Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Almighty Buck Businesses EU The Courts Apple Technology

EU Drops Court Case After Apple Repays More Than $16 Billion In Taxes and Interest To Ireland (theguardian.com) 118

"Ireland's government has fully recovered more than [$16 billion] in disputed taxes and interest from Apple, which it will hold in an escrow fund pending its appeal against a European Union tax ruling," reports The Guardian. From the report: The European commission ruled in August 2016 that Apple had received unfair tax incentives from the Irish government. Both Apple and Dublin are appealing against the original ruling, saying the iPhone maker's tax treatment was in line with Irish and EU law. Ireland's finance ministry, which began collecting the back taxes in a series of payments in May, estimated last year the total amount could have reached -- [$17.5 billion] including EU interest. In the end the amount was [$15.2 billion] in back taxes plus [$1.4 billion] interest.

For its part, the commission said it would scrap its lawsuit against Ireland, which it initiated last year because of delays in recovering the money. "In light of the full payment by Apple of the illegal state aid it had received from Ireland, commissioner (Margrethe) Vestager will be proposing to the college of commissioners the withdrawal of this court action," the commission spokesman Ricardo Cardoso said. Ireland's finance ministry said its appeal had been granted priority status and is progressing through the various stages of private written proceedings before the general court of the European Union (GCEU), Europe's second highest court. The matter will likely take several years to be settled by the European courts, it added.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Drops Court Case After Apple Repays More Than $16 Billion In Taxes and Interest To Ireland

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Apple has not repaid anything. What they have done is use the tons of money they have doing nothing in Ireland, and put it in a escrow account.

    Now that money is sort of working for Apple. The EU wants a big chunk, and Apple will go to court to prevent that. Meanwhile, Ireland will be beholding
    to Apple for preventing the EU suing Ireland. The EU knew it could not win against Apple, so they went after Ireland. Now we have a proxy court battle.

    • Ireland tweets:

      "Funding secured! We're buying Tesla and taking it private!"

    • by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Wednesday September 19, 2018 @04:09AM (#57340364) Journal
      This is a case about illegal state aid, and was always against Ireland first, ordering them to collected taxes they should have collected in the first place. Apple has very little to do with this as far as the Commission is concerned. And had Apple decided not to pay, Europe would still have had no business suing Apple, they would - again - have to lean on Ireland instead to prosecute Apple for not paying. That is how all these cases work.
  • Fault? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by balsy2001 ( 941953 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @08:32PM (#57338778)
    How does making apple pay “back” taxes to Ireland punish Ireland for making an illegal tax agreement with Apple? Not that I agree with the ruling, but shouldn’t the money go to EU coffers or charity? This just sends a message to countries to cut whatever deal you want, if you get caught the worst that happens is you get the money anyway.
    • by JBMcB ( 73720 )

      How does making apple pay “back” taxes to Ireland punish Ireland for making an illegal tax agreement with Apple?

      More to the point, why does the EU care if Ireland collects taxes from Apple? If it has to do with EU contributions, it's practically rounding error.

      • Re:Fault? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @08:54PM (#57338896)

        More to the point, why does the EU care if Ireland collects taxes from Apple?

        Because Apple is reporting profits in Ireland that were not actually earned in Ireland. This gives Apple an unfair competitive advantage and compels other companies to seek similar tax shelters, and compels other countries to lower their corporate tax rates in a "race to the bottom".

        There are two solutions:
        1. Harmonize corporate income tax rates, so all countries, or at least all EU countries, tax at the same rate.
        2. Stop taxing profit. Profit is very easy to manipulate and shift around. Instead, tax sales, or payroll, or dividends, or charge resource excise taxes, or infrastructure use fees, or whatever. None of those can be easily shifted between jurisdictions.

        The EU's lawsuit against Ireland is trying to impose #1, but #2 would be better for Europe's economic future.

        • by khchung ( 462899 )

          So how do you define where profit was “actually earned”?

          The product was designed in country X, made in country Y and sold in country Z. Was the profit “actually earned” in X, Y or Z?

          The company C paid $50 to designing company A in country X and $50 to manufacturing company B in country Y and sold the product in country Z for $100. Does that mean it made no profit at all?

          Companies A and B “actually earned” profits in country X and Y, right?

          Both were actually owned by the s

          • by Tomahawk ( 1343 )

            Profits earned from apple products sold in all EU countries were routed through Ireland, thus a phone sold in France was, according to the books, sold from Ireland.

        • 2. Stop taxing profit. Profit is very easy to manipulate and shift around. Instead, tax sales, or payroll, or dividends, or charge resource excise taxes, or infrastructure use fees, or whatever. None of those can be easily shifted between jurisdictions.

          I've been advocating this for years. People need to stop thinking of taxes as a way to "stick it to x" (where x = rich person, corporation, someone you don't like). And start recognizing taxes for what they are - diverting a part of the country's productiv

        • No. The reason the EU cares is that a country must treat all its residents and resident companies on an equal footing. Ireland offered lower tax rates to Apple than it does to other companies, which is illegal in the EU.

          Ireland is allowed to and does undercut other EU countries in corporate tax rates in order to attract businesses. That practice is frowned upon, but allowed, for the time being.

          • by JBMcB ( 73720 )

            Ireland offered lower tax rates to Apple than it does to other companies, which is illegal in the EU.

            It most certainly is not. There are hundreds of companies across the EU that get special tax incentives, subsidies, etc... And they are absolutely targeted, in the same way Apple gets breaks in Ireland.

        • by JBMcB ( 73720 )

          Because Apple is reporting profits in Ireland that were not actually earned in Ireland. This gives Apple an unfair competitive advantage and compels other companies to seek similar tax shelters, and compels other countries to lower their corporate tax rates in a "race to the bottom".

          That very well may be, but seems to be outside the scope of the EU's charter of things to regulate - primarily rules on trade and travel. Taxation is an internal state matter.

      • A) Ireland is part of the EU B) The EU wants to prevent a race to the bottom on corporate taxes
      • More to the point, why does the EU care if Ireland collects taxes from Apple? If it has to do with EU contributions, it's practically rounding error.

        The whole purpose and point of the EU was to level the European playing field economically and prevent countries from fighting with one another economically (which in the past has not so indirectly lead to them fighting physically too). The EU's only concern here is that Ireland doesn't offer tax breaks to corporations and gain favourable treatment as a result.

        Most EU rules are based around this common economic model.

    • Well you see (Score:2, Interesting)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 )
      punishment only deters crime when working class people are involved. When corporations and the extremely rich are involved there's just too much risk to jobs and the economy to significantly punish. Now don't forget to vote for your local pro-corporate political candidate or they'll ship your job overseas and the price of a hamburger will treble.
      • Microsoft finally learned to respect the law in Europe after getting whacked with multibillion dollar fines. Amazing thing: it took more than one. But they eventually did learn to jump when the EU says jump.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Actually we don't punish people for civil matters like this in Europe.

        There is no concept of punitive damages when suing someone or some entity. There is no restorative justice, which means the amount of money awarded is calculated to restore things to how they would have been if the problematic thing hadn't happened.

        So in this case the back taxes and interest need to be paid to the government that will spend it on the citizens who are entitled to it under EU rules, and also remove the incentive that Irelan

    • Re:Fault? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by msauve ( 701917 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @08:46PM (#57338850)
      Because Ireland currently gets taxes from Apple above the proportion at which Apple does bona-fide business there. Forcing equitable payments removes the tax advantages of Apple having profit making pseudo-businesses there, which should ultimately result in their moving those businesses to other locations which can still offer those tax advantages.

      It's a long term lose-lose situation.
      • I get that, but Ireland was complicit in the deal. Their punishment, get $16 Billion. I just think the money should go somewhere else so both sides in the illegal deal are punished currently, not just by the los of future jobs. For example, make Apple estimate where the sales came from in the EU and give proportional payments to those jurisdictions.
        • I get that, but Ireland was complicit in the deal. Their punishment, get $16 Billion.

          The EU's job is not to punish Ireland, which in practice means punishing its citizens who had little to do with this. The EU's job is to keep the internal market regular and uphold the four freedoms and so on.

          • The way to keep markets regular is to have punishments as deterents for unwanted behavior.

            Citizens of various jurisdictions and socio-ecomomic classes will be punished by Apple forfeiting $16B too, you have just made value judgments about who its ok to punish for this and who it isn’t.
        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • This would be like a joyrider giving the car back and you saying it should be given to the neigbour.

            Not even close. Both Ireland and Apple assert that the money belongs to Apple, not Ireland. The EU is stepping in and saying that Ireland must take more of Apple's money in order to comply with EU treaties. In effect the EU is acting as if this money belong to the EU, not Apple or Ireland, to allocate as the EU sees fit.

            The EU's problem is with their treaty partner—which is Ireland, not Apple—but their response to this supposed treaty violation is apparently to hand the offender—Ireland

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        which should ultimately result in their moving those businesses to other locations which can still offer those tax advantages

        Unlikely, because the EU thought of that. The new rules are making it so that corporations pay tax proportionate to how much business they do in each country, regardless of if they funnel all the profit to some tax haven or not. So there really isn't any point pulling out of Ireland, it won't help them.

    • It depends on the circumstances in which the deal was made. If there was clear wrongdoing on Ireland's part, then a fine would be in order. But if Ireland acted in good faith and the Commission merely ruled differently on the interpretation of the rules, then the message to Ireland is: "Sorry, but you can't do that. You'll have to collect those taxes retroactively"
    • but shouldn’t the money go to EU coffers

      The EU is not some overarching federal goverment. It's a join agreement of nations on rules. They don't act indepdently.

  • ...that because Ireland and not Apple is holding the money in escrow pending the legal decisions on the validity of the Irish tax legislation and incentives in respect of Apple, there is no need for the EU to take Ireland to court for not collecting the money from Apple.

  • The title is misleading.

    Ireland have setup an escrow account. (due to legalities around this, this took some time).
    apple have lodged the money plus the interest into this escrow account.

    While Ireland owns the account, it cannot touch the money. However, apple's 'debt' is paid at this point (so no more interest is owning on this).

    What happens next is various court cases and appeals. Funnily, if Ireland _loses_ these court cases, then it gets all that money. If Ireland ultimately win, apple gets all the m

Remember, UNIX spelled backwards is XINU. -- Mt.

Working...