Answer these two simple question: why would they do this?
And second, you've never claimed some sort of deduction to lower your taxes? If your accountant said "hey i can probably save you a few dollars if i do x" you'll say "nah man I'm good, i wanna pay more"? Honest question.
You just don't get it do you. A deduction isn't a loophole. And the kinds of loopholes used by Apple and widely available to many other corporations are not available to most individuals. Thus your analogy is false, as is your strawman about paying 'extra' taxes.
See above. By the stringent requirements that the "ethical" crowd puts forth, anything done by anyone to lower their tax burden is unethical, rather then what it really is: common sense.
No. Tactics done by corporations to circumvent tax rules and rates merely by virtue of their being wealthy enough to do so, and consequently often end up paying a lesser rate than individuals who can't or are not allowed to take advantage of those loopholes is what's at issue. That's what is considered unfair policy, and thus unethical.
Who cares about scale. The tax burden is a relative scale not an absolute one. And a line item deduction IS a loophole. Not sure why you think they are not.
Scale matters. When several large corporations in a county or district use loopholes to avoid paying their fair share of taxes, the difference created by these loopholes can be the difference between whether that county, district or state can afford expected levels of service or even balances its budget. Often the amount of lost revenue is on the order of billions. Several individuals, by contrast, do not affect state revenue on the same scale.
You still don't get it. A loophole is something unforeseen or unaccounted for by the tax code. And because it was not foreseen or not covered (or perhaps ignored) by the tax code, it isn't technically illegal. A line item deduction on the other hand is something listed, known, and granted by the tax code. It's explicitly made available to whomever qualifies for it. It isn't a trick or end-around the rules.
Is this really so confusing for you?
It was sarcasm. The same people here whining about ethics are the same ones who would do whatever it takes to lower their own burden. Yet they want to be the first to throw a stone. Hypocrisy complete and true!
Again, what corporations can do about their tax burden is different from what individuals can do. A person whose primary residence and who derives their income primarily in California, for example, has to pay the California state tax rate. Unlike Apple, (and other companies) whose primary residence is California, but who funnel money through Nevada, Ireland and the Netherlands, using mailboxes, subsidiary offices and tax havens. The result is often a much lower tax rate than individuals could gain through simple line item deuctions.
That's what upsets many people, along with your smug, "Good for Apple, screw you" attitude.
Ironically, what states fail to collect in revenues from corporations, you and I have to make up for in the long run through cut backs in services, higher taxes on individuals or property, higher sales taxes, or paying higher interest rates on state borrowing. Eventually of course a county or state could go bankrupt. Many are already in severe deficits or debt. Leaving aside the ethics problem, it's just common sense to have corporations paying their fair share, so individuals like you and I don't end up paying more.
Now if by chance your cheerleading for corporate tax avoidance is based on some principle that governments should not collect as much revenue in the first place, or that states shouldn't exist, I'm fine with that. But that's a separate topic, and an unlikely reason why many people get upset over the kind of tax avoidance tactics corporations use. It also has nothing to do with some imagined hypocrisy you accuse people of simply because you don't have an argument, or don't know the difference between a loophole and a deduction.
