That is the event that made this such a CAUSE CÉLÈBRE, the Netherlands and Luxembourg might have also given tax breaks, but then again they didnt need other people money, to stop them going bankrupt.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
European Union Accuses Ireland of Giving Apple Illegal State Aid with Tax Deals
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That is the event that made this such a CAUSE CÉLÈBRE, the Netherlands and Luxembourg might have also given tax breaks, but then again they didnt need other people money, to stop them going bankrupt.
Your explanation conveniently overlooks the glaring fact that Ireland didn't make an alleged illegal deal with Ireland.It takes two parties to make a deal. If it is deemed illegal then the profits made by tax manipulation are illegal. Rarely do offending parties get to keep the illegal gains. Do you think an exception should be made because it's Apple?
Bolded: fixed your quote since you seem to be implying Ireland acted alone.
I disagree. If someone has stolen something and resells it, who is at fault? It's obviously the person who stole it. You could ask the person who it was resold to for it back (and they can reasonably ask for their money back, in exchange), but I wouldn't think you can force them to do so. Similarly, if there's a fault here somewhere, it's with Ireland. You can't blame Apple for buying what was being sold. Doing so seems like it would just produce a lot of mistrust all around in the market. Oh, don't buy products anymore, the government is going to undo your transactions and fine you for having the audacity to spend money. Also, the EU is going to fine your government which is going to result in a raising of your taxes.
You are right, Apple (and Starbucks and all the others) had absolutely nothing to do with this. In fact, they were forced by Ireland to take this route
isnt he or red bull rather active in austria?
if you have any link to that interview i would appreciate that because on the face of it seems so commendable and breath of fresh air.
and news like this just highlight that nothing is ever good enough ie low enough for these companies and countries should stand firm.
"Legally evade" is an oxymoron.
If a company or person pays exactly the tax they owe under the law, they are not evading anything.
This is not accurate. The EU is a creation of a series treaties (starting with the Treaty of Rome), and in those treaties, signatory nations give up sovereignty to the EU. These treaties give the various bodies of the EU (Legislature, Commission, Judiciary) legal authority which can supersede the authority of the national governments. This has been confirmed by the Court of Justice for the European Union in a doctrine akin to the U.S. Supremacy Clause. While you are right that Directives often are not directly legally enforceable, but instead require national laws to implement them, they cannot be ignored by the member nations. Further, EU Regulations do have direct effect, that is, they are the law of all of the member nations.
I think the problem is they're accused of giving Apple an unfair advantage by giving them unique tax-breaks, and hence would be anti-competitive.
The Netherlands and Luxembourg wont say anything, they will just implement the EU regulation if one comes. EU Council regulations are law for all countries of the EU.
A Directive from the EU Council is open to some wiggle room by the various states, but the end result must be met.
Well since this isn't about theft, I'm totally lost on your example.
More so, your example is wrong. What you are describing is theft by receiving. It's a crime. It has nothing to do with Ireland/Apple and taxes.Ireland didn't steal anything and Apple wasn't buying anything. If anything this was more a quid pro quo. Ireland gets jobs, Apple gets favorable tax rates. Both parties entered into an agreement deemed mutually beneficial. Ireland can be no more culpable than Apple. Neither party was under duress. If this proven to be illegal, both parties are equally complicit. Apple wasn't tricked, duped, bamboozled, or flimflamed. Not sure how you don't see that.
Obviously I love Apple, but ALL companies should be required to pay taxes. And Apple isn't the only company doing this, so I'm glad the EU might toughen their policies. I wish the U.S. would close the loopholes that allow U.S. companies to pretend to be located in other nations.
Except the when Celtic Tiger, was seen to be a kitten, and it needed a bailout of 90 billion Euros.
Did you really think there were going to be no consequences,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/28/ireland-bailout-european-union_n_788922.html
Only when it's Apple.
And yet people call WalMart and Amazon unethical and immoral when they undercut little mom and pop stores or the e-books low pricing affair which technically they haven't not broken any law.
Double standards I say..
Except that it was Apple that sold the idea to the Irish Government.
"In 1991, a basis for determining Apple Computer Ltd.s (subsequently AOEs) Irish branch net profit was proposed by Apple and agreed by Irish Revenue..."
(See paragraph 31 of http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/253200/253200_1582634_87_2.pdf)
And
"In 1991, a basis for determining Apple Computer Accessories Ltd.s (subsequently ASI) Irish branch net profit was proposed by Apple and agreed by Irish Revenue. ..." (Para 33 of same document)
Not a lawyer are you?
In other words - IF Ireland entered into a deal deemed illegal - Apple would still very likely be on the hook for back taxes.
Why? Apple is a company that makes money for its shareholders. Those shareholders then turn around and spend that money. Why is that bad? It keeps the economy going.
America has one of the highest capital gain/corporate tax system in the world and we are still unable to get out of debt. If a business can escape that, good on them. America is the only country that still taxes it's citizens even when they are living abroad for extended times (which some exclusions).
It is illegal under EU law to offer state subsidies to companies. The very sweet tax deal is a state subsidy and it not a deal available to others.
I'm not sure if this is a joke, because it is too out of reality to be said seriously
That's first because Ireland is part of the EU, so the EU has some say.
Second, there are all these other countries with their own tax laws. The UK for example could create a law that says they don't care what taxes Apple pays to Ireland, they want taxes paid on sales in the UK. And the other EU countries could do the same. And if the EU agrees with this, then whatever Ireland does is irrelevant.
We get a lot of benefits from them, and new laws aren't just passed easily. They are subject to debates in the parliament (were all members are proportionally represented) and must be approved by that parliament.
Apple pays a tax rate of below 4% on it's profits. Two-thirds of it's global profits are routed through Ireland. The profits are sat in bank accounts doing not at lot, I don't have the latest figures but it's well over $100 billion. Acitvist investors such as David Einhorn want the money returned to the US, taxes paid and then distributed to them as shareholders.