Yo, they will enthusiastically give up their second most important market and forgo over $100bn in sales.
The shareholders will be thrilled!
And who would fill such a supply gap? China of course, who else.
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.
Apple Hit With €500M Fine as EU Enforces Digital Markets Act
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The shareholders will be thrilled!
And who would fill such a supply gap? China of course, who else.
Let's try an analogy.
If the US passed a law that said "All car companies whose CEO hasn't served as the head of DOGE have to pay the US government a $10,000 tax for every car sold" that law is written to purposely exclude Tesla. Yes, the law doesn't mention Tesla by name, but it excludes them.
You're essentially arguing "The law applies to Tesla too, their CEO just happened to serve as the head of DOGE, but if they picked a new CEO, then the law would apply to them, so the law applies to everyone equally." The DMA was specifically written to exclude Spotify. Just because the law could, in theory, apply to Spotify in the future doesn't mean it wasn't written to purposely exclude Spotify.
So instead of making a fictitious claim, why not quote the bit out of the law, as I asked earlier when I shared the link, that does that? You seem convinced, I could be wrong, please do enlighten us.
No, but they are over regulating industries where American companies have leadership, and very liberal with where Europe has leadership, namely luxury goods.
They are acting in their best interest, that’s not wrong. But reciprocal actions are only fair.
Going behind the monetization of software tech and asking it for free, is essentially extortion.
If you think they are regulating everyone equally, tell me which software regulation from EU has affected an European company?
And why not implement the law I am suggesting? It will only be fair right?
ISO is not the same as what I suggest. And it is not searchable.But why limit it to a particular region? Why not do it universally? But ahem, you do realise there are already ISO standards for such things
Restricted by region to match the regulations in their country. One sided regulations are unfair. US wants a free market, but that won’t work if American companies in foreign countries are treated differently than foreign companies being treated in America.
If they want to regulate industries where your country has a leadership, then you regulate industries where their country have leadership. If a country had a free market, then US is a free market for that country.
That’s the way to deal with this problem.
It helps if you think of it like 'on the spot fines' like traffic fines in Ireland, and presumably many other countries.
If you're caught speeding, you are given a penalty charge which, if you pay it in time, it means you will not be prosecuted further. You have the right to contest it in Court if you wish, and if you don't pay it you will be pursued.
On the surface that looks to be civil as it's administrative but it's backed by criminal legislation.
There is a system for determining whether a law is civil or criminal - the fines in the DMA falls heavily on the criminal side.
The aim is to modify behaviour and (if necessary) punish transgressors, the wrong is against society in general, prosecution is done by the state (in a delegated manner, hence the right to appeal), the remedy is a fine.
Apple, of course. They're raising prices because they're losing their share of a duopoly. And in doing so, they're proving that they have something that absolutely needs to be broken up.
By the way, weren't you one of the first to rejoice when the EU forced Microsoft to make changes to its operating system? Back when it was still the “big bad Microsoft” and “poor little Apple” was being marginalized?
Well, less than fifteen years later, Apple itself is now “the big bad” monopolist.
Huh?? That is not how it works. If you want to come to my home you act by my rules. Same for me when I come to you. This isn’t a dig on or against America. These are just rules. We don’t all have to have the same rules.
ISO standards are totally searchable and compliance comes with certification which is also searchable. 🤷♂️
Don’t know how else to describe other than read the law, I linked to this earlier.
This is nothing like a traffic violation. And Irish law system is based on common law, similar to the UK but different than most European countries which are based on civil law.
But going back to the original point; bar some very serious cross border crimes by organized crime groups, criminal law is largely the domain of national sovereignty. This is purely in the administrative domain of eu regulations and not criminal law.
Traffic law in Ireland is codified - it's not a common law matter. And pooling of sovereignty was a huge issue to many states as integration and establishment of the Single European Market progressed.
Applying the standard tests for determining whether a law is civil or criminal says to me that it leans heavily into being criminal in nature. Someone else can argue otherwise - the joys of law!
But yes, this is going down a rabbit hole - the original point I was addressing was the original posters insinuation that the fines were all about making money. They're not - they're about changing behaviour.
That’s absolutely not how it works. You will come to my home and eat the food in my fridge without asking. But when I come to your house, I can’t?
If you don’t want your guests to touch food in your fridge, that’s ok. But when you go to their house, you better keep your hands off their fridge. Just because they have a group of good friends who can take things from each other’s fridge, you can’t. You have to always remember, you are not one of them, because you have your own rules.
regarding ISO, cool, now let’s have a standard for luxury goods made in EU.
No you still mis-understand. My rules are my rules, yours are yours. I will abide by your rules. But you seem to want to make my rules the same as yours. And it doesn't work like that. And my rules are just my rules, they aren't there to just anoy or isolate you, they are inclusive and the same for everyone regardless of where you come from.
The world is your oyster, go ahead. Good luck with defining what a luxury good made in the EU is
The question I would ask is why? Why would you want to do that? What is the aim or objective? Have fun with it...This case has no connection to the US tax payers. All money came ONLY from the EU taxes that hadn't been paid since 2016.
You're asking me to quote language that isn't in the bill. The DMA outlines what "core platform services" can be considered Gatekeepers. Music Streaming is not listed. The DMA only applies to these sorts of products/services:
- Online intermediation services
- Online search engines
- Online social networking services
- Video-sharing platform services
- Number-independent interpersonal communications services
- Operating systems
- Web browsers
- Virtual assistants
- Cloud computing services
- Online advertising services (including advertising networks, advertising exchanges and other advertising intermediation services) provided by an undertaking that offers any of the core platform services listed above
You're wrong. Apple already paid $38b in taxes to the US on those profits in 2018, and now will now amend that tax filing to get credit for the foreign taxes paid by the EU. Which they shouldn't have to do, because Ireland shouldn't have been entitled to tax the profits of a non-resident company on sales made outside of Ireland. But the EU, in its infinite wisdom, disagreed. So the EU actually took money from the American taxpayer and gave it to Ireland, who didn't want it (and wasn't entitled to it under any fair reading of law).
No you still mis-understand. My rules are my rules, yours are yours. I will abide by your rules. But you seem to want to make my rules the same as yours. And it doesn't work like that. And my rules are just my rules, they aren't there to just anoy or isolate you, they are inclusive and the same for everyone regardless of where you come from.
The world is your oyster, go ahead. Good luck with defining what a luxury good made in the EU is
You don’t seem to understand how relationships works. It is a two way street. It’s not meant to annoy or isolate anyone. It’s meant to keep things fair with mutual respect and be sure one side is not taking advantage of the other’s open nature. It’s just to avoid opportunistic leeching mooches to not take advantage of you.
Also why do I have to worry about defining luxury? The companies have to list in tangible terms what are the physically verifiable attributes that they have in their luxury product. Then I will list all the products that have those same attributes, with prices.
For example, if Hermes says their leather is supple, yet strong, then I’ll test the suppleness and strength of Hermes, and then list all the products with those same attributes, along with price and a link to buy it from the other place. Plain and simple.
If they come up with ways to overcome it, then I’ll come up with new regulations. Just like what EU is doing to the tech industry. Just like EU, we’ll have a commission whose entire job is to come up with more and more regulations.
Isn’t that exactly what EU is doing? Then won’t it be absolutely fair to do it in return? It’s not to isolate anyone. It’s to keep things fair.
Apple should just double their product cost in the EU to recoup the fines.
This isn't entirely accurate. While Apple did pay $38B to the US Treasury in 2018, that was specifically for repatriation of overseas profits under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act - a separate issue from the EU case.
The European Commission ruled that Ireland provided illegal tax advantages to Apple (violating EU state aid rules), not that they were taxing non-Irish sales. The core issue was that Apple's Irish tax structure allowed billions in profits to go essentially untaxed anywhere.
Ireland initially resisted collecting these taxes because their favorable arrangements helped attract multinational businesses, not because they weren't legally entitled to them under EU law.
The fundamental question isn't about double taxation but whether Apple's Irish structure artificially shifted profits to avoid taxation. The Irish Supreme Court ultimately upheld the EC's ruling.
This is less about the EU "taking money from American taxpayers" and more about closing a specific tax arrangement that the EC determined violated EU competition law.
Not true: for example in EV there was already a widespread socket standard, but US decided to standardize the Tesla socket. Why? To help Tesla. I'm not saying is not fair/it is fair but it's just a reminder that in every country (US too) the local gov. prefers to help the local companies.
When rich marauders cry then that is a good day. Go ahead!
Literally nobody is keeping the US from making their own regulations that companies (both domestic and foreign) have to follow. What exactly is your point here? Is the EU somehow preventing the US from setting these regulations? No. So what are you trying to say? Trump just thinks it's easier to slap tariffs on everything instead of developing proper regulations to level the playing field or to ensure better products for American consumers. But then again, the current US government doesn't seem to care about American consumers at all.
I was quoting the population of Europe, not the EU. The people I was targeting with my original comment never make the distinction between the two. You'll regularly see people pulling the "Apple should leave Europe" card in news articles about the UK for example.
Do you get the difference between an application store and a single ERP?
I agree Trump is not doing enough. May be he wanted a simpler quick strategy, instead of coming up with detailed laws that will take years to come.
My point is, EU is making specific laws that apply to no one other than American companies. But they say it’s applies to all.
If that’s what you want; then we will do it too. Make very specific laws. If a luxuary company is doing more than 5 billion in sales, then these laws apply. There. Are you happy?
Since when Apple pays taxes in the US from EU operations when they purposely chose Ireland (with 0.05 % taxes) as its European centre and moved all European financial operations there to avoid all other EU taxes (each state has a different tax)?