Apple Hit With Tax Lobbying Protest, Italian Investigation Into AppleCare Offerings

[jayducharme]

since AppleCare is not a warranty i don't see how they apply

Exactly. I get AppleCare for all my Apple products -- but not as an extended warranty. If a "defect in manufacturing" doesn't show up in the first 90 days, it probably will never show up while I own the product (since tech products now have a really short useful lifespan). What I buy AppleCare for is the unlimited tech support, which is generally excellent. I can take any of my Apple products to the Genius Bar or just call Apple and get any question resolved quickly. That to me is worth the cost.

I think if Apple sold AppleCare solely as extended tech support, they wouldn't have a problem with the European agencies.

 

[Jodles]

In Norway it is either 2 or 5 years, depending on the product and how long you should be able to expect that that product should last. Recently a court order made it clear that mobile phones are covered by the 5 year law (though everybody wants new phones all the time anyway, so I doubt manufacturers are struck too hard by this).

There is also a paragraph in the law that says that any problems to satisfy this law is a matter between store and supplier, not involving the consumer. I.e. if Apple refuses to supply goods to replace something, the shop has to. The consumer is unaffected.

To the point, Applecare is completely unnecessary here, but they still try to push it on costumers. When I asked bluntly when I bought my Macbook, if the *only* advantage with Applecare was that I didn't have to bring the receipt with me, he replied yes...

Rip off!

 

[baryon]

I agree. EU Law states that warranty on computers should last 2 or 3 years, not sure. So I refused to pay extra for Apple Care, as it is made redundant by free compulsory warranty. Then I go to the Apple store saying that my graphics card is dead, and they tell me I have to pay for it. WTF? Isn't this illegal?

 

[boozezela]

It’s actually quite easy: The mandatory 2 years are only for defects that were already present on the day of purchase, and the vendor is responsible if anything breaks that. Burden of proof is on the vendor during the first year, on the buyer in the second year.

The warranty (in Apple’s case one year) that the producer gives you covers all defects that occur after purchase. Same with Apple Care. Thus, the Italian complaint misses the point completely.

The manufacturer is responsible for the first year, while the vendor is responsible for the second.

When you buy the goods from Apple, Apple becomes also the vendor and should be responsible for defects in the product for the second year.

Problem is that they refuse to do so.

 

[boozezela]

Exactly. I get AppleCare for all my Apple products -- but not as an extended warranty. If a "defect in manufacturing" doesn't show up in the first 90 days, it probably will never show up while I own the product

I beg to differ:

- Nvidia based Macbook Pros failed during the second year on average.
-The plastics for the Macbooks (both top and bottom case) were failing well after 90 days
- Hinges for Macbook Airs failed after 90 days as well

 

[ten-oak-druid]

I want to get some lobbyists.

 

[iStudentUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)

I agree. EU Law states that warranty on computers should last 2 or 3 years, not sure. So I refused to pay extra for Apple Care, as it is made redundant by free compulsory warranty. Then I go to the Apple store saying that my graphics card is dead, and they tell me I have to pay for it. WTF? Isn't this illegal?

The EU doesn't say there must be a warranty on computers. It says that everything should conform to what a customer should reasonably expect. The EU says the customer must be able to bring a claim for at least 2 years after purchase, that doesn't mean everything had to work for 2 years. If you buy a pen that breaks after 23 months you have the right to sue the seller, but no court is going to say that a pen that breaks after 23 months didn't confirm to reasonable expectations. See the difference?

Now, the EU sets the minimum standard, but member states can give consumers more rights if they like. For example in the UK you can try to claim for 6 years, that does not mean everything should last 6 years.

Apple can ask you to show the device is faulty, and not caused by misuse. If you can't convince Apple of that then you can take them to court. A judge then decides whether you have the right to a repair/refund/replacement given how long you have owned the device, how much it cost, what went wrong and why it went wrong.

Most countries have charities that advise consumers, so if you are really upset then talk to them. I've never had to go to court (often just mentioning it makes people cave) but some peope I know have. Just learn about your rights and see what you can do.

The manufacturer is responsible for the first year, while the vendor is responsible for the second.

According the the EU directive I have in front of me (1999/44/EC that lays out the rules on consumer contracts that had to be implemented by member states) the seller is liable from the start. Where did you get that information from? I don't know about Europe as a whole but in the UK you can't sue a manufacturer for faulty goods as you don't have a contract with them. You can only sue them if their product causes you injury etc.

 

[bassanoclapper]

I have 3 Applecare policies, soon to be 5 [1 expired]
Am watching this one quite closely

 

[BC2009]

First off -- stupid article to include both stories together.

Second, on the "tax story", this is probably no different than anybody who wants a tax break. I guarantee you that if you received a big inheritance from a relative who passed away in a foreign country you would be cursing that country for wanting to tax you for inheriting that money (or worse for taking the money out that country) and cursing the USA for wanting to tax you for brining the money in. My mom went through this once because Italy did not like large sums of money leaving the country, but she lived in the USA.

Apple and many other companies are lobbying congress to provide a tax holiday to re-patriot foreign funds. Right now these companies have lots of money that they made in foreign countries and they are keeping it there because they don't want to be taxed on it twice (once in the foreign country and once as it travels into the US). It makes sense to keep the money abroad especially if you have lots of bills to pay in those countries to suppliers and such (just choose the correct account to write that check from).

I'm guessing the profits have begun to exceed the bills and these accounts have grown to a substantial amount. The amount is so large that they are trying to convince congress of the benefits to bringing that money to the US (e.g.: more jobs for their constituency, another private airplane for a CEO, etc....). Right now, these companies have little incentive to bring this money into the USA since the cost of bringing it in is huge.

Sure there are plenty of loopholes in tax law so that rich folks can avoid paying taxes on the money they have earned; however, this more about avoiding being taxed on money you made elsewhere and I think it is something most anybody would want to do if they had a whole lot of money in a foreign account.

Protesting these companies (and obviously focusing on Apple to increase your publicity) is not going to fix US tax law. Those CEO's will still be able to dodge all the taxes they want to dodge. However, bringing that money to the USA could have some benefit to the US economy (and yes, I am not naive, somebody will also personally benefit from it as well).

Anyway, seems like a bigger deal is being made of this than it is.

 

[benthewraith]

No.
I pay my taxes, you pay yours. And why, pray tell, do you want to bring the money back in anyway? See, THAT'S the real question.

And while I'm at it, with almost 70BN in cash, would it KILL you to manufacture SOMETHING in America? All you want to do is duck taxes and pay slaves to make your crap. Typical corporate blood-sucking whores.

Why wouldn't you? Bringing money back in to the states from overseas helps us economically. Companies can hire more employees. We're at what, 9% U3 unemployment and 17% U6 unemployment? Companies use profits to innovate and expand. A few million to some fat cats is nothing compared to being able to bring in billions of dollars from overseas.

 

[chris200x9]

You mean like how AUTO manufacturing in detroit is flourishing?

Considering how GM just paid off it's federal loans way early and considering how ford is making record profits, I would say yes. I mean seriously, were you trying to lend credence to my point?

 

[technowizard]

That's like being excited that gas has gone down from $4.10 to $3.99 a gallon. It might be cheaper but it's still too expensive!

Here In the UK it is around 4x that price for petrol (or as you call it 'gas') and its a similar case around europe. You have no idea how cheap your fuel prices are!

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Why wouldn't you? Bringing money back in to the states from overseas helps us economically. Companies can hire more employees.

But they DON'T hire more employees. They move jobs OUT OF AMERICA not into it! They want to make all that money outside the country, but they don't want to pay their taxes here in the U.S. It's an insult to say they'll pay a tiny percentage of it if only they can bring that money into the U.S. Imagine if you or I told the IRS that we'll gladly pay 1% a year instead of 28%! They'd say get ready to go to prison.

 

[LowKeyed]

But they DON'T hire more employees. They move jobs OUT OF AMERICA not into it! They want to make all that money outside the country, but they don't want to pay their taxes here in the U.S. It's an insult to say they'll pay a tiny percentage of it if only they can bring that money into the U.S. Imagine if you or I told the IRS that we'll gladly pay 1% a year instead of 28%! They'd say get ready to go to prison.

If they didn't want to spend or invest that money here in the US why would they try to pressure congress to let them do it cheaply. I'm sure China would love for them to shift money into that economy as would most other countries, as long as that was where they intended to spend it or invest.

No doubt Apple spends large amounts of money on cheaper foreign labor, as a shareholder i'm glad they do. Also, as a customer i'm glad they do, if i can save a few bucks on a product then great.

If Apple had it's headquarters based in England would you have a problem with them trying to bring money made in Germany into the US without paying taxes on it again? Why should we make it more expensive for US based companies to do business here?

Apple can leave that money in foreign markets and it's not cheating the tax system because that is where the money was earned. They want to bring it back to the US and not have to punish shareholders by paying tax on it again. How does that make them bad guys.


Your example is all wrong. The reality is more like. My corporation has 500K in Scotland in an account maintained by a Scottish sub corp but we want to buy a retreat house in Florida. If we bring that money to the US we have to pay tax on it (again), if we leave it in Scotland (where our shareholders already paid tax on it once) we can't buy the house we want. So we leave it in Scotland and invest it. Maybe in a few years we buy a retreat home in Scotland and then instead of spending training dollars in florida at Disney World we spend them in the highlands. Buy those souvenirs and tip those waiters.

Long and short is that every dollar in the US economy helps the US economy, more money here doesn't hurt it.

BTW, i understand this is an incredibly simplistic description of the issue.

 

[Sjhonny]

In the US we have the 14, 60, or 90 day warranty policies. I really like Europes' 1 year policies . Plus a 2 year extended. Once the 3 years are over you get a new lappy.

As for taxes, if I can't do sketchy things to dodge em, neither should Apple.

Actually it's two years (legally). I don't know why, but for some reason apple get's away with giving just one year standard. In some country's (like the Netherlands), the company of which you bought the product has to prove you've misused it (drop, water damage, scratched), before they can decline you your warranty claim.

 

[entropys]

Speaking as an overseas person, this tax carry on is a bit bizarre. So a US company, in this case Apple, sold a whole heap of stuff (in this case macs, iPods and iPhones) Down Under, paid its OZ tax liabilities (such as GST and OZ corporate taxes) on the money it eaned here, and now has a nice bucket of money sitting in Australian banks, equities and securities. But if they take that money back to the USA, the US Government wants them to pay tax again?*

I think that these protesters are the kind that regards anything left after tax is grudgingly allowed after the comrades have taken according to their needs.

I guess from the protesters' perspective, it is a terrible thing they can't get at that most fungible of assets, Other Peoples' Money (there really should be an OPM index).

*Edit: as I think more about it, this is a great US policy. After all, as a foreigner, my country benefits because the US corporation is more likely to keep the money here for further investment and development of my country. Stupid Yanks.

 

[joeshell383]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; es-es) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

You know, I love Apple. I'm a shareholder and I want them to become as rich as possible.

And yet...yeah. US Uncut is absolutely right. We should all be complaining about such things.

But I kind of think protesting the companies is stupid. They'll always try to get the best deal they can. They should, that's just smart. It's the government that sets the rules, we should be complaining to them if the rules aren't strong enough.

This is like standing by the side of the road with a 'slow down' sign instead of trying to actually change the speed limit.

No. Protesting Apple is a great way to generate public awareness of the initiative. Apple is particularly vulnerable to this protest because of its retail stores. Apple ought to drop out next week and let the companies that already have unfavorable reputations with consumers (B of A for the bailout and GE for its other tax avoidance initiatives) carry this one. If it is enacted, Apple will be able to take advantage of it anyway.

Better to drop off now than to have the media cover this in conjunction with or instead of WWDC product announcements.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Your example is all wrong. The reality is more like. My corporation has 500K in Scotland in an account maintained by a Scottish sub corp but we want to buy a retreat house in Florida. If we bring that money to the US we have to pay tax on it (again), if we leave it in Scotland (where our shareholders already paid tax on it once) we can't buy the house we want. So we leave it in Scotland and invest it. Maybe in a few years we buy a retreat home in Scotland and then instead of spending training dollars in florida at Disney World we spend them in the highlands. Buy those souvenirs and tip those waiters.

Long and short is that every dollar in the US economy helps the US economy, more money here doesn't hurt it.

BTW, i understand this is an incredibly simplistic description of the issue.

If I make money in Scotland and want to bring it back to where I actually LIVE (i.e. the U.S.), your darn right I have to pay taxes on it. I'm enjoying the protection of the greatest military on earth and the rights of the Constitution. Running a government isn't free (as witnessed by our ever increasing deficit as more jobs go out of the country and corporations try to avoid paying any taxes here). If companies like Apple want to make money in China, but don't want to any taxes here, they can go LIVE in China and then they won't have to worry about bringing the money back to the U.S. Good riddance to tax evaders and outsourcers too.

What we NEED BADLY in the U.S. is a TARIFF on any U.S. company's goods (not foreign companies, but U.S. companies or divisions of U.S. companies) that are made outside the the country and then shipped back to the U.S. Income is income and if I live here, I pay income taxes here. That would remove the incentive to take jobs out of the country in the first place but wouldn't cheese off the foreign countries involved directly since their own goods are not affected. It's time to take this country back from greed.

 

[Gasu E.]

If I pay taxes and can't avoid them, so should Apple. They are not special to deserve tax cuts.

Are you a corporation? If you are, you are subject to corporate tax laws, same as Apple.

 

[Gasu E.]

What we NEED BADLY in the U.S. is a TARIFF on any U.S. company's goods (not foreign companies, but U.S. companies or divisions of U.S. companies) that are made outside the the country and then shipped back to the U.S. Income is income and if I live here, I pay income taxes here. That would remove the incentive to take jobs out of the country in the first place but wouldn't cheese off the foreign countries involved directly since their own goods are not affected. It's time to take this country back from greed.

Apple and every other company, US-based or not, pays US taxes on profits of products sold here. So I'm not sure your tariff idea does anything but raise prices for you and me.

What Apple is NOT paying US taxes on now are profits made on sales outside the US. Because they are a US-based company, they would like to repatriate the profits from overseas sales, but the tax rate on these repatriated funds is 35%. That'a much higher than the marginal corporate tax rate of almost any other country. Which is why Apple keeps the profits overseas.

 

[Gasu E.]

But they DON'T hire more employees. They move jobs OUT OF AMERICA not into it! They want to make all that money outside the country, but they don't want to pay their taxes here in the U.S. It's an insult to say they'll pay a tiny percentage of it if only they can bring that money into the U.S. Imagine if you or I told the IRS that we'll gladly pay 1% a year instead of 28%! They'd say get ready to go to prison.

Actually, if you or I (US citizens) move to a foreign country to work for a while we get to exempt something like $80K per year, plus some expenses, from US tax.

 

[throttlemeister]

For all those bitchin' about Apple and others taking jobs out of the country, let me explain something to you: it is not Apple's fault, it is not the governments fault, it is YOUR fault! If you want American jobs to stay in America, then buy American. Even if it is more expensive.

But noooo, the average consumer wants to buy buy buy and if they can get it 2 cents cheaper elsewhere, they buy it elsewhere. And then after companies off-shored parts of the company to reduce cost and be able to compete with cheaper foreign products, the consumer starts whining that they are taking American jobs out of the country.

Payback's a bitch ain't it?

Stop looking at price as the sole differentiator for your mindless consumption behavior. Stop buying for the buying and collecting of stuff. Instead, make a conscious decision on why you need to buy a certain product and why you want to chose for product A instead of B. Sure, you'll be buying less stuff, but you'll be able to get better quality products from local manufacturers while probably saving money because you're not buying loads of crap you don't really need.

 

[boozezela]

For all those bitchin' about Apple and others taking jobs out of the country, let me explain something to you: it is not Apple's fault, it is not the governments fault, it is YOUR fault! If you want American jobs to stay in America, then buy American. Even if it is more expensive.

But noooo, the average consumer wants to buy buy buy and if they can get it 2 cents cheaper elsewhere, they buy it elsewhere. And then after companies off-shored parts of the company to reduce cost and be able to compete with cheaper foreign products, the consumer starts whining that they are taking American jobs out of the country.

Payback's a bitch ain't it?

Stop looking at price as the sole differentiator for your mindless consumption behavior. Stop buying for the buying and collecting of stuff. Instead, make a conscious decision on why you need to buy a certain product and why you want to chose for product A instead of B. Sure, you'll be buying less stuff, but you'll be able to get better quality products from local manufacturers while probably saving money because you're not buying loads of crap you don't really need.

Do you actually realise that a $2700 iMac for which there is no cheaper alternative is entirely made in China?

I cannot buy a more expensive one made in the US either, because there isn't any.

 

[biallystock]

You know, I love Apple. I'm a shareholder and I want them to become as rich as possible.

And yet...yeah. US Uncut is absolutely right. We should all be complaining about such things.

But I kind of think protesting the companies is stupid. They'll always try to get the best deal they can. They should, that's just smart. It's the government that sets the rules, we should be complaining to them if the rules aren't strong enough.

This is like standing by the side of the road with a 'slow down' sign instead of trying to actually change the speed limit.

You ignore the fact that, not just in the USA but in many countries, corporations subvert the democratic processes to get what they want.

In the USA it is particularly bad, to the point you may as well have what the British have, which is an unelected Upper House selected from corporations, to review and veto legislation they don't like.

Americans may not be aware of their own behavior, which is so ingrained as to seem normal to them, which is to subjugate their own interests to those of the corporations.

This has been inculcated into the American voters' thinking by constant immersion in commercial propaganda, and a media which is owned and controlled by the commercial interests which benefit from the voters' submissiveness.

I can think of only one country, outside of the communist countries, with a more alienated and tame media and that is Italy where Berlusconi distracts the public from what is really going on with game shows and strippers.

 

[E.Lizardo]

I guess some idiots are incapable of understanding that BUSINESSES DON'T PAY TAXES.

Consumers do.Taxes are part of the cost of the product,just as labor,development,advertising and materials.

Business taxes are just another way to tax you that seems invisible.

You are paying it just the same.

Sheesh!