Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Capitaogozma

macrumors newbie
Dec 21, 2010
1
0
fair share of taxes??

If all corporations, Apple included, paid their fair share of taxes, our country wouldn't have a financial crisis. Corporations should have to pay 35% on profits regardless of where they are derived. Additionally, corporations should be penalized for outsourcing and given incentives for bringing manufacturing back to the United States. This is exactly what President Obama proposed, only to have the legs cut out from under him by the Republicans in the Senate.

There's no such a thing. if anybody else tried to the same the same thing tax collectors do, it would be called extortion. And it wasn't Apple that got the world in this mess. governments did that with their funny money and the help of the fractional reserve banks politically granted monopoly.

If you want to learn real economics, go to http://www.mises.org.

p.s. There is no real difference between republicrats and democans. They all agree to your enslavement.
 

maknik

macrumors regular
May 17, 2006
173
53
Sure, that's why countries like Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Finland, with very generous welfare states, are toward the bottom of the list. When a Democratic administration says that corporate tax rates need to come down, that's a pretty good indication that perhaps our rates are too high.

Those countries are much smaller than the US, that's why they don't need as much taxation. The current Democratic administration is staffed with Wall Street bankers, and thus the fact that they favor lower corporate taxes (if they do; I don't see them proposing to do anything about it) is mostly an indication of who finances their campaigns.


At the end of the day, the corporate income tax is very inefficient. It doesn't bring in much revenue, and higher rates tend to scare away capital. On top of that, it is very complex and expensive to comply with. The opportunity costs of compliance are even more staggering. All those tax accountants (just for sheer compliance, before we even consider tax deferral or avoidance) could do more good doing something else if we had a simpler, lower tax system.

These are just the standard anti-tax arguments, here deployed for corporations, but just as applicable to rich payers more generally. The evidence that capital has been "scared away" is quite lacking, particularly given the dominance of the US in international business.


Another point is that it is not just the rate, it's also the base. The US is one of the few countries to attempt to tax worldwide income both at the corporate and individual levels. A UK citizen living in Bermuda pays no UK income tax. An American living in Bermuda pays US income tax. For corporations, taxation of extraterritorial income is a bit more common, but so are tax planning strategies like transfer pricing (to shift expenses to high tax areas and income to low tax areas).

The fact that corporations try to weasel out of paying taxes, and sometimes even succeed in shaping the tax code to their desires, does not mean that is the right thing to do. The UK has a notoriously weak corporate tax policy, one that has brought them little discernible gains.
 

iMikeT

macrumors 68020
Jul 8, 2006
2,304
1
California
There's a lot for me to say in response to this. However, I'll just say that I have mixed feelings about this whole situation.
 

emaja

macrumors 68000
May 3, 2005
1,706
11
Chicago, IL
...Trying to evade paying their taxes is BS! Just goes to show, if ALL the BIG Corporations didn't have so many Loopholes from paying their Taxes, maybe our country wouldn't be in such a huge mess with our debt. PAY YOUR TAXES APPLE LIKE THE REST OF US!!!

They are not evading taxes. They are merely using the existing rules to their benefit, just like any other company or individual would.

Don't blame them for it. You don't like it, then change the rules.
 

pmjoe

macrumors 6502
Mar 27, 2009
468
36
I did not see Apple lobbying for that proposal to give tax breaks for creating jobs in the US, so I have to assume this $$$$$$$$$$ is destined for CEOs and shareholders.
 

MagnusVonMagnum

macrumors 603
Jun 18, 2007
5,193
1,442
To address this situation, Apple and these other major players are reportedly stepping up lobbying efforts to try to get the federal government to offer a one-year "tax holiday" that would allow them to bring the profits back to the United States while only being subjected to 5% tax, with the rationale being that the money could be put to work in the U.S. to stimulate the economy rather than simply sitting in foreign bank accounts.International markets have become increasingly important to Apple as iOS devices have proliferated around the world. In fact, Apple reported that during its most recent quarter, 62% of its revenue came from international sales. Consequently, billions of dollars in profit are being generated overseas each quarter, and Apple has been loathe to turn over 35% of those sums to the U.S. government.

Gee, send our jobs overseas and then complain that you have to pay taxes on foreign profits. Hmmmm. I'll vote for a tax holiday for these companies if they agree to bring all our outsourced jobs back to this country in return. Otherwise, SCREW 'EM.

They are not evading taxes. They are merely using the existing rules to their benefit, just like any other company or individual would.

Don't blame them for it. You don't like it, then change the rules.

Yes, it's easy to change the rules in a country where the ultra-rich spend a fortune on lobbyists to make sure the rules aren't ever changed. :rolleyes:

The article here is suggesting they don't want to follow even all the existing rules. A tax holiday to bring all that money into the country? LOL. Right. I say let them live in China if they don't want to pay their taxes here.
 

rileyes

macrumors regular
Dec 16, 2009
131
205
How Ironic

How ironic that apple doesn't want someone else taking a roughly 30% cut of their money. LOL
 

KPOM

macrumors P6
Oct 23, 2010
18,020
7,863
Gee, send our jobs overseas and then complain that you have to pay taxes on foreign profits. Hmmmm. I'll vote for a tax holiday for these companies if they agree to bring all our outsourced jobs back to this country in return. Otherwise, SCREW 'EM.

The current tax system encourages companies to keep income earned overseas out of the US. It's a good thing that Apple (and other companies) make money overseas. 95% of the world's population lives outside the US. However, those companies shouldn't be discouraged from bringing those profits back to the US.
 

emaja

macrumors 68000
May 3, 2005
1,706
11
Chicago, IL
Spare us the flat tax thought. It's absurd and puts an undue burden on the lower classes--the one's who spend 90+% of their money on disposable consumption.

Many of the flat tax proposals have had a lower level income exemption. There were also exemptions for food, clothing, and other essentials.
 

jay_app

macrumors member
Apr 20, 2004
31
38
Spare us the flat tax thought. It's absurd and puts an undue burden on the lower classes--the one's who spend 90+% of their money on disposable consumption.

It does not put a burden on the lower class, they would get a prebate. They would get cash each month to offset possible taxes.

"All valid Social Security cardholders who are U.S. residents receive a monthly prebate equivalent to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services, also known as the poverty level expenditures. The prebate is paid in advance, in equal installments each month. The size of the prebate is determined by the Department of Health & Human Services’ poverty level guideline multiplied by the tax rate. This is a well-accepted, long-used poverty-level calculation that includes food, clothing, shelter, transportation, medical care, etc."
 

paduck

macrumors 6502
Jul 5, 2007
426
0
Many of the flat tax proposals have had a lower level income exemption. There were also exemptions for food, clothing, and other essentials.

By definition, a consumption tax can't have a lower income exemption since it isn't about income.

As for a flat tax, I believe what you really want is tax reform - in other words, trade in all the exemptions and deductions for lower marginal rates. Currently there are more deductions than income in the US, so that ought to be easy. Except the power of entrenched interests. Imagine, for example, the impact on the housing market (especially the highend market) of removing the mortgage interest deduction. That's what you are dealing with.

I think you can have a "flat tax" with progressive brackets. The real key is now deductions/exemptions. If you have a "lower income exemption" you basically have more than one bracket. I don't see why you don't have no exemption, make everyone pay, but gradually increase the marginal rate. Having a bottom exemption means there will be people effectively paying zero who won't be invested in the system. And I think we want everyone to feel like they are contributing something to the nation.
 

paduck

macrumors 6502
Jul 5, 2007
426
0
It does not put a burden on the lower class, they would get a prebate. They would get cash each month to offset possible taxes.

"All valid Social Security cardholders who are U.S. residents receive a monthly prebate equivalent to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services, also known as the poverty level expenditures. The prebate is paid in advance, in equal installments each month. The size of the prebate is determined by the Department of Health & Human Services’ poverty level guideline multiplied by the tax rate. This is a well-accepted, long-used poverty-level calculation that includes food, clothing, shelter, transportation, medical care, etc."

But if you have no income tax or your pay isn't subject to Social Security, how does that really work in an effective manner without a huge bureaucracy behind it to prevent fraud.

You could just exempt basic supplies like food and general clothing from thE consumption tax. That is MUCH more efficient.
 

Enigma55

macrumors newbie
Sep 19, 2008
24
0
This proposal makes sense for Apple since they would use that extra money to stimulate the economy and help create more jobs. These other companies though are money grubbing devils and would probably keep it all anyway. They should definitely be taxed the full amount.
 

swagi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 6, 2007
905
123
6 pages of discussion about an article stating nothing but

CORPORATIONS ARE GREEDY BASTARDS

Sorry to burst your bubble - I knew that already. Thought Apple was different. Yeah, screw you poor victim to genius marketing.

I think a lot of people here still love to circulate the myth that iTMS is barely breaking even and that it was just installed to sell more hardware.

And to all the naysayers - I'm a heavy proposer of a Basic Income Grant in combination with a Flat Tax system. Yes, it could an should work. You don't like it? You think people need to WORK for money?

Do me a favor, go google up Jeremy Rifkin, will ya?
 

kingtj

macrumors 68030
Oct 23, 2003
2,606
749
Brunswick, MD
I have to say, I think this would be a good move....

It really shouldn't be contentious, except for people still thinking in terms of "rich vs. poor" or in other words, "us vs. them".

In reality, this money was already earned overseas by these companies making sales or providing services within those nation's borders. Now it's parked in their banks where the company can opt to spend or invest it there, or just let it sit and earn interest. If the U.S. govt. keeps up a high barrier to re-entry of those funds (like some big fat 35% tax on it!), they're essentially telling businesses, "If you do international business and earn profits overseas, you better keep them over there or we're going to punish you financially for your success!"

I fail to see how any of this causes the "poor to pay more" in taxes? It simply encourages our big, international businesses to consider bringing back in more of their earnings made in other places!


I can imagine this being fairly contentious. On the one hand - it would be great for the US economy to have that kind of cash injection. On the other - why should the 'rich' pay less tax; while the poor pay more?
 

ny3ranger

macrumors regular
Feb 10, 2008
106
0
Really, on top of paying taxes in foreign land you have to pay 35% to bring back the money to your home country. I didnt know this but it doesnt seem sound. Woudlnt it make more sense to let people bring in all the money they want from foreign countries and then collect taxes on the development and earnings on the cash ones its here and making more money?




140237-apple_managing_money.jpg


Over the past few years, much has been made of Apple's reserves of cash and securities, which are now up to approximately $60 billion and growing rapidly. Some observers have suggested the company initiate a stock buyback or issue dividends to reward investors with some of the profits, while others have preferred that the cash remain in Apple's hands to enable the company to reinvest it into the business at some point in the future for greater returns. Apple CEO Steve Jobs noted during the company's October 2010 earnings conference call that Apple is holding onto the cash in order to take advantage of "one or more unique strategic opportunities" that it believes may present itself.

But all of the money may not be available for immediate use, as Fortune reports that Apple is one of a number of U.S. companies with significant profits generated in international markets that continue to sit abroad as the companies prefer to not pay the 35% federal tax charged on such foreign earnings.

To address this situation, Apple and these other major players are reportedly stepping up lobbying efforts to try to get the federal government to offer a one-year "tax holiday" that would allow them to bring the profits back to the United States while only being subjected to 5% tax, with the rationale being that the money could be put to work in the U.S. to stimulate the economy rather than simply sitting in foreign bank accounts.International markets have become increasingly important to Apple as iOS devices have proliferated around the world. In fact, Apple reported that during its most recent quarter, 62% of its revenue came from international sales. Consequently, billions of dollars in profit are being generated overseas each quarter, and Apple has been loathe to turn over 35% of those sums to the U.S. government.

On a possibly related note, Apple recently hired high-profile lobbying firm Fierce, Isakowitz and Blalock to assist with government dealings, an unusual move for the company that has typically refrained from significant lobbying in Washington, DC.

Article Link: Apple Lobbying for International Tax Amnesty to Bring Home Profits
 

kingtj

macrumors 68030
Oct 23, 2003
2,606
749
Brunswick, MD
This is flawed logic, Engima55 ....

The proposal makes equal sense for Apple and for the big "evil pharmaceutical firms" and whoever else you feel is a "bad, money-grubbing company".

What you seem to be missing is that right now, none of them are being taxed AT ALL on these earnings, at least by OUR country. They only get taxed on them if they try to transfer them back into the U.S.A. (no matter WHAT their motivation is for wanting those funds here). They already earned the money though, so this isn't a case of letting them have their money or not.

As long as we have a rule demanding they pay 35% of the money in taxes, they're simply not GOING to bring it here. They MIGHT however, spend it over there, to build more facilities that allow employing foreign workers and laying off more people they currently employ here in the U.S.


This proposal makes sense for Apple since they would use that extra money to stimulate the economy and help create more jobs. These other companies though are money grubbing devils and would probably keep it all anyway. They should definitely be taxed the full amount.
 

MattInOz

macrumors 68030
Jan 19, 2006
2,760
0
Sydney
I did not see Apple lobbying for that proposal to give tax breaks for creating jobs in the US, so I have to assume this $$$$$$$$$$ is destined for CEOs and shareholders.

Apple hasn't paid a dividend in a very long time and the CEO package is modest by corporate standards (that is to say it's fair by broader standards). So I don't think your theory has much basis in history.

Unless you mean the shareholders and CEO's of the companies Apple will use this money to acquire?
Shareholders of those companies will mostly be staff and family so yay to win fall for them.

p.s. I'm Australian and big chunk of that cash will be sitting in a bank here in OZ underwriting investment and jobs growth here so very happy for no tax break to happen.
 

firewood

macrumors G3
Jul 29, 2003
8,107
1,343
Silicon Valley
6 pages of discussion about an article stating nothing but

CORPORATIONS ARE GREEDY BASTARDS ...

And anyone who purchased some Apple stock a couple years back or more and held on to it is probably extremely happy with the success of Apple's massive corporate greed.
 

bearcatrp

macrumors 68000
Sep 24, 2008
1,728
67
Boon Docks USA
Come on apple, follow the law like everyone else does and pay your fair share of the taxes, if you want to bring it back. If you don't want to pay the taxes, leave it there. Just like any other company. Sounds like apple is getting a god complex thinking there are above everyone. Apple should take care of their share holders and split the stock instead of being a greedy corporation like they have become. If it wasn't for the shareholders buying stock, apple wouldn't of had the money to do all of their business. Hey apple, follow the law like everyone else does instead of trying to cheat. One of the big reasons for our bad economy. Greedy corporations evading paying their fair share!

BTW, I do not own any stock in apple.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.