Apple Lobbying for International Tax Amnesty to Bring Home Profits

[foodog]

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.

Corporations don't pay taxes they pass the tax cost off in higher prices to consumers, reduce the amount of dividends they pay, or both.

This affects everyone especially people making less money.

A very, very simply example. Raise taxes on Apple, they raise the cost of their computers to keep profits up. If profits drop, stock price drops they don;t want that. The Feed company of America uses Apple computers, they have to raise the price of feed so they can pay for the new computer system. Farmer Brown's feed cost goes up so he has to charge more for eggs and bacon. The factory workers of the car company have to pay more for food and negotiate higher wages to pay for the extra food costs..... and on and on.

 

[foodog]

because you didn't earn it all yourself. steve jobs does not personally create designs, mine for metal, then mold those metals into a product. then open his own personal store and man that store to sell it to customers.

people do that. a product is created by the help of hundreds of thousands of people. hundreds of thousands of people who do not all equally share in the profits.

in before some libertarian or capitalist rhetoric. im not advocating socialism or whatever, im simply saying that Apple is morally obligated to pay ATLEAST SOME taxes.

Apple is owned by the shareholders. You may be one of them if you have an IRA, 401(k), 403(b) etc.... You pay taxes on your profits.

 

[foodog]

Don't like it? Don't headquarter in the U.S.

Which is why corporations are leaving in droves... with a lot of the jobs.

 

[OllyW]

Corporations don't pay taxes they pass the tax cost off in higher prices to consumers, reduce the amount of dividends they pay, or both.

This affects everyone especially people making less money.

A very, very simply example. Raise taxes on Apple, they raise the cost of their computers to keep profits up. If profits drop, stock price drops they don;t want that. The Feed company of America uses Apple computers, they have to raise the price of feed so they can pay for the new computer system. Farmer Brown's feed cost goes up so he has to charge more for eggs and bacon. The factory workers of the car company have to pay more for food and negotiate higher wages to pay for the extra food costs..... and on and on.

Are you saying Apple deliberately set their current prices with the intention not to pay the current US tax and if they are made to pay it they will have to raise their prices to claw the money back?

 

[drsmithy]

35% does seem steep. While not the highest tax rate I've ever heard of (I think England once had a 95% tax rate, didn't it?), 35% is pretty expensive compared to other tax rates (albeit maybe individual tax rates).

In the '50s and '60s, the top individual income tax rates in the USA were ~95% and ~70%, respectively. Corporate tax rates were around 45-50%.

Since I'm sure we all know what a hellish place to be the USA was back then, compared to now, it's clear that the only way to ensure a prosperous society is lower taxes.

The truth is the poor pay no federal taxes. Anyone one who comments that the so called rich get away with everything on the back of the poor has believed the harmful, dishonest, divisive and destructive politicians.

The rich don't "get away with everything on the back of the poor" because they take their taxes, they do it by simply not paying them enough in the first place.

It hold poor people back, they are told the system is not "fair" so don't bother try to get ahead just vote for me and I'll take money from the "rich" and hand it to you. Most of the bottom 50% on income earners not only pay no income taxes they get money back (ie cash payments).

It's true. Living on welfare is just one great big party. Even Wall Street bankers are jealous of the lifestyles that poor people on welfare get to lead.

Top 1% of income earners pay 40% of all taxes

They also have 90% of all the money, so really, they're getting a pretty sweet deal.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Everybody will be given a prebate.

Which means, in effect, that the poor actually subsidise the rich.

Do some research. I'll help you start...

I've done more than enough research. The "Fairtax" will do exactly what it has been designed to do, and that is make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

 

[donlab]

The point

Boy I wish I could pay 5% on my federal taxes, is it too much to ask a company to pay something similar to working class Americans? Last time I checked an average single person in America making an ok wage($34-83k) pays in the 25% tax bracket, so if the Supreme Court says companies are people, then why can't they pay taxes like people?

This! I believe corporations=peope to be the dispositive issue. What a shame that recent supreme court ruling was!

 

[emaja]

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQiRJh-_H0i5IDqpK0mrjAAjnk7UrrYnreYOz40qHt63xhIlxE

15% Wich I dont see increasing all that much.

Ipod had at its height 60+% of the market.

15% with ONE PHONE is pretty dominant. Factor in the revenue from the apps, and Apple makes a TON of money.

 

[thirdwaver]

Which is why corporations are leaving in droves... with a lot of the jobs.

I'd love to see you give us some citations to back this up. Corporations aren't leaving in droves. They're just moving the labor part (the jobs) elsewhere. They won't leave because as long as they can keep politicians in their pockets who reciprocate by making/strengthening these tax loopholes, they get the best of both worlds.

It's not sustainable, folks. If/when the middle class evaporates, who's going to buy these overpriced gadgets? The slaves who make them? Doubt it.

 

[Hurda]

Factor in the revenue from the apps, and Apple makes a TON of money.

Which Apple has to spend, more or less, entirely on the upkeeping of the iTunes- and AppStore-infrastructure...

 

[Ugg]

Correct if I'm wrong, but Apple has ALREADY paid taxes on this money in the countries where it was earned... why should they get taxed at the full-rate on it twice?

It's amazing how few people understand this.

It would be nice to know just what taxes Apple has paid in which countries. I'd be especially interested to know how much profit they're claiming in Ireland and Slovakia, both of which have low corporate taxes. Nonetheless, the idea of taxing foreign profits is outmoded. Surely the Republicans will pounce on this issue and deal with it.

 

[firewood]

Are you saying Apple deliberately set their current prices with the intention not to pay the current US tax and if they are made to pay it they will have to raise their prices to claw the money back?

Apple would not even make or sell a product unless the price they could charge allowed them to be profitable after taxes. Their current product portfolio is based on their current estimated taxes. For a high enough tax level, U.S. companies would thus make far less products, and employ even less that the few they do now. Thus sending even more jobs (and profits) overseas.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

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.

By "discouraged" you mean paying their fair taxes like everyone else in this country that isn't rich, a crook or generally trying to avoid paying what's due, thus leaving the working middle class to make up for it.

Yes, they still have the money...abroad. Like I said in my previous post, if they want to spend that money (i.e. the top brass, etc.), they should MOVE to one of those countries they're earning the money in and become a citizen there (i.e. China, Mexico, Vietnam, etc.) and then they can freely spend their money. They want to bring it back to the U.S. so they (whether it's the bosses whose money is tied up in stock and only pay themselves $1 a year to defer taxes indefinitely or the company itself who might want to purchase something in the country) can have that money to spend here (where they enjoy the protection of the U.S. Military, Freedom of Speech and Press, etc.) but they don't want to pay any taxes on any of it. Ah gee. What a bummer. I don't care where you earn your money. If you LIVE in the U.S. and under U.S. protection and government, you pay your taxes to support that government and military. It doesn't pay for itself!

But no, no! We all know that the Uber-Rich shouldn't have to pay a dime. The poor don't pay a dime. Somehow the middle always gets screwed. The problem is the middle is disappearing (thanks to the policies of the Uber-Rich) and that will leave the U.S. in one heck of a bind some day since no one will be paying and our deficit will balloon into the Billions, maybe even the Trillions! Oh gee, wait a second....

Hey, how about a "tax holiday" for the rest of us? Maybe we'll let those companies bring their money back here for 5% if the rest of us can bring the profits we've made over the past decade or two "back" at 5%. I'd much rather pay only 5% than 28%! Yes, give me back my other 23% for the past decade and I'll vote for the corporations to bring back the money they've made over the years to the U.S.! Fair is fair. Otherwise, like I said, let them move to China. They can spend their money there instead.

So it's all about everyone living exactly the same lifestyle regardless of what they do for a living? Yes, many that make $350k barely work, but most took many years of working 15+ hour days and risking everything they had to get to that point. It's so very different once you're on the other side of the table. Believe me.

"Once you start down the dark path, forever will it control your destiny." -Yoda

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." -Matthew 6:24 (NIV Translation and attributed to Jesus)

 

[drsmithy]

It's amazing how few people understand this.

People who understand know that there are taxation treaties with pretty much every country that matters, so that people and corporations generating income in multiple places don't get double-taxed.

With that said, the US is somewhat unusual in that it taxes worldwide income.

 

[hotrock3]

Yes, they still have the money...abroad. Like I said in my previous post, if they want to spend that money (i.e. the top brass, etc.), they should MOVE to one of those countries they're earning the money in and become a citizen there (i.e. China, Mexico, Vietnam, etc.) and then they can freely spend their money.

Heaven forbid they bring money from other countries and pour it into our economy because they see it as more beneficial to spend it here than there!!! They should take all their money and bolster another nation's economy.

I would do everything I could to spend my already taxed money in other countries before bringing it into the US to have it taxed again before I can buy something in which the transaction is taxed once again.

The government isn't an efficient money management system. Have you ever been to the DMV? Those people get paid very well to sit there, work slowly, and many of them are rude to you when you ask them a question. (I'm sorry if you work at the DMV, my intention is not to offend you, it's only my personal experience in KS, ID, and FL.)

 

[spydr]

Oh the irony.

So Apple does not want to pay 30 ish % tax on their money.

Funny, the figure seems strangely familiar

A bit silly comparison though. Apple charges 30% for bringing some essential service and millions of customers to the developers/publishers.

Now Apple has already paid billions in federal tax on their US income and pays taxes on foreign income to foreign countries.

So I don't think it is really as much pun as you suggest there

 

[pundit]

A bit silly comparison though. Apple charges 30% for bringing some essential service and millions of customers to the developers/publishers.

This is a lie. The App Store isn't an "essential service"... Plenty of jailbroken phones do just fine with Cydia and the like. If it were permitted. Netflix would be just fine about developing a sideloaded app, even. Its only "essential" because its forced.

Netflix developed and updated in a very professional way, numerous apps on other platforms, like Xbox, Wii, PS3, WD Live etc etc.

As for millions of customers to Netflix... how, exactly do Apple advertise Netflix? They don't. Netflix advertises the Netflix app and its provided as a convenience for their customers with an iOS device.

Apple gets the Netflix Halo much more than the reverse.

 

[hotrock3]

Netflix.

I would have chosen a different app. One that you must pay for unlike the Netflix app which is free. They get a good deal out of the AppStore, their app is hosted and distributed for free!

 

[michaelcyee]

I would have chosen a different app. One that you must pay for unlike the Netflix app which is free. They get a good deal out of the AppStore, their app is hosted and distributed for free!

Netflix paid a $99 fee to become an iOS developer. It was not free.

 

[hotrock3]

Netflix paid a $99 fee to become an iOS developer. It was not free.

Point for you.

But is $99 anything to Netflix?

 

[emaja]

Which Apple has to spend, more or less, entirely on the upkeeping of the iTunes- and AppStore-infrastructure...

Do you honestly think Apple spends all that money and gets to keep NONE of it as profit?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Heaven forbid they bring money from other countries and pour it into our economy because they see it as more beneficial to spend it here than there!!! They should take all their money and bolster another nation's economy.

Who said anything about them pouring it into our economy (other than the proposed 5%)? Apple and these other companies routinely outsource jobs to other countries. They do not spend it here or pour it into the economy. They might invest in buying out other companies or perhaps opening a store here or something, but the idea that they are going to invest that money directly into the U.S. economy is ludicrous, IMO. They are hoarding it now and they will hoard it then as well. If they want to bring it here so badly, they obvious have an intention for it. If it were to help the U.S. economy, they wouldn't be so opposed to paying their taxes.

I would do everything I could to spend my already taxed money in other countries before bringing it into the US to have it taxed again before I can buy something in which the transaction is taxed once again.

And I already suggested that these people that want that money here should move overseas so they can spend their money there. They clearly want to bring it back here for a reason. They don't want to leave the country to spend it (or have someone else spend it for them overseas where it does them little good on any kind of personal level. I want my fancy new office building HERE not in Vietnam because I don't want to live in Vietnam, but in perhaps California or Oregon and I'll be working at that new ultra-modern facility. No, I'm stuck here with the old building because I can't bring my money in without paying taxes and I don't want to move there. So sad.)

The government isn't an efficient money management system. Have you ever been to the DMV? Those people get paid very well to sit there, work slowly, and many of them are rude to you when you ask them a question. (I'm sorry if you work at the DMV, my intention is not to offend you, it's only my personal experience in KS, ID, and FL.)

So your entire opinion of the government is based on the DMV (which is state level)? The Federal Reserve is private. Are they doing a good job? What about Wall Street and all those cheating banks that failed we had to prop up? Most of the government agencies in question are out of touch for a reason and unlike a private company that can go bankrupt or move to China is times are tough, the government has to keep on operating. Then there's the matter of the scum-bag politicians running much of government. There's a reason it's inefficient.

Now if you take a look at the Post Office (which is self-sufficient and not based on taxes), it has been doing wonders considering the onerous pre-funding tax burden placed on it by Congress under the Republicans under Bush (otherwise it would have been in the black even in the worst part of the recession). Its package prices are a far better deal than both UPS and Federal Express and yet it manages to deliver 1st class mail to every single address in the entire United States in a VERY timely manner. If it were privatized, companies like UPS wouldn't touch the mail delivery to every address with a 100 foot pole. They would charge massive over-fees or force people to travel long-distances to get their mail at a post office box and prices would go up constantly as gas fluctuates, etc. You have no idea how efficient the Post Office is despite some of its more arcane management practices and how poorly much of management treats the carriers who have to trudge through every kind of weather condition to every address in the country. Some of these people are heroes and yet you have people in certain parties in the government that would cut them down to minimum wage if they could and divide up the lucrative parts of the business and sell it to their friends. They would destroy collective bargaining and return working conditions to pre-OSHA, unsafe and unmonitored status all in the name of making money off it for themselves, not delivering a SERVICE to the country. Who would think to privatize the military? That's been tried as well in small areas (i.e. Blackwater) and look what trouble they got themselves into in IRAQ.

Take a look at regulation of public utilities and the before and after and see where consumer prices fall. I think you'll find de-regulation from government control means HIGHER prices for the consumer, not lower prices (because now they need to turn huge profits and they cannot do that without raising prices!). Look at health care. If you want to turn large profits at insurance companies and hospitals alike, you have to take steps to maximize profits, whether that means denying services (insurance) or massively over-charging for things like aspirin and all kinds of other nonsensical fees (hospitals).

Private holdings for profit is not always best. It works where there is true free-market competition and it's ethical when it doesn't involve denying basic life necessities or care in order to turn a profit.

Maybe some day people will realize that there is more to life than just money and that a world full of people that only look after themselves isn't such a great place to live in.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Apple can shut the #$#@ up and pay their taxes. The advantages of being based in this country and the responsibilities of being based in this country go hand in hand. When I get my paycheck, I don't argue with the government over my tax rate because I "earned" the money. Earning the money does not erase my responsibility as a citizen to pay taxes on it. A few other points:

- Just because something is legal in America doesn't mean it isn't corrupt and wrong. Hiring lobbyists so they can legally dodge their taxes doesn't mean they're not dodging their taxes. The American people get screwed on the deal regardless of how legal those corporate puppets in Congress proclaim it to be.

- 5% versus 35%. Do they have anything concrete to offer the American people in exchange for this possible reduction of funds going into programs like Social Security and Medicare, you know, things that provide services like healthcare to poor people? Remember poor people? The ones who can't afford to fly across the country at a moment's notice in their private jet for an organ transplant?

- Here's a company that's famous for sitting on cash and not putting it back into the economy, asking for a tax break so that it can have more cash, and claiming they're going to put it back into the economy. In what twisted netherworld of bass-akwards logic does this make any sense? "Hi, I'm the medical doctor that is famous for not dispensing medical supplies. I deserve to have more medical supplies, so that I can dispense them to people." How about we find the company/doctor that IS putting money into the economy/dispensing medical supplies, and give them what they need? Instead of just pouring the money down a black hole of corporate greed and corruption?

- This is the legacy of the great Apple, who made computers usable for the average person instead of the professional geek? Overpriced luxury goods, closed ecosystems, anti-competitive behavior, and ruthless corporate greed? This company is not your friend, people. It is a very big fish in the sea of capitalism. The products make you feel warm and fuzzy because that's what gets you to buy the products, which is what makes money for the shareholders, which is what Apple is legally required to do. That's the system. It breeds corruption. Apple is not immune.

Agreed man, agreed!

 

[hotrock3]

Who said anything about them pouring it into our economy (other than the proposed 5%)?

Why don't you answer that for me?

They clearly want to bring it back here for a reason.

Most of the government agencies in question are out of touch for a reason and unlike a private company that can go bankrupt or move to China is times are tough, the government has to keep on operating. Then there's the matter of the scum-bag politicians running much of government. There's a reason it's inefficient.

So why not downsize?

Now if you take a look at the Post Office (which is self-sufficient and not based on taxes)...

You have no idea how efficient the Post Office is despite some of its more arcane management practices and how poorly much of management treats the carriers who have to trudge through every kind of weather condition to every address in the country.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/15/AR2011021506151.html

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articl...stal-service-faces-238-billion-budget-deficit

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010...-delivers-bad-budget-news/UPI-12321267544397/

http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/17/u...bamas-2012-budget-but-some-call-it-a-bailout/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704881304576094000352599050.html

Yup, the USPS sure is doing well. Somehow they overpaid its FERS 6.9 billion dollars and it plans on losing another 8 billion this year. Good thing they are closing around 2000 post offices to help prevent breaking 2010's record $8.5 billion in losses.

 

[JoeG4]

since they cannot bring money back to US, instead of building a US factory and creating US jobs, they build a factory over there and create jobs for someone elses economy.

You're talking about a company that doesn't manufacture a damn thing in the US to begin with. Aside from some offices in Elk Grove, Cupertino, and Texas - and a bunch of retail stores that are pretty well acclaimed for being crappy minimum wage working environments, Apple doesn't hire anyone else.

 

[leroypants]

I would support the tax cheat Steve jobs with this if he used the money to open a manufacturing plant for iphones and ipads in America, giving thousands of Americans jobs. However we all know that Apple would just horde the money.