The lesson for businesses is that Ireland makes promises they know they can't keep.
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 Loses Major Tax Dispute in Europe, Must Pay Ireland €13 Billion
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The lesson for businesses is that Ireland makes promises they know they can't keep.
And Apple has had their Cork operation here since 1980! That’s a long time. Currently they employ over 6,000 in Ireland.
Another company is following this approach (focus on financials vs innovation/product quality) and it's not going well at all. It's called Boeing.
Or, I don’t know, pay your taxes, maybe?
It's always nice to see someone who prefers citizens to companies.
Those who are unhappy with this should volunteer and offer to pay double the price charged by Apple. Just to set up a company rescue fund.
Those who are unhappy with this should volunteer and offer to pay double the price charged by Apple. Just to set up a company rescue fund.
A majority voted in favour of this. It's also peanuts compared to all the money that's wasted by governments on pointless wars and kickbacks.
So Ireland lured Apple in with low taxes but then get the taxes after all.
Brilliant strategy!
Brilliant strategy!
In my city, businesses are routinely courted with promises of special tax treatment. Ironically, it's nearly always for businesses that don't need the tax break. Target, for example, was offered a deal where if they built a warehouse here they wouldn't pay any city taxes for 20 years. I don't see how that's different from what happened in Ireland. Apple built facilities there and employed people, bringing in an industry that otherwise wouldn't have gone there. For that, Ireland lowered Apple's taxes. That happens all the time in the U.S.
Last edited:
They'll probably buy f22s and tanks with that money now.
""Today is a big win for European citizens and for tax justice," said the European Union's competition chief Margrethe Vestager."
The European citizens she refers to are presumably the handful that brought the case? Because there is no evidence of these type of monies ever being used to benefit general citizens. On the other hand, governments constantly propagandize their deficits and need to increase taxation whilst simultaneously advertising spending on foreign aid and war, none of which helps their citizens. Unless of course you argue that they are defeating media-created ogres and aiding the purposely displaced.
The European citizens she refers to are presumably the handful that brought the case? Because there is no evidence of these type of monies ever being used to benefit general citizens. On the other hand, governments constantly propagandize their deficits and need to increase taxation whilst simultaneously advertising spending on foreign aid and war, none of which helps their citizens. Unless of course you argue that they are defeating media-created ogres and aiding the purposely displaced.
It's different because Ireland decided to join the EU, and by choosing to do so, agreed to follow their tax rules.
Yes, apple lost a tax case. Losing a tax doesn’t mean “dodged” tax. It means one lost a tax case. It doesn’t mean they evaded paying taxes. But go ahead, spin it all you want. Spin it like a top.
At least there were some court proceedings.
Corporations don't pay taxes, they just collect them. Envy and greed tend to get votes, but it is a highly regressive tax and the people who feel it the most through higher prices are the ones who can least afford it.
You really should talk to a financial advisor or an accountant or a tax attorney. If you are playing 40% taxes, taking that statement at face value, you should be making over 600,000 a year. Taxation is a game of cat and mouse, no reason you should be paying that amount if you diversify it via investments, property ( tax free zones) etc. Honestly you should talk to a few people. Create an LLC, start up a side business, get deductions for that etc.
Ireland of course was complicit. The money should not even go to Ireland it should be distributed in all the other European countries where APPLE dodges paying tax by claiming all the income was generated in Ireland when it was not. Ireland set up a sweet heart deal with Apple with a low tax deal and Apple routed all their European income through Ireland. Very dodgy.
Except it *could* be based on to shareholders, but Tim will insist on a certain margin range so that seems unlikely - look at the profit margin over the last decade to see. Certainly employees could pay some of it. But the point is that people will pay the tax, corporations merely decide which group is going to pay it.
So you're against cross-border commerce and in favour of of something like Juche in North-Korea?
Why do you buy anything from Apple and not a locally made $1000 phone with 60hz 720p lcd and a locally made 200nm cpu?
What would you feel about a situation where one US STATE put in place a 1 percent tax rate and then a large company (ie Apple) routed every sale all over the US as if it was made in that one state. Thereby benefiting both the company and the state. Well that is exactly what Apple was doing for years.
There is a difference between cross-border commerce and setting up structures deliberately to dodge tax.
It's like businesses incorporating in Delaware. Delaware has very business friendly laws and very lax taxation, thats why around 65% of business 500 companies incorporated there.
Is the setup above legal? Look there are many laws on the books that don’t sit well with me and some that don’t sit well with others. DMA for example. But public corporations (I guess unless you’re Enron) can’t go rogue.
It means exactly that: they dodged taxes.
They set up a structure to dodge taxes in a deal with the tax authorities - and that was found illegal.
I’m for cross-border commerce, and so is the European Union.
But if means a company can claim to “sell products at a loss“ in big European markets like France, Germany and the U.K. - and funnel the profits to low- or untaxed entities by exploiting loopholes in a country’s tax code.
This article explains it quite succinctly.