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 Offers City of Cupertino $9.7M for Transportation Projects to Avoid Business Tax
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah you kind of hit on a point there. The city is basically penalizing Apple for contributing to a healthy employment level.
However, they need to mitigate the impact to traffic somehow. Apple appears to be offering an environmentally friendly solution, but how practical are their ideas? How safe is it to bike in that area? I could bike around here, but even on the best bike paths, it’s not safe for women and children to bike alone, so most of us don’t do it.
I can understand Apple or even individuals just not trusting governments with their hard earned money. It’s easy to try and paint Apple as a villain here, that’s honestly my instinct as well because they’re just such an easy big fat cat target, but so many local governments are plagued with inefficiency and corruption.
What a scam. In NYC they built out so many bike lanes it's choking off traffic. So now they came up with a 'congestion fee'
At least ny taxpayers footed the bill to create the crisis, and they're footing the bill for the fix.
Cupertino is extorting Apple to create the crisis.
At least ny taxpayers footed the bill to create the crisis, and they're footing the bill for the fix.
Cupertino is extorting Apple to create the crisis.
Yeah. So much better to have a ton of cars belching out exhaust and creating gridlock. Way better than clean bikes and exercise like so many other cities are trying. And btw, before there were those bike lanes there was triple parking.
And speaking of parking, have you ever tried to find a parking spot in NYC? You conspiracy theorists could just as easily argue that allowing a flood of cars into the city clogs parking which creates a need for insanely expensive parking garages and the lucrative tax revenue they bring. Works both ways, doesn’t it?
Edit: Article in today’s NYT about this. Here’s a helpful passage:
In reality, the government is a monopoly provider of road space, and the government has largely chosen to give it away. It’s no surprise, then, that the vast majority of American commuters drive to work alone, or that all those lonely commuters (plus taxis, Ubers, buses and delivery trucks) cause congestion.
When the government holds down the price of something people value, Mr. Manville said, we get shortages. And congestion is effectively a shortage of road — one that occurs at the peak times when people want to use it most.
If we had that problem with other kinds of infrastructure or commodities, we’d charge people more for them. If airline tickets were particularly in demand, their prices would go up. If there were a run on avocados, grocers wouldn’t respond by keeping them as cheap as possible.
When the government holds down the price of something people value, Mr. Manville said, we get shortages. And congestion is effectively a shortage of road — one that occurs at the peak times when people want to use it most.
If we had that problem with other kinds of infrastructure or commodities, we’d charge people more for them. If airline tickets were particularly in demand, their prices would go up. If there were a run on avocados, grocers wouldn’t respond by keeping them as cheap as possible.
Last edited:
To the point that the business tells the city how it’s going to spend the money it receives from said business, though?
They're proposing a tax for employing people full-time. 
Sounds like one of the worst things to tax. Maybe it's time Apple invested in different cities.
[doublepost=1554348797][/doublepost]
Sounds like one of the worst things to tax. Maybe it's time Apple invested in different cities.[doublepost=1554348797][/doublepost]
No need cause they have their own buses that are way better than the public ones. (Disclosure: I work for a tech company in the area, but it's not Apple.)
Last edited:
Committing fraud to avoid taxes is illegal (the President). Avoiding taxes through negotiations or loopholes (Apple) is immoral.
There’s no double standard, but one is definitely illegal. Both should pay taxes
Sweden national tax rate ~ 60%
Sweden smartphone ownership ~ 90%
Everyone, always be wary of people who try to make complicated things sound simple.
Absolutely, it's quite normal; this is true even for those citizens that are involved in local politics.
Too bad not many citizens actually care about local politics...
[doublepost=1554382788][/doublepost]
Sweden is not socialist.
That’s not the point, or his. He was (wrongly) claiming that high taxes negate techology adoption. He was using socialism as a surrogate for high taxes.
Negotiations are not immoral. They allow each side to create a custom solution that benefits both parties more than the standard solution. As far as loopholes, they are explicitly written into the tax law. Calling the “loopholes” is just a negative way to spin a legal exemption.
I guess that it would depend on who is in charge of creating new technology.
If Apple (or any other company) had to pay 80% in taxes they'd have to be very conservative in their investment choices due to lack of cash. To bring it to an extreme, if they had to pay 99.9% in taxes they wouldn't be able to function (there would be no reason to exist for Apple), so the idea that high taxes can hinder technological adoption is true unless the government picks it up. At the same time, if taxes are too low government wouldn't function, and it's easy to see all the problems that it would cause (to bring it to an extreme on the opposite side of my previous example, if taxes were at 0.01% nothing will function unless private companies picked it up).
I think that the real question is where is the right taxation point (and how to cut waste).
California gonna California.
It's no wonder so many businesses are now building new campuses in Texas.
It’s all legal, but mostly big corporations benefit from it. Just because you can take advantage of a loophole doesn’t make it right.
I’m really getting tired of the tech industry and their obsession with walking and biking. Most people don’t live close enough to their work to use either method for their work commute and cost of living can make the commute distance a nightmare. If they want to do something useful for transportation they can start a campaign to outlaw carpool lanes that are useless for most drivers and I can point them to at least a half dozen freeway interchanges that are mostly parking lots do to all the people they insist need to work in the Bay Area. Fix that mess and stop thinking a world doesn't exist outside a couple miles from your campus.
It might be legal, but this sort of deals should not be legal.
if they want road/infrastructure spending, than fine, let them help
but Tax money goes towards more services and support than just infrastructure / roadways, and Apple, being a large employer and presence will use a large portion of the resources of the area, more than just some roadways. Whats going to help pay fo the plumbing of the area that's used? traffic? police / fire? garbage disposal? so on and so forth. This is essentially Apple trying to avoid paying into the tax pool, by only paying into infrastructure thatonly will benefit them
that defeats the whole purpose of taxes. These large companies essentially are trying to set themselves up as "city states" with as much independance from the governments of the regions they operate in. (Google's doing the same here in Toronto). Governments need to tell these companies "tough" and hold to the proper taxation of large companies and their profit pools
if they want road/infrastructure spending, than fine, let them help
but Tax money goes towards more services and support than just infrastructure / roadways, and Apple, being a large employer and presence will use a large portion of the resources of the area, more than just some roadways. Whats going to help pay fo the plumbing of the area that's used? traffic? police / fire? garbage disposal? so on and so forth. This is essentially Apple trying to avoid paying into the tax pool, by only paying into infrastructure thatonly will benefit them
that defeats the whole purpose of taxes. These large companies essentially are trying to set themselves up as "city states" with as much independance from the governments of the regions they operate in. (Google's doing the same here in Toronto). Governments need to tell these companies "tough" and hold to the proper taxation of large companies and their profit pools
I fail to see how paying more than the law requires is virtuous. Tell me, do you feel guilty when you apply for an exemption that you qualify for?
If your concern is that the tax law isn’t fairly implemented, talk to the politicians.
Taxes are not a right/wrong proposition. The only relevant category is legal/illegal.
[doublepost=1554402301][/doublepost]
You are conflating issues. The article is not about avoiding taxes in general. It is about a specific NEW tax that was created after the headquarters was built. This tax is specifically about the impact to traffic congestion created as a side effect of the new jobs.
Yes, I agree. Tax avoidance is perfectly legal. Tax evasion, OTOH, is illegal. Just toss this out their so that people don't mix up the two.
Not sure how far away the Apple campus is from public rail transport, such as CalTran or BART? If the idea is to pare down the amount of private vehicle traffic, then maybe Apple should really be interested in designing and building a direct-to-campus shuttle or trolley of some kind, that runs on steel rails, and that connects with an existing rail transport system. Maybe even a Disney World type of Monorail?
Last edited:
What I’m saying is corporations stand to benefit from tax loopholes significantly more than the middle class. Talk to the politicians? Sorry I don’t have a multimillion dollar lobbying arm like corporations do.
in addition, Large corporations who have their hands in politicians pockets have purposely help create those loopholes that they take advantage of to lower their tax burden.
Sure it's easy to claim that these tax loopholes aren't illegal. But they're not illegal because they've done their damndest to ensure that hte politicians in power keep them legal. That doesn't mean that many of the allowances that large corporations have are moral or ethical.
You know that's not true.
If they were interested in cleaning up air quality they'd outlaw dinosaur farting cars and provide incentives for electric vehicles.
I never have a problem parking in NYC. Sundays are the best, it's free on the street anywhere you want to park.