MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
53,022
14,763



Apple plans to hire an additional 1,000 employees at its Cork offices in Ireland, a country where the iPhone maker shelters multi-billion-dollar profits from corporate taxes in the United States, according to Reuters.

Apple-Ireland.jpg
Apple's offices in Cork, Ireland
Ireland's main foreign investment agency, the IDA, said Apple was to add 1,000 jobs to its office in Cork by mid-2017 from 5,000 at present. It said the company had also added 1,000 jobs in the past year.
In September 2014, the European Commission accused Apple of receiving illegal state aid from Ireland in return for maintaining jobs. A decision in the investigation is due after Christmas, according to Ireland's finance minister Michael Noonan.
Apple's Tim Cook says Cork operations won't be affected by EC tax investigation outcome. Full interview on 6.1 news
https://t.co/sdY8mbdMey - RTÉ News (@rtenews) November 11, 2015
Apple has paid a corporate tax rate of about 2.5% in Ireland on $109 billion in profits over the past five years, far less than an average 12.5% paid by many other companies in the country. The U.S. has an average corporate tax rate of about 15% to 39%.

Article Link: Apple to Create 1,000 New Jobs in Ireland Amid Tax Probe
 
  • Like
Reactions: appledefenceforce

Fzang

macrumors 65816
Jun 15, 2013
1,314
1,081
I wonder if the EC will run Apple out of there and lose all those people's jobs?

That blame would lie solely with Apple then. Avoid paying billions in tax, create enough jobs for an entire city, and then expect immunity because what about all those poor workers losing their jobs? Won't somebody think of the children?!
 
Comment

2457282

Suspended
Dec 6, 2012
3,327
3,014
I think this is all political fodder. They created the laws that allow this and Apple is taking advantage of the law. Nothing new as many companies do that. Even in the USA, most companies incorporate in Delaware because of the way the laws are structured there. Ireland/EU can change laws to the tax code and then companies can decide to stay or move to another place if it is more advantageous. You have even seen individuals move countries due to tax issues. Albeit, all of this only works for the big boys. Us little folks cannot afford to move just to get a tax break.
 
Comment

BigJayhawk

macrumors regular
Jan 8, 2003
225
147
New Jersey
That blame would lie solely with Apple then. Avoid paying billions in tax, create enough jobs for an entire city, and then expect immunity because what about all those poor workers losing their jobs? Won't somebody think of the children?!

There are five banks on the same street in your town. Each bank lets you use YOUR OWN money for varying surcharges. You would go to the MOST EXPENSIVE ONE as a "service to the bank"??? Right! Sure!

Our government (and others to lesser degrees) are starting to realize that when you are a multi-billion-dollar company (ANY OF THEM - not just Apple), that the entire planet is no different for them than one street of banks for us.

If our country doesn't stop with the political fodder of blaming the rich for everything and realize that you change NOTHING for the better by doing that then maybe we'll get some policy that actually results in big corporate money being brought back HOME and spent in the U.S.

Shareholders have very little patience for a company that uses its OWN MONEY for a 26% LOSS before even spending it when they can just as easily spend it after a 10% loss (or even borrow someone else's money for 3%). This will NEVER change. If government policy does not change then this debate will never end and all of the world's corporate money will stay abroad. (I guarantee that Chinese companies are bringing their profits back to China!)
 
Comment

bergert

macrumors regular
Jun 24, 2008
187
66
There are five banks on the same street in your town. Each bank lets you use YOUR OWN money for varying surcharges. You would go to the MOST EXPENSIVE ONE as a "service to the bank"??? Right! Sure!

Our government (and others to lesser degrees) are starting to realize that when you are a multi-billion-dollar company (ANY OF THEM - not just Apple), that the entire planet is no different for them than one street of banks for us.

yeah - but you see the masses prefer click-bait articles how bad corporation XYZ is, not the truth. The facts are often hard to swallow.
 
Comment

miknos

Suspended
Mar 14, 2008
940
793
Good news.

I prefer Apple to keep the money and decide what to do instead of some bureaucrat. Apple could pay dividends, buyback shares, hire more people, open more stores, invest more in R&D…

They could use it to put 32GB as minimum storage for iDevices.
 
Comment

omerbaker

macrumors member
Apr 19, 2009
78
10
I'm pleasantly surprised that there hasn't been a bunch of statist arguments on why Apple is evil for sheltering their profits. We've all heard the saying "The only two things that are sure in this world are death and taxes." I say the only sure thing in this world in that taxes are death.
 
Comment

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,473
8,169
Somewhere
There are five banks on the same street in your town. Each bank lets you use YOUR OWN money for varying surcharges. You would go to the MOST EXPENSIVE ONE as a "service to the bank"??? Right! Sure!
And when you use one of those banks to hide your money so you don't have to pay taxes on it someone will still come after you for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AleXXXa
Comment

PJL500

macrumors 6502
Nov 27, 2011
272
167
But still no Apple Store in Ireland... Not the Republic anyway
Yeah, Apple could do a good turn and buy out McDonalds on Grafton Street and have a (bit smaller) Regent St style location... .
 
Comment

RockSpider

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2014
903
396
I'm pleasantly surprised that there hasn't been a bunch of statist arguments on why Apple is evil for sheltering their profits. We've all heard the saying "The only two things that are sure in this world are death and taxes." I say the only sure thing in this world in that taxes are death.
So you're okay with not having roads and schools and all the other goodies that taxes bring, you'd rather that Timothy Cook makes $30 million a year, and you have nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AleXXXa
Comment

hpe

macrumors member
Aug 9, 2013
37
0
Switzerland
So you're okay with not having roads and schools and all the other goodies that taxes bring, you'd rather that Timothy Cook makes $30 million a year, and you have nothing.
Actually, corporate tax rates could be 0%. Then you would avoid companies going abroad (much easier to do than for people), you would avoid counties, states and nations competing with each other. The taxes would be taken from the people working for said companies in the form of taxes on salaries. The share holders would be taxed then they sell their shares, provided they made a profit, and on taxig the dividends.

Taxes would still be paid, you would just avoid a lot of meaningless bureaucracy that is currently being done in order to bring down the tax bill of a corporation, instead a corporation could spend all it's efforts providing the service or product they offer.

To be clear, corporates should absolutely pay environmental taxes if they cause any. This can be done by taxing carbon emissions or chemical impact as examples
 
Last edited:
Comment

RockSpider

macrumors 6502a
Sep 18, 2014
903
396
Actually, corporate tax rates could be 0%. Then you would avoid companies going abroad (much easier to do than for people), you would avoid counties, states and nations competing with each other. The taxes would be taken from the people working for said companies in the form of taxes on salaries. The share holders would be taxed then they sell their shares, provided they made a profit, and on taxig the dividends.

Taxes would still be paid, you would just avoid a lot of meaningless bureaucracy that is currently being done in order to bring down the tax bill of a corporation, instead a corporation could spend all it's efforts providing the service or product they offer.

To be clear, corporates should absolutely pay environmental taxes if they cause any. This can be done by taxing carbon emissions or chemical impact as examples

Sounds simple enough, but there's usually something that can go wrong when people are involved.
 
Comment

AtomicDusk

macrumors regular
Jul 24, 2014
119
298
San Diego
So you're okay with not having roads and schools and all the other goodies that taxes bring, you'd rather that Timothy Cook makes $30 million a year, and you have nothing.

They pay the taxes on dollars earned in the US. The issue is whether or not they should be subjected to US taxes on dollars earned and stored over seas, when the money goes from an over seas bank to a US Bank.

Instead Apple can probably spend it directly on manufacturing from the bank in Ireland without incurring the massive repatriation corporate tax rate.

Or Tim Cook will go Srooge McDuck on us and build a massive vault full of money to go swimming in.
 
Comment

Silencio

macrumors 68030
Jul 18, 2002
2,598
458
NYC
So you're okay with not having roads and schools and all the other goodies that taxes bring, you'd rather that Timothy Cook makes $30 million a year, and you have nothing.

Nah, let the free market decide if you should have roads, police and fire protection, and access to healthcare. Corporations have our best interests at heart. The invisible hand will make everything better. Feudalism 2.0.
 
Comment

numlock

macrumors 68000
Mar 13, 2006
1,590
88
Good news.

I prefer Apple to keep the money and decide what to do instead of some bureaucrat. Apple could pay dividends, buyback shares, hire more people, open more stores, invest more in R&D…

They could use it to put 32GB as minimum storage for iDevices.

so one of the easier things they could do they have shown they arent willing to do. that certainly shows promise

Actually, corporate tax rates could be 0%. Then you would avoid companies going abroad (much easier to do than for people), you would avoid counties, states and nations competing with each other. The taxes would be taken from the people working for said companies in the form of taxes on salaries. The share holders would be taxed then they sell their shares, provided they made a profit, and on taxig the dividends.

Taxes would still be paid, you would just avoid a lot of meaningless bureaucracy that is currently being done in order to bring down the tax bill of a corporation, instead a corporation could spend all it's efforts providing the service or product they offer.

To be clear, corporates should absolutely pay environmental taxes if they cause any. This can be done by taxing carbon emissions or chemical impact as examples

thats such a huge change that its almost moot to talk about it. i cant even imagine the cost and time it would take to get every county, state and nation aboard.

the salaries would obviously have to increase by some factor to compensate for the fact that individuals would pay all taxes and based on history the average joe would get shafted. wouldnt the new battle then just become sales and capital gains tax or you think the world would agree one one % there as well?

unless there is a turnaround income tax would still be higher than capital gains taxes.

would be easier to put an embargo on these companies and see how much they really love ireland, luxembourg and the netherlands (singapore if you are rio tinto) if they just cater to them.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.