Finally.. +1 dude. I was holding back because of so many stupid comments by americans who probably don't even know where italy is.
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 Under Investigation for $1.3 Billion Italian Tax Fraud
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Finally.. +1 dude. I was holding back because of so many stupid comments by americans who probably don't even know where italy is.
Some American users responses to this make me chuckle wholeheartedly
Glad to know you're ok with multinational corporations like Amazon and Apple avoiding (even in perfectly legal ways) to pay billions in taxes both in the US and Europe every yearWhile regular US and EU citizens pay taxes to the last cent.
Yeah a shakedown...because we're talking about companies who NEVER practiced any kind of tax avoidance and do their best to contribute with taxes to the countries where their businesses take place....right.
Nothing wrong in LOOKING INTO the matter. Apple doesn't lack lawyers to defend itself.
Wrong. Many of us hate the laws that LEGALLY allow giant corporations to skip out on paying taxes. The remedy for that is to change the law. There's nothing illegal or immoral for a company to do everything it can to maximize profits under the law. It would be unethical to cheat their stockholders by doing anything less.
----------
OK, I don't know EXACTLY where it is, but I know it's shaped kind of like a boot. Right?
So if there was a loophole to use child labor, it would be unethical not to take advantage of it, because, stockholders.
If the war comes (or a terrorist threat), who will stand up to defend the corporation facilities? Only the stockholders or every citizen? Or maybe the Irish army? (with all due respect)
Companies are part of the society, their very existence and well being depends on the citizens, the government, the armed forces, the infrastructures, the hospitals, and so on. In running a company, there should be considerations that go beyond maximizing profit for the stockholders or what's strictly legal or illegal.
I'd say it's equally important not to be unethical to the stockholders AND every other citizen, AND courts, AND democratically elected governments. That's how society works. That's why the government is there. If corporations don't like it, they can build their own army and claim an island in the ocean (and sell their products to fishes).
Now, we all agree child labor is wrong. Even if there was a loophole to use child labor legally. Everybody would WELCOME an investigation on companies using said loophole, just to look into it and see what can be done about it on legal grounds.
Likewise, we can all agree that stuff like pretending your main subsidiary is in Ireland or in Luxemburg, and then making billions in revenue in Italy or in the UK, maybe claiming the facilities in those countries are just "delivery hubs", is a big "do you think we're all stupid?"-level shameless middle finger to every taxpayer in those countries. Hard to sympathize with the "Won't somebody please think of the stockholders?!" sentiment, when the alternative is screwing every other citizen. Both are not to be cheated. The citizens even more so, if you ask me.
Of course I agree with you there's nothing technically illegal until proven otherwise, just wanted to give my take on the "ethical/unethical" issue.
Last edited:
No. Ethics is ethics. Saving money by avoiding to pay taxes when they can legally be avoided is ethical. Using child labor in cases where it might be legal is still unethical. Trying to confuse these two things, as you did, is unethical. It looks like you are trying to set up a straw man argument and make Apple guilty by association with that straw man.
You may go to Apple's website and look at their "supplier responsibility" report. It explicitly says that Apple will not tolerate certain practices, including child labor, even if it would be legal at the place where it happens. There is a very clear statement from Apple that they won't tolerate child labor. And they have cancelled contracts with two suppliers where they found that underage workers were hired intentionally.
I'd say it's more a morally/ethically grey area. Yeah, it's legal, and there are plenty of worse things you could be doing, but if you're making billions, and would still be making billions even after taxes, you're kind of a cheap bastard for doing it.
So Apple. Yeah. Cheap bastards. Bah. Though all things considered, they could be eating babies, so it's kinda hard to outright hate them for something so relatively benign.
150years ago it wasn't and I'm sure there were people saying "slavery is unethical, BUT child labor is ah-okay" like you today say "child labor is unethical, BUT tax avoidance is ah-okay".
The perception of what's morally acceptable changes with time, let's just hope more and more people find tax avoidance* less and less acceptable. That's the point I was making. We move the border, there's not an absolute border. We raise the bar, and we reflect it in law making, which takes time and political leverage. Meanwhile, companies are welcome to preemptively adhere to certain standards (even if not required by law) and authorities are welcome to investigate in gray areas.
Was apple required by law to support gay marriage? No..
Would the 80s Apple have supported it? Probably not..
It's a matter of public perception, if and when public perception on tax avoidance will shift, on Apple site among the "Enviromental certifications" page, the "We don't use child labor" page, the "We're bringing back jobs to the US" page, maybe you'll also find the "Apple is committed to pay taxes we're they're REALLY due" page.
*to be clear, there's "let's just do the best we can technically do to save money without being disrespectful" tax avoidance and then there's tax avoidance that involves BLATANTLY MISPRESENTING your business to the IRS, like PRETENDING you operate in Luxemburg or Ireland. We're mainly talking about the latter.
Last edited:
"Many of us" are clueless about the difference between avoiding taxes and tax evasion. On the other hand, someone on this thread stated that cutting down on your tax bill and using child labour are about the same thing, and I can't let that stand without contradiction.
Here's an example of tax avoidance, completely legal and ethical: In the UK, you are allowed to make about £7,000 profit from shares in every tax year, which runs from April to April. If you sell shares and make £14,000 in profit, you pay tax on £7,000. If you sell half in March in the previous tax year, and half in April in the new tax year, you pay no tax. That's tax avoidance. Totally legal. So who will volunteer to claim that is unethical and show himself as a fool?
Last edited:
Wow you managed to understand English less than non-English speakers, that's quite a feat.
About ethics, in some of the factories used by Apple in China work conditions would be considered as slavery or almost slavery if those factories, with the same work conditions, were in USA and EU.
And this is true for many other multinationals such as Nike, TheNorthFace, Adidas, etc, etc.....................................Making profits the unethical way!
About ethics, how ethical is it to make nonsensical claims like you do? What exactly constitutes "almost slavery" for workers working on Apple products at Foxconn, for example? Let's see how it compares to actual slavery: They apply for jobs, work there for a time, and then they leave again. With slavery, the "applying for a job" and the "leaving again" isn't there. They get paid. Good wages considering the cost of living in China. With slavery, wages are not part of the deal. Are any women regularly being raped by the factory owners, are workers being flogged if they are not working fast enough? That's what slavery is.
Long working hours? The very first report about working conditions in Chinese factories used by Apple was reported as saying "there were many complaints about overtime". The actual report was found to say "there were many complaints that workers couldn't always get as much overtime as they wanted".
I'd say what you claim is actually quite insulting to a huge number of American citizens, whose predecessors didn't come to America because they applied for well-paying jobs, but who were imprisoned by armed people, everyone who dared to resist being shot, the rest being shipped to America in conditions that killed many.
I do not know the first italian who is not like that. They suck all the money they can no matter what.
Maybe i've exaggerated defining the work conditions as slavery.
But the same working conditions in USA and even more so in EU would trigger Worker's Union outrage with strikes and street protests.
So you know every single Italian on earth?
If not, this is quite a racist post.
I lived seven years in the States (two in Texas and five in Iowa and travelled in many other states) and i got the impression that those that suck all the money they can live in the States. And they do it with a big smile on their faces, most of the times.
That is very different from the blatant dishonesty that many of these large corporations indulge in. For example, Google largest market in Europe is the UK where they earn multiple billions but pay very little in Tax. They claim they do little or no business in the UK it is all done out of ireland where all the sales are done. There is ample evidence that they sell advertising out of the UK including advertising such positions in the Press for UK located sales people.
Apple does exactly the same thing the products that are sold in the UK use a cost price to ensure there is little or no profit. This is done by financial engineering so that the profit ends up in Ireland. Starbucks exactly the same the coffee is sold to the shops at hughly marked up prices to ensure the profits are not made in the UK.
You may consider this to be good tax management most of us consider it dishonest.
That may be what they think but the law is the law and trying to prosecute for something within the law however shady it may sound should not work. Change the law is what they should do, but then it would also catch their 'friends' which is what they want to avoid
Would they?
Foxconn for example pays a lot more than other companies in the area. There are plenty of people everywhere in the world who love to get paid overtime work. (Yes, Foxconn pays for overtime). They provide very cheap accommodation and food, so workers don't need to travel to work, they save most of their wages, and after two or three years they return home as rich people.
Someone working at McDonalds in the USA may have a higher income in dollars, but that person also has hugely higher living costs and probably can't manage to make any savings.
Now look at the software industry in the USA, where people are working 80 hour weeks (which is BTW. completely idiotic and their managers should be flogged and fired for stupidity). Or what happens if you want to become an MD; the same kind of extreme working hours. Any strikes? Anyone on the streets? No.
But what you haven't said: What working conditions are you exactly complaining about? Except for comparing it to slavery, and saying how awful it is, you haven't actually said _what_ you think is happening that would be awful.
Or: you don't respect them. You control all the media. You win elections. you don't pay.
Given we know your formula doesn't work in one direction, why should we believe it works in the reverse direction?
Think of it this way-- let's assume you and I are the sole residents of nation XYZ. We both pay a certain amount each to support this nation. Now I say we should change the law so that you pay $1 more and I pay $1 less. Is that an ethical dilemma? Or are we just negotiating over money?
There's no ethical certainty about the specific amounts each individual should pay in taxes. One could argue that each individual should pay the same amount. Or one could say people who have higher incomes should pay more; or people with greater wealth should pay more; or people who consume more, or consume unhealthy products, or leave larger estates to their survivors whould pay more. It's not a question of ethics.
----------
Examples?
----------
I's like to see specific, well-defined line between legitimate and unethical tax avoidance. And I'd be interested to see a specific definition of "pretending" as you use it above.
Yeah Yeah whatever
Apple will probably just pay somebody off under the table and keep on rolling.
That's how these guys roll
(and lots of other you know who they are) . Do anything for a quick buck. All they do is "just take care of it" and lie to the public so we are "pacified." Morality just isn't popular it's contemptible. Right is wrong and wrong is right. Oh no, I mean really whose to say what is right and what is wrong...it's all relative. If it feels good or makes money then surely it's good!! Who cares who suffers. [cynical sarcasm]
I wouldn't trust what I see in the news about it...
Apple will probably just pay somebody off under the table and keep on rolling.
That's how these guys roll
(and lots of other you know who they are) . Do anything for a quick buck. All they do is "just take care of it" and lie to the public so we are "pacified." Morality just isn't popular it's contemptible. Right is wrong and wrong is right. Oh no, I mean really whose to say what is right and what is wrong...it's all relative. If it feels good or makes money then surely it's good!! Who cares who suffers. [cynical sarcasm] I wouldn't trust what I see in the news about it...
What's the suicide rate amongst those workers?
http://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/foxconn-nets1.jpg
Hint: those are suicide nets. How many US companies do you know which need them?
When was the last time a company in the US suffered full scale riots?
And best of all, when the workers do get unhappy and decide to stop working, you've got an oppressive government ready and willing to violently crack down on them.
Are you actually implying Foxconn would be a nice place to work? :O
Where I live, factory jobs are generally considered pretty undesirable - I can't imagine living in a place where that was the best job I could hope for, and all without the labour protection laws I enjoy here. The only reason Foxconn workers enjoy any increase in work conditions (when compared to their peers at other manufacturing facilities) is because the company contracting them (Apple) highly value their image.
So is working at Foxconn better than abject poverty? Yes. Is it a far worse place to work than anywhere you or I have ever, or will ever work in our lives? Yes.
Just curious, but when was the last time you visited a manufacturing centre in China? When was the last time you were in China?