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's EU Core Technology Fee Could Bankrupt Freemium App Developers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well they like to dodge it don't they. Maybe they should've paid their 30% and avoided this situation with the EU
That...wasn't an answer to the question.Well they like to dodge it don't they. Maybe they should've paid their 30% and avoided this situation with the EU
It shouldn't be hard for you to find what they paid. Don't know about what info is put out in Europe, but I just did a quick Google search and found a Forbes article listing which US companies paid the most in income taxes. In terms of total income tax paid (both US and foreign income tax)...Apple paid the most. Followed by Microsoft, Alphabet, Inc., and JP Morgan.
Unfortunately the EU say Apple dodged thirteen billion euros in taxes. Apple have used the courts to dodge paying it back thus far but..
Apple hits setback in dispute with European Union over tax case
Apple might end up on the hook after all for billions of euros in back taxes to Ireland in the latest twist in a longrunning European Union dispute.
Ok, that's the kind of answer I was looking for. Fair enough!Unfortunately the EU say Apple dodged thirteen billion euros in taxes. Apple have used the courts to dodge paying it back thus far but..
Apple hits setback in dispute with European Union over tax case
Apple might end up on the hook after all for billions of euros in back taxes to Ireland in the latest twist in a longrunning European Union dispute.apnews.com
They don't have worldwide power or authority. You're subject to European laws if you do business there, just as you're subject to US laws if you operate in the US. Don't want to comply with local laws? Don't do business there.
All the rest is just a formula to calculate fines that scale to the size of the enterprise.
I doubt the EU could break up Apple globally, but they could of course require Apple to spin off the EU App Store for the purposes of doing business here.
Again, when you're doing business somewhere, you have to comply with local laws.
Not for nothing, and I don't usually open this particular can of worms, but I find it slightly ironic for Americans to get worked up over regulations, laws and government action spilling over.
The only difference here is that it's usually US power and US laws that shape others, but the EU is big enough to have the adverse effect. Welcome to the rest of the world where this happens all the time.
If I had written the US should be broken up over all the unchecked power they hold over people, states and economies who have no influence over US policies... I'm not sure you'd agree as enthusiastically.
Will we get to vote in US elections then? Will the US stop regulating and threatening companies not headquartered in their territory? I reckon VW, TikTok and Huawei, for a start, would like to have a word.
See above.
You'd have a point...if the rest of the world didn't throw a fit about it all the time. The world does nothing but complain about us doing it (rightly so, quite honestly)...but somehow think it's a-ok for them to do it. If it's wrong when we do it...it's wrong when you do it. Honestly, the whole "you're doing it, so that means I can, too" thing...is pathetic. They're more focused on "one-upping" each other than they are about their own citizen's wellbeing. And I'm sure the US government response to your comment would be along the lines of "your countries are taking our tax dollars, so there's where our right to do this" comes in. Not saying that's morally right...but "you want us to mind our own business, but you have no problem accepting our dollars" is probably the argument that would be brought up by them.
Trust me, the US's "desire" to throw our government action and tax dollars around...is a contentious talking point for pretty much everyone here...one that will likely have quite the influence on our upcoming election this year...
For the sake of not straying any further into the politics on a thread not marked "political news"...I'll stop there
What amazes me is the incredibly large number of people in this thread who completely lack a technical understanding of what is considered secure software and distribution of such.
There is a morbid belief that closed systems and totalitarian control of how software is distributed automatically leads to higher security for the end user. It baffles me that people actually justify being walled in, and actively want to deprive themselves and others of choices.
Opposing completely voluntary and alternative ways of installing software, which already exist for macOS, is insane to me. Options are always good, fair competition is always good.
No, side loading is not automatically a security risk. No, closed app stores are not automatically safe. If we disregard the infected political discourse for a moment, anyone who believes that Apple's stance in this matter is healthy, is either ignorant or blinded by brand loyalty.
There is a morbid belief that closed systems and totalitarian control of how software is distributed automatically leads to higher security for the end user. It baffles me that people actually justify being walled in, and actively want to deprive themselves and others of choices.
Opposing completely voluntary and alternative ways of installing software, which already exist for macOS, is insane to me. Options are always good, fair competition is always good.
No, side loading is not automatically a security risk. No, closed app stores are not automatically safe. If we disregard the infected political discourse for a moment, anyone who believes that Apple's stance in this matter is healthy, is either ignorant or blinded by brand loyalty.
So a legal tax agreement caused the DMA?Well they like to dodge it don't they. Maybe they should've paid their 30% and avoided this situation with the EU
No I think Apples anticompetitive behaviour caused it. They don't help themself though do they old bean.
Tim should probably resign if the US goes after them for antitrust.
What anticompetitive behavior? The dma could have been written because they didnt like apple logo. People have misconceptions about anticompetitive behavior.
There has been a lot, too much to list here. Generally their abusive app store practices.
Do you think Tim should call it a day if it all come on top at home? Gates did at MS
All loosy-goosy terms that mean nothing. Any major legal rulings other than dating apps?
Nope. The apple board sees Mr. Cook differently than the average MacRumors poster.
He was rich enough at the time.
Tim has plenty of money. Time for a quick kill? put all the anticompetitive stuff on Cook and get someone else in as CEO before the worst happens.
Only other thing stall for time and hope that Trump takes pitty on Apple after the election but that doesn't seem likely.
US v Apple would be very messy and protracted.
Or Apple successfully staves off whatever the “worse is.”
Sure, that’s one option and not a bad one at that.
Apple has the money to fight it out.
But yeah….governments can cut apples revenue by billions and not expect apple to make it up. Maybe those who are fighting to split apple apart should take a pay cut first.
Thing is the case is they are saying the fines are based on world wide. Basically they are making the punishment for disregarding the law so high that a company would not want to do it.
Far too often companies just take the fines as cost of doing business. They are not high enough for them to care.
We have seen it in wage suppressions and illegally not paying people correctly. They make more profit than it cost.
We seen it with Apple when they colluded with other companies on anti pouching and not hiring each other employees and even used the threat of lawsuits to get companies to comply. Palm blew the whistle on it.
We see it in the EPA violation all the time.
This is a case they are making the fines hurt big time.
The DMA was 100% written with giant US tech companies in mind. Why do you think all the companies impacted by it are American, while zero companies from the EU fall under it? Heck, parts of it seem designed specifically to prop up Spotify itself.
It all goes back to the EU and the US having very different business environments, which in turn influences the type of businesses that appear. The EU knows they are behind in the tech sector, and this is their attempt at still having a seat at the table.
Maybe, but this 'duke it out' approach didn't end well for Microsoft. Maybe Tim could pivot to philanthropy after the trials
I just have one question for you.
Can you elaborate how an open ecosystem can possibly be safer than a closed one? Given the existence of cases like this.
Android malware scam victims lost more than S$10 million in first half of 2023: Police
Over 750 cases of Android malware-related scams were reported in the first half of 2023, including 11 cases involving the unauthorised withdrawal of Central Provident Fund savings.
I am not saying that a closed App Store is 100% safe, but I do believe that a closed App Store would, all other things being equal, be safer than an open platform where users are free to install whatever app they want (because the freedom to do whatever you want naturally implies that some of those actions will not be the right one).
Likewise, not every side loaded app will automatically be a security risk, but will invariably end up being. You can't tell me that 1 million people who decide to sideload will somehow know how to identify and avoid all the bad apps.
I agree that choices are good, but I also don't agree with framing this argument as more choice vs less choice. To me, I see it as choice vs security (eg: android vs iOS), and I feel that users should have the choice of opting for a closed ecosystem in the interest of better security (and, if you refer to my linked article above, the option of being able to protect their life savings from malware).
When you enable sideloading on an iPhone, you are taking that choice (of not having a choice) away from users who specifically chose an iPhone precisely so they didn't have to deal with this sort of thing.
Let me just be clear - it is not your duty to care about the safety and the well-being of other people. There is nothing wrong in arguing for a more open ecosystem despite knowing fully well the ramifications it can have on other users. At least just be upfront about it. That yes, there are going to be people impacted, sometimes negatively, and that's just too bad for them.
Rather than pretend that sideloading is 100% benefit with completely zero downsides. Even if I choose not to sideload, there can still be impact to me. I. know it, and I believe you know it as well.
Just be honest. That's all I ask.
I just have one question for you.
Can you elaborate how an open ecosystem can possibly be safer than a closed one? Given the existence of cases like this.
Android malware scam victims lost more than S$10 million in first half of 2023: Police
Over 750 cases of Android malware-related scams were reported in the first half of 2023, including 11 cases involving the unauthorised withdrawal of Central Provident Fund savings.www.channelnewsasia.com
I am not saying that a closed App Store is 100% safe, but I do believe that a closed App Store would, all other things being equal, be safer than an open platform where users are free to install whatever app they want (because the freedom to do whatever you want naturally implies that some of those actions will not be the right one).
Likewise, not every side loaded app will automatically be a security risk, but will invariably end up being. You can't tell me that 1 million people who decide to sideload will somehow know how to identify and avoid all the bad apps.
I agree that choices are good, but I also don't agree with framing this argument as more choice vs less choice. To me, I see it as choice vs security (eg: android vs iOS), and I feel that users should have the choice of opting for a closed ecosystem in the interest of better security (and, if you refer to my linked article above, the option of being able to protect their life savings from malware).
When you enable sideloading on an iPhone, you are taking that choice (of not having a choice) away from users who specifically chose an iPhone precisely so they didn't have to deal with this sort of thing.
Let me just be clear - it is not your duty to care about the safety and the well-being of other people. There is nothing wrong in arguing for a more open ecosystem despite knowing fully well the ramifications it can have on other users. At least just be upfront about it. That yes, there are going to be people impacted, sometimes negatively, and that's just too bad for them.
Rather than pretend that sideloading is 100% benefit with completely zero downsides. Even if I choose not to sideload, there can still be impact to me. I. know it, and I believe you know it as well.
Just be honest. That's all I ask.
Some security researchers think that the 'locked down' nature of iOS is part of the problem. Because Android is more open there are more tools available to detect and counter security threats.
More here from Kaspersky
Is iOS really more secure than Android?
Which is better for corporate mobile communications security-wise: iPhone or Android device?
www.kaspersky.co.uk
Maybe, but this 'duke it out' approach didn't end well for Microsoft. Maybe Tim could pivot to philanthropy after the trials
Yeah, Microsoft is really hurting…. 🤣
Microsoft Overtakes Apple as World's Most Valuable Company [Updated]
Microsoft today overtook Apple as the world's most valuable public company by market value. Apple's share price dropped by just one percent,...
www.macrumors.com
I'm no expert. Probably give it to iOS if I had to guess, think the viewpoint is valid though as attacks on mobile OS continue to evolve making it more difficult for security researchers to detect vulnerabilities isn't going to help.
Or… security researcher/salesperson doesn’t like that iOS users dont need to buy anything from him.Some security researchers think that the 'locked down' nature of iOS is part of the problem. Because Android is more open there are more tools available to detect and counter security threats.
More here from Kaspersky
Is iOS really more secure than Android?
Which is better for corporate mobile communications security-wise: iPhone or Android device?
You maybe a developer but clearly you may not be a business person. This is business issue, not a development issue.
Your comparison is a fallacy. Back in the day retail and distribution margins were way smaller. How do you think Apple manages to get such high margins. Imagine businesses paying web hosting at a rate of .50 per new visitor … crazy.
You need to compare to the costs of alternative deployment and platforms of today. It’s basically a pay per usage model, not a percentage of revenue. Problem being, those platforms cannot be used with iOS because the only possible retail shop in town is the App Store.
This new policy coming from Apple is basically cuttin them down by pumping the price of their technology up. In the App Store, the use of such technology costs “zilch”, outside of it it may cost 50% of the revenue making in other alternative non cost effective.
In other words, proposes an a really bad alternate deal just for the sake of looking that is providing options. All optics.
As a customer, what I fear is that if Apple does not take serious the EU iOS device sales may end up being banned from the market. In such case they will face not only fines but also lawsuits from customers. The EU customers will end up moving.
Hopefully it will not reach to that.
Last edited: