Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
While I don't agree with a lot of his ideas. I give him maximum credit for stating what he believes and not being intimidated by naysayers like you. We need honestly in congress. He brings that. Whether you like or agree with what he believes is another question. ;)

I appreciate honesty, although I doubt he's as honest as he works to appear. Honestly only makes it easier for the public to decide if they support your beliefs or not. I'm not going to vote for Dem who's against gay marriage simply because he or she was up front and honest about it.

----------

Apple created so many jobs that now Cook holds the Senators' balls in his hands and can do whatever he wants about paying more or less taxes :rolleyes:

It's only 3 mo of low paying US jobs.
 
While I don't agree with a lot of his ideas. I give him maximum credit for stating what he believes and not being intimidated by naysayers like you. We need honestly in congress. He brings that. Whether you like or agree with what he believes is another question. ;)

I agree. I certainly don't agree with a lot of what he says, but he's right often enough, and he's right on this. The tax code currently dis-incentivizes companies with foreign markets and foreign-made products from bringing money earned overseas into the US. That's undeniable. The solution is also undeniable. Understand that corporations exist to maximize profits for shareholders, and don't penalize companies for bringing foreign money into the US.
 
McCaskill's question is great.

So if Apple is really just about minimizing tax burdens as a matter of doing what you can within the law to maximize profit for your shareholders -- as they say, and as their defenders here say -- why not shift the company entirely off-shore?

Cook had two options: admit he was screwing his shareholders by not doing that, or admit that there's more to it than just maximizing profits. He choose (b) -- "we're an American company" -- but couldn't explain why it wasn't unAmerican to hide 70% of your profits from America.

Yes, we all try to minimize our taxes. But when the rich can minimize them much more than the poor, that's not just an issue with the tax code, because the rich will always be able to find more loopholes with million-dollar lawyers. It's a matter of what it means to believe in America as a free, equal, and fair democracy. And Cook can't repudiate that without destroying the Apple brand in the eyes of millions of Americans. So he's left in this uncomfortable position, simultaneously claiming to be a pure profit-maximizer, and a loyal American company. And that won't cut it.

I think Cook explained things amazingly well and you would have to be thick to not have understood it IMO. So, do you maximize or minimize your tax burden? If you take a single deduction, by your logic, you can't be a loyal American.
 
It takes a real set of balls to hide and not pay SO MUCH in taxes and then turn around and give advice on how to make companies pay more in taxes. And that Rand Paul simpleton? He's exactly the type to decry a lack of "patriotism" but, at the same time, applaud a company that wouldn't pay its fair share for the privilege of doing business here.

Rand Paul is a simpleton? You have his IQ test scores? Or is it you strongly disagree with his political ideas and so you insult his intelligence without any honest reason? Yes...that's who you are. ;)
 
McCaskill's question is great.

So if Apple is really just about minimizing tax burdens as a matter of doing what you can within the law to maximize profit for your shareholders -- as they say, and as their defenders here say -- why not shift the company entirely off-shore?

Cook had two options: admit he was screwing his shareholders by not doing that, or admit that there's more to it than just maximizing profits. He choose (b) -- "we're an American company" -- but couldn't explain why it wasn't unAmerican to hide 70% of your profits from America.

Yes, we all try to minimize our taxes. But when the rich can minimize them much more than the poor, that's not just an issue with the tax code, because the rich will always be able to find more loopholes with million-dollar lawyers. It's a matter of what it means to believe in America as a free, equal, and fair democracy. And Cook can't repudiate that without destroying the Apple brand in the eyes of millions of Americans. So he's left in this uncomfortable position, simultaneously claiming to be a pure profit-maximizer, and a loyal American company. And that won't cut it.

I agree that it was a great question, but I disagree with your analysis.

First, the "we're an American company" answer is obviously BS, but it is the most graceful answer Cook could give. The truth is: "The only reason we don't relocate is that most of our talent is here, and it would be difficult to relocate that many people. We care about our talent because it is integral to our success as a company, so we tolerate your ridiculous tax code and harassment."

You can say that Apple is at a disadvantage in the sense that it isn't really feasible to move its main operations to more business-friendly countries like a small to mid-size business could, but I digress.

Second, your statement that they are "hiding profits" is ridiculous. You seem to be under the misconception that profits are somehow immoral, and take away from the public. That couldn't be less true. Profits can only be earned through one method: pleasing your fellow man. That is what makes capitalism different than something like communism - you are rewarded proportionally to which you satisfy your fellow man, rather than through dominating him.

To add to that, I would ask you: who do you believe spends their money more wisely: Apple or the US government? Do you remember the bank bailouts? Citigroup alone received over 2.5 trillion -with a T- dollars. Where do you think that money comes from?

Finally, I want to remind you that America is not about equality and fairness. Our Declaration of Independence states that "all men are created equal". That means that we all have the same opportunity to succeed and to fail. Our founding fathers believed that this is a right given by a higher power than the government of man. The very moment we are born, we stop being equal, and become responsible for our own fates. "Fairness" is a mind-bogglingly abusive word today. How is it fair to pay more for working hard, making the right choices, and ultimately achieving the dream of success?
 
Is Apple suggesting they are tax exempt or don't have to pay full taxes?

No. Apple is suggesting that htey do not have to pay US taxes on income earnt overseas.

Some of the politicos seem to think, that as a US company, all income that apple earns should be taxed in the US.

But the US tax codes do not state that.
 
I paid less than 30.5% in Federal taxes last year. Apple paid 30.5%. Congress wants them to take money they earned entirely overseas and pay 35% on it. And that's on money that was already taxed in a foreign jurisdiction.

I'd say I'm better off.

Nope, nothing was taxed and 0.00 was paid in taxes. Tough day?
 
So because someone creates jobs; they don't have to pay taxes?

Companies like Bank of America don't create many jobs here and they pay no US taxes. In fact, they reported a $7 billion US loss for 2012 and $10 billion in foreign profits. All of this with 82% of their revenue being generated in the US.

All of these companies are following the tax laws written by Congress, many of whom are directly or indirectly bankrolled by Wall Street/big banks and other constituents.
 
yet they couldnt answer why they acted differently with profit in the americas compared to the rest of the world.



seems like you actually watched this instead of reading highlighted and carefully picked segments like most on this forum seem to have done



nothing is ever enough for the greedy

If you had actually watched the proceedings, AOI was setup in 1980 to move Apple computers into the European an Asia markets because they had the people available with the required skill sets in law, sales, service and distribution. While not specifically stated, trade between the America's is much easier than Eurasia so there is a good chance Apple did not need that benefit in the 1980.

Levin was being a [male part] and not letting them explain again because he did not know how the law worked with at arm's length. The IRS had to school him.
 
i don't understand America at all, your greatest company (there or there abouts) pays all their American taxes that they have to, then they are picked on because they don't move all their money from overseas (which all foreign taxes are payed) back into your country so they can pay more tax on it.,....



what the hell am i missing here? sounds like congress is pissed because apple has better accountants than what they have.

----------

Nope, nothing was taxed and 0.00 was paid in taxes. Tough day?

you need to check your facts

----------

shouldn't they be more worried about the gun laws???




goes and grabs popcorn..... :)
 
Or buy a major item over the internet instead of a local store because no sales tax is collected at purchase. THAT'S illegal tax evasion most of us have committed.

True, but this will end sooner than you think. Ironically, this bill is pushed by GOP and states legislatures usually dominated by republicans. So sales, state, county, school taxes is ok with them, but federal ones are bad. How about getting rid of all local and state, sales, gas and other countless fees and taxes and have only federal one? Anyone? Any republicans? No? Really? Rand? Paul? Lets do it! Hello? Anyone?
 
Because you obviously do all you can to maximize your tax burden.

Yeah sure, because it's all black or white. If you don't try to optimize your taxes, you try to pay the most possible, right.

It's interesting how it's always the same people with the same way of thinking that can't do better than binary thinking.
 
Why? Why is that being dodgy? I do what I can to reduce my taxes: donations to charity, etc. Don't you? Is that not "manipulating" where your money goes for purposes of tax laws?

Not trying to argue with you, just pointing out that's what the reality is... that's why its happening: They paid foreign sales once... to then pay US tax on top when you don't have to would be a big hit to the price of the products they sell overseas. If we lowered our tax code on repatriating (remember, they already had to pay taxes on the in-country sales), to the point that the energy of managing an AOI-like construct is not effective, then we have the incentive to get the money back here, along with the advantages that brings.

The tax system of most nations is out of step with the internet-linked world. Google has been accused of dodging tax in the UK - basically accused of making sales in the UK via UK based staff to UK based businesses but then processing the payment via Ireland and calling them Ireland sales.

Maybe that's perfectly sound too legally-speaking but I think it's morally wrong if it's UK sales made in the UK, with only a bit of banking sleight-of-hand making them Irish sales, as it's clearly doing business in the UK without paying the tax.
 
If you are manipulating where your money goes to avoid paying taxes you are by definition, being Dodgy or at the very least Dodging the laws. Do we all do our best to keep our money we do, but I don't make billions or have the ability or resources to move and manipulate my money in the way a corporation like Apple can.

Absolutely not. There is a clear distinction between tax avoidance (completely legal) and tax evasion (highly illegal). And Apple not moving cash from a bank account in Ireland to a bank account in Cupertino doesn't even fit any reasonable person's definition of "tax avoidance".
 
i don't understand America at all, your greatest company (there or there abouts) pays all their American taxes that they have to, then they are picked on because they don't move all their money from overseas (which all foreign taxes are payed) back into your country so they can pay more tax on it.,....

As others have stated, this is really not about taxes. It has everything to do with getting their faces in front of a camera for political reasons.
 
i don't understand America at all, your greatest company (there or there abouts) pays all their American taxes that they have to, then they are picked on because they don't move all their money from overseas (which all foreign taxes are payed) back into your country so they can pay more tax on it.,....



what the hell am i missing here? sounds like congress is pissed because apple has better accountants than what they have.


They have a point, which is that since all Apple products are designed and engineered in the US, some money must return to the US. If you ask me, it doesn't sound illogical at all. Yet, as another senator said, money goes were it is welcomed.

Even T. Cook kind of agreed with this. If they removed the 35% tax on money from income coming outside the US, Apple would surely bring more money to the US and eventually, as a consequence of further growing and expansion of the company, pay more taxes than what they currently pay.
 
I appreciate honesty, although I doubt he's as honest as he works to appear. Honestly only makes it easier for the public to decide if they support your beliefs or not. I'm not going to vote for Dem who's against gay marriage simply because he or she was up front and honest about it.



It sounds like you appreciate people who agree with you more than you appreciate honesty. Most politicians won't tell you what they really think because they're afraid they might offend people and hurt their chances of reelection. We really need to eliminate the labels Democrat and Republican, Conservative and Liberal. Listen to what the candidates ideas are and vote for someone who makes sense. Having political parties is like competing sports teams....Asinine. I don't belong to any team. I vote for who makes sense to me regardless of their political affiliation. ;)
 
Yeah sure, because it's all black or white. If you don't try to optimize your taxes, you try to pay the most possible, right.

It's interesting how it's always the same people with the same way of thinking that can't do better than binary thinking.

In my understanding, tax codes are supposed to be black and white. There are no middle points. There is the right way to do it, and the wrong way to do it. There are several ways of doing it right, and several ways of doing it wrong, but all of them are equally right or wrong.
 
...The truth is: "The only reason we don't relocate is that most of our talent is here, and it would be difficult to relocate that many people. ...

Agree on your second point, but I'm not sure if the first is entirely correct... I think you can re-declare your HQ somewhere else, but keep your presence in the US.

Accenture moved the HQ to Ireland but kept most of their US presence; Halliburton moved to Dubai but still has a US presence as well.... companies move to lower tax jurisdictions when it makes sense.

.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.