The game was exploiting loopholes, not the US government. And my point was that is abominable, even if currently legal.
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.
How Apple Minimizes its Corporate Tax Burden
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The game was exploiting loopholes, not the US government. And my point was that is abominable, even if currently legal.
That's absolute rubbish. How about passing fair amount of money to those that do work? As you know all too well the share of income in the USA for those actually designing and building the computers, cars etc. has been steadily declining for decades (and not just the share but also the absolute amount corrected for inflation) . And it would be false to claim that food stamps and jobless benefits is what bankrupting our country. It's not. It's social security, medicare, medicade, education and army. Whom of those do you consider lazy? Army? Retirees? Sick people? It's in the interest of rich to keep our population healthy and educated. You don't expect that Donald Trump is going to start designing iPhones or cleaning the hotels, right? It is the rich that benefit from our infrastructure first and foremost because business can't live without it. Those who think that they are rich because they are so "entrepreneurial" should try to migrate to Somalia and make it there. I would really be interested to learn how much money Donald Trump would be able to make there, or the guys from Goldman Sachs or even the doctors. And they are the ones that are trying to transform our country to Somalia (sorry our Somalian fellows, I have nothing against your country, I hope you do better in the near future).
I agree those dam lazy people who have to sell their homes in order to pay for their health care, since their jobs don't provide enough coverage. Now if only they could get second and third jobs and undergo their chemotherapy at the same time right?
Paying full taxes would NOT be "paying their fair share" because they would be paying a lot more than other companies. Apple's exploitation of loopholes is very fair compared to the rest of the companies, or at least more fair than if they didn't.
How about lowering the taxes a bit and making sure that "fair" means that all businesses pay the same tax and do not have to rely on loopholes? This way, the US will get the tax money instead of other countries that don't deserve it.
It's not a "loophole" if it is a provision written into law or regulation by the relevant authorities.
Those characterizing a lawful provision as a loophole are necessarily whiners or mis-characterizers (liars).
Rocketman
Those characterizing a lawful provision as a loophole are necessarily whiners or mis-characterizers (liars).
Rocketman
According to this standard, essentially all of the software companies would be "immoral".
I'm wondering if Lilo saw the brief mention of SOX in this discussion. Does he understand the byzantine restrictions that SOX places on large publicly-traded companies. Does he realize that they are legally required to deliver high value to the stockholders?
Another well-thought and well-expressed comment in the discussion!
I was somewhat surprised that the NYT article seems to demonize one company. But that is just Big Pulp doing what they do best: sensationalizing and scandalizing one company even if the real problem is the entire system. The NYT certainly got a good bump in their web hits the last 24 hours.
Last edited:
Well sorry for the typo, it meant to say "That's your non-sequiter", but thanks for the grammar check.
As for as the content of the post, the market dictates the price. Let me assure you friend, if the investors set the price, they would set it higher. So no, tax increase =/= to price increase. Tax increase won't affect the price.
Actually, most medical problems are due to smoking or obesity. People can either stay healthier or actually keep some money in case of emergencies instead of relying on taxpayers every time they have some problem. You know, people go to the ER to get dental checkups.
In short, they are abusing the safety net that is meant to provide support to the rare problem that would otherwise ruin somebody's life.
If that is not a loophole than what is? A hole in the federal court door or something? You really think that the tax code was specifically designed so that corporations like Apple paid less than 10% in taxes?
Oh, that makes sense (the fragment).
But then who pays the extra money for the tax increase? Someone has to. The companies are as efficient as possible.
A flat tax would end all this arguing so fast. Every company or every individual pays one simple rate, no matter who you are, how much you make, how big your business is, or what you produce. This would be doubly great for businesses, especially small ones because they'll be able to accurately predict how much they'll have to pay pretty far into the future and be able to budget properly and not be afraid of hiring. The market loves certainty.
Worse, much less of the money that they DO pay goes to the US. I think that lowering taxes in the US would actually bring more tax money in.
That's the ideal. But in practice, and increasingly so, there is a failure of gainful employment to materialize so too many degrees are being awarded where people do not get jobs that are any better than the jobs they would have acquired had they not pursued higher education. In many cases those individuals are financially worse off due to lost opportunities and debts (though at least they help to make for a more enlightened citizenry).
Companies are not humans, they can't be immoral. Their management, on the other hand, are immoral. We have many obligations, the one before SOX is clearly very low in the priority list that includes your country, your elders, your children etc. And yes the congress (especially the republican part of it) and the lobbyists are the first to blame for this nonsense.
A flat tax would put a lot of people into eternal poverty or at least prevent them from moving up. You need to invest some in the lower classes. Otherwise, capitalism will stop, and the businesses will have nobody rich enough to buy from them.
Yep. The problem is apparent in the US and in France and is caused by there being TOO MUCH money put in to help the poorer. It makes some of them lazy.
Also, I really hate the idea of an English major. People should be going to college to learn about things that can help them in a REAL job other than an English teacher. Math, science, computer science, business, public speaking, and economy are way more important.
----------
No, there was not. Read about factory life in the 1800s. None of the rich were self-made people who worked from the bottom.
So you take issue with the NY Times and MacRumors. We are responding to their evidence that suggests there are loopholes being exploited and there are blatant attempts to evade paying taxes. If that is factually wrong, then I'll concede much of this debate vanishes away.
Why? There is always some small country that will be happy with 1% tax rate to host these bastards. I suggest that next time some pirates attack Halliburton facility anywhere in the World (those bastards moved to UAE), let them defend themselves.
But it's those breaks for various groups that got us into the "loophole" mess in the first place. A "green business" break here, "hiring veterans" break there, they all add up to a convoluted and unpredictable mess of a tax code.
For individuals, you can't reap the benefits of a system without paying into it - that develops a broken and unfair system that destroys the incentive to move up. Everyone should pay something, and if it's all one rate it's nothing but fair.
That is a truly lousy argument. If every major company is evading taxes through loopholes none are paying their faire share. We aren't asking how much they pay compared to others, we are asking if they are paying what they should. Are they or are they not exploiting loopholes, evading taxes?
Yes. Of course. Evidence: law, regulations, tax forms, results that are fully LEGAL.
----------
It's not a "loophole" if it is a provision written into law or regulation by the relevant authorities.
Those characterizing a lawful provision as a loophole are necessarily whiners or mis-characterizers (liars).
Last edited:
Apple's Tax
Tax for the previous year is paid in the current year.
Last year Apple paid taxes on 2010 revenue.
This year they pay tax on 2011 revenue.
You cannot calculate taxes paid in a year compare to the revenue of that same year. DOH!!!
Tax for the previous year is paid in the current year.
Last year Apple paid taxes on 2010 revenue.
This year they pay tax on 2011 revenue.
You cannot calculate taxes paid in a year compare to the revenue of that same year. DOH!!!
I agree too that the US needs to make sure that loopholes like these are taken care of.
At a certain point, if the US taxes are lower, it wouldn't even be worth it to deal with avoiding taxes with these complicated systems of loopholes.
Where in the act does it say you have a responsibility to exploit loopholes and evade taxes? I'm not being confrontational. I haven't had a chance to read the SOX and since you mention it, I presume you know what you are talking about.