I don't consider it good for all Americans if Apple evades corporate tax by exploiting loopholes it pays lobbyists to ensure remain and then demand a tax break again before it expands. It's about time America cleaned up it's act in my mind. But it won't.
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
I don't consider it good for all Americans if Apple evades corporate tax by exploiting loopholes it pays lobbyists to ensure remain and then demand a tax break again before it expands. It's about time America cleaned up it's act in my mind. But it won't.
I agree the government could be more prudent with their spending. But with arts programs, education, and tons of other programs being cut or in jeopardy - NOT bringing in more tax dollars via closing loopholes is just as stupid as spending $600 on a wrench.
Fact is - loopholes are loopholes and can be closed. And in this case - the good that would come from it would be far greater than some of these bad spends you line list.
And that sounds like someone who does not understand the difference between a small business and mega corp.
The big players like Apple get to abuse loop holes and get yet another huge edge to use against smaller players.
There is a difference between paying to much and exploiting loopholes.
The exploiting loop holes to the level Apple and other big companies. They start crossing ethical lines when they do things like exploiting loopholes by putting token offices and PO boxes then routing all their profits threw those locations.
What facts do you have to support your theory? Apple's growth continues even with the current warranty policy, i.e. more consumers, quarter over quarter, are buying Apple products. The warranty does not seem to be a "deal killer" for hardly anyone. Consumers that want peace of mind with an extended warranty are buying either Apple's or a 3rd party.
Apple's Consumer Satisfaction Index score (See http://www.theacsi.org) is 87. That is the highest of any computer or consumer electronics company and also represents a 9 point increase over 2010's score. So consumer satisfaction seems to be rising even without having to lower margins on extended warranty coverage.
Honest taxes are created for good reason. Oppressive taxes are created for exploitation and corruption.
For example, corrupt and poorly run states like California, New York, and New Jersey collect high single digit income taxes whereas other states collect none.
Besides, most forms of government spend far more than they take in anyway; spending has become decoupled from tax revenue. See the above mentioned states and the Federal government.
Those same states also see an exodus of residents and jobs. Perhaps California would prefer if Apple moved to a more tax-friendly state. Then it would have even less in taxes and fewer residents buying homes and paying property taxes not to mention their state income taxes. Eventually you end up in a situation like Detroit, where the system is bloated and corrupted beyond repair and all the taxpayers have moved out and the only people left are the ones who don't pay any taxes.
Some people like to think high taxes operate in a vacuum, and they don't.
And while we're on the subject, at least Apple paid something, unlike General Electric.
What amazes me about some of the posts in this thread is, they disregard the property rights of Apple to actually keep some of what they earn after R&D, employing folks, building infrastructure, building products, selling them and, eeek, making a profit after all that.
At what point is a company's money their money and not some assumed pool of resources to support the government in its profligate spending habits and constant encroachment on and ascimilation of private sector activities?
I ask.
At what point is a company's money their money and not some assumed pool of resources to support the government in its profligate spending habits and constant encroachment on and ascimilation of private sector activities?
I ask.
Wrong. Companies charge what people will pay. If Apple could just raise prices, they would have already done it.
People don't seem to realize what we're getting from our government. Am I the only one who is amazed by what I get for the taxes I pay? And trust me, Apple gets a lot more
Really? I'm sorry you're sad; I guess I missed the party. Since you seem so darn certain about that, would you educate the rest of us what specific objections you have? Do you have a URL to enlighten the community? Simply stating your dogmatic belief doesn't really add anything to the discussion.
The FairTax would dramatically reduce the accounting and paperwork requirements for virtually all individuals; things would also be far simpler for corporations. Overhead for enforcement would also be dramatically reduced. Fairtax.org covers this well.
Sounds like a conspiracy. I bet those nasty PR departments are in on it. And, or course, congress had absolutely nothing to do with the current complications -- nothing at all.
I never talked with SJ or TC, but the CEOs of tech companies I've talked with were all interested in getting the rules and regulations for doing business simplified. None of them want the current byzantine rules.
I'm not saying "perhaps Apple acted improperly", I'm saying Apple acted improperly. That isn't a conjecture it is a claim.
I don't need a book to tell me what is the case to formulate and share my own judgments. We are all entitled to forming our own verdicts and sharing them courteously. If you think I am failing to use proper reasons or grounds, then challenge those points. But this general nonsense about "but who's the say what is moral?" isn't helping these discussions.
You fail to understand the point of the analogies and are attacking a straw man. They, the analogies, are not meant to compare what Apple is doing to what those companies or individuals did. Rather what happened is some of us admonished Apple (and others) for what they've done in the tax domain. Then a bunch of people like you replied with an argument like this:
Premise 1: What Apple did was legal.
Premise 2: What's legal can't be unethical.
Therefore: What Apple did can't be unethical.
Now I challenged premise 2, using those kinds of analogies. The analogies are only used for that purpose alone. No one disputes that Apple acted legally. That's quite beside the point. The question is if they acted morally or ethically. Now, if you want to claim everything that is legal is ethical or moral, you better engage those analogies I mentioned because they give clear evidence that that claim is untenable (premise 2).
You're very judgmental about some of the posts here as if you're some amazing business owner or know so much about small business. Fact is - small businesses are paying more of a tax burden than large businesses precisely because they don't have the means to take advantage of loopholes like this that require major $$ to set up "dummy" corporations around the world to hide their money. But if you want to keep shouldering the load more than your neighbor, go right ahead.
"only very dumb people" indeed.
----------
But but but GE....
Sorry - loopholes are loopholes and if GE is just better at playing the game than Apple - then you can't fault them for it if you're going to be OK with Apple "at least paying something." You don't get to have it both ways.
Good point. My suggestions may well be premature. If consumer satisfaction is already so high, and on the rise, there isn't much incentive to do more to bring it up even higher. Let it hit its plateau before one asks how to make it even higher.
Stop complaining, we all know low class are the ones cheating the system and making the middle class pay more and the rich pay low because the rich provide us jobs and they work or have worked hard to earn all it's money especially in Apple's case if you know their history. Taxes are used in good use half the time and if they're getting billions from Apple then they should be happy with that, after all Apple gives the US a good rep (and we can use that), jobs, buildings, and a ton of opportunities. Taxes do suck but it's due to us citizens that let the gov over taxe us. We need to complain else where.
You seem not to understand the difference between what a tax dodger/cheater is and making sure only taxes due are paid. The former are people or organizations that do something illegal to avoid paying taxes. The later, what Apple and every other savvy person and organization do, is make sure they take ever legal deduction possible, yes, even if that means setting up a P.O. box in the middle of a dessert. If it's allowed by the tax code it's fair game - literally.
There is a varied philosophical disagreement by people here on the purpose and function of government. But that is not really the crux of the issue. This is really only about tax policy, something people are missing. What do you think all those lobbyists and industry associations do in DC? They meet with congressional staff members and help them write tax law. Then the staff pushes the drafts to Congressional Committee Members and they shepard those lobbyist inspired loopholes into eventual law. And why do they do this? Campaigns are expensive. It doesn't matter if you are a D or R or I or something else. They cost money.
If Congress did not intend for tax policy to be a campaign goldmine, for both money and rhetoric, it would enact a flat or flatter tax with fewer deductions and loopholes, and a wider base. Taxes are a game.
You seem to imply that evasion is only a question of legality.
But there's (at least one) definition that states: To escape or avoid by cleverness or deceit.
I would say Apple was/is clever. They are within the current laws (until proven otherwise). That doesn't mean they aren't evading taxes.
if US taxes were lower like 10-15% maybe apple wouldn't jump through all the hoops and keep the money stateside. instead they are a ridiculous 35%...
You sound like a four year old, what ever you do, dont quit going to school. Your reading comprehension seems to be sadly below average.
"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.
Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands."
- United States Supreme Court Justice Learned Hand
Dont hold your breathe, Im sure they would just lobby for more exemptions and cry like spoiled brat children when they dont get what they want. Dont be so naive, Apple was allowed to repatriate overseas money in 2004/2005, all they did was pay themselves with stock options and bought back more of thier own stock, didnt invest anything in the USA, in fact they were so appreciative of the tax amnesty that they decided it was best to move assembly operations to china, truely a class act.
That's not the way congress works though. One could just as well say if congress didn't intend for the financial sector to behave callously and irresponsibly as it did, it would have passed legislation to make that conduct impossible. Well they've been trying to pass such measures but have proved unable to do so, for various reasons, one of which you mentioned in the preceding paragraph to this claim I responded to.