How Apple Minimizes its Corporate Tax Burden

[econgeek]

Your reasoning is so backwards I don't even know where to begin. The police works for the people. They are regulated by the law, the law is regulated by the legislators, the legislators are elected by the people. That's how a representative democracy works, the government is by and for the people.

So, please explain to me why the police are raiding marijuana dispensaries? The state passed a law making them legal. Most people support legalization. The federal laws are illegal themselves because the constitution doesn't give them that power, yet the police are still doing it. That makes those police criminals.

There are no legitimate elections in the USA, at least since 2000. I worked for one of the campaigns in 2004... On election night I had access to the reporting from individual precincts. In some precincts as more votes were counted, our vote total-- absolute number of votes-- was going DOWN. This is mathematically impossible without vote fraud.

The idea that the people control the government is just a lie told by people who want to rationalize fascism.

As stalin said "It doesn't matter who they vote for, it only matters who counts the votes."

 

[3282868]

Wow. I cannot believe the Apple apologists. It's voodoo and trickle down economists (which is laughable, the rich don't hold on to their money, they keep it).

Note: You are not rich! Apple is rich, and rich off of your Apple products and cheating the system whether the system allows it or not. The system needs to be overhauled. Apple has billions. Some of you defending Apple is laughable. Wake up people!

Exactly! As I stated before, I come from an affluent family, my father was an investment banker and we know many who may be considered "rich." I'll let you in on a little secret, rich people are cheap! They don't spend their money, they hold onto it, especially the older generations who worked hard. "Trickle Down Economics" is a failure of epic proportions, and simply made the rich wealthier.

Many here seem to believe lowering taxes is good. I'd like to read your views when the services our taxes pay for - education, roads, infrastructures, civil servants who protect us, whither even further.The financial collapse in 2008 was the result of a complex game involving derivates, betting against mortgages and defaults, making money off us and where none existed. Apple is playing the same game, and yet many are defending them for it. It's like Jews defending Nazi Germany, it's sad.

 

[econgeek]

Do you have any idea what happens when you over tax a population? The idea that corporations and people are going to stick it out and just fork over the money because Congress and the Feds need more money to prop up their failing social policies is complete nonsense.

Citizenship renunciations in the USA are up over %1400 over the past couple years-- and that's just by the official stats, most renunciations are not collected by the stats.

Corporations have been moving overseas for decades. The funny thing is these politicians think they can rail against "outsourcing" and what do they do? They propose to REGULATE it! Yeah, proof right there that they don't' give a damn about doing the right thing, or are too incompetent to do the right thing.

Maybe someone should tell them that companies located outside the USA are not subject to US regulations.

Some of us have been making "beaucoup" dollars betting against the stupidity of this country and the people who reside within it's borders.

I knew about the housing bubble and crash in 2001, due to a nice article on http://mises.org Clinton era regulations combined with Bush era manipulated interest rates ensured it would happen. I made a killing on the way up and on the way down. It was amazing.

Then of course, all these politicians-- who caused it with regulation-- blame the banks (the victims!) and use this as justification to nationalize the banking industry under the control of the federal reserve. And most of these leftists you see think that it was the banks that caused the crisis.

Keep pushing your silly ideas, keep espousing insane economic rhetoric, keep advocating for more, and eventually you and your ilk will be the last ones occupying what was once a great and prosperous country.

Much like we've seen happen in Venezuela.

But I do have a sore spot for those who will be destroyed by the fiscal insanity espoused by individuals such as yourself who blame corporations for making money and defend government bureaucracy i.e., Greece.

Government Revenue anyone?

Greece is a perfect example. The US is in a worse state than greece (if accurate accounting was done) and the people are screaming just like the greeks are.

Only difference is, since the US exports most of its inflation and manipulates commodity prices it can delay the accounting longer than greece could.... but not forever.

 

[cadillac1234]

As mentioned, businesses do not pay taxes anyway. It is simply a cost of doing business and as such is passed along to the consumer in the form of higher prices.

This meme is in 100% disagreement with the 'invisible hand and competition will benefit the consumer' meme.

Funny how they are both fundamental laws in the supply side economics argument

The free market can withstand anything including insider manipulation, global scale malfeasance, mega-conglemeration, etc but if there is a .5% increase in corporate taxes it all falls apart.

 

[black743]

You guys realize that companies pass their taxes onto the consumers. So if Apple pays higher taxes, then we pay more for their products. Everyone screams about paying a fair share....then they scream about things costing too much. You can't have it both ways folks.

 

[lukarak]

Apple shouldn't pay any taxes. The benefit the society gets from their existance far outweighs the cost of forgiving their tax duty

 

[mantan]

The funniest part about this thread is how people's position is based on their affinity for Apple.

If the article was about Exxon, Citibank or a big insurance company, would people start singing a different tune?

 

[3282868]

The funniest part about this thread is how people's position is based on their affinity for Apple.

If the article was about Exxon, Citibank or a big insurance company, would people start singing a different tune?

Exactly!

 

[cadillac1234]

So, please explain to me why the police are raiding marijuana dispensaries? The state passed a law making them legal. Most people support legalization. The federal laws are illegal themselves because the constitution doesn't give them that power, yet the police are still doing it. That makes those police criminals.

That is extremely poor government policy with the Feds pushing their weight around to suit a very narrow agenda. I am 100% against it and believe it is completely wrong....

that being said... I don't think the solution is to disband all police forces and hire out to the nearest Blackwater office

 

[econgeek]

I'd like to read your views when the services our taxes pay for - education, roads, infrastructures, civil servants who protect us, whither even further.

Already answered, many times, here even. You're just repeating this stuff because you can't respond to arguments?

Greed. It's all about selfish greed.

You're right about that-- it is your GREED that compels you to advocate stealing from people, because you imagine you're going to profit from it.

Reality is rife with historical examples-- your way doesn't work. It destroyed the USSR, it is destroying Europe and the USA.

And as this destruction occurs, what do you do? Do you learn economics? Do you reconsider?

No, you blame it on others and demand ever more draconian measures to fulfill your greed.

At the end of the day, taking money by violence is always less efficient than voluntary trade.

Can you imagine what computers would be like if their production was nationalized like you want to nationalize everything else?

The USSR produced a knockoff of the Apple ][.. it was crappy.... but if the USA had been like the USSR there wouldn't have been an Apple ][ to knock off!

 

[theluckyone]

Higher corp taxes DO NOT lead to higher prices

Good for Apple. Businesses help society by providing great products and giving jobs to members of that society so that they in turn may buy from other businesses.

If Apple saves money from not paying a lot of taxes, then Apple has more incentives to offer top engineering/management/marketing talent to make their products even better and to make their employees/customers even happier.

Apple pays its "fair share" to society simply by existing.

1) taxes are on profits, after bills are paid. Apple has huge profit margins and could easily pay more.
2) prices are based on what consumers will pay. if companies could just "pass costs" along, and consumers would keep buying, no company would ever go out of business.

So, no, higher taxes do not raise prices.

 

[slrandall]

Exactly! As I stated before, I come from an affluent family, my father was an investment banker and we know many who may be considered "rich." I'll let you in on a little secret, rich people are cheap! They don't spend their money, they hold onto it, especially the older generations who worked hard. "Trickle Down Economics" is a failure of epic proportions, and simply made the rich wealthier.

Many here seem to believe lowering taxes is good. I'd like to read your views when the services our taxes pay for - education, roads, infrastructures, civil servants who protect us, whither even further. Greed. It's all about selfish greed. Our government needs to be overhauled in order to ensure our taxes are being utilized properly, not giving corporations breaks while the upper-middle down to the lower classes pay more taxes while the rich do get richer. The financial collapse in 2008 was the result of a complex game involving derivates, betting against mortgages and defaults, making money off us and where none existed. Apple is playing the same game, and yet many are defending them for it. It's like Jews defending Nazi Germany, it's sad.

Image

Taxes should be lowered, but not for certain groups of people for whatever reason. For everyone, across the board. The government should not be in the business of steering the economy by trying to incentivize businesses to create jobs by lowering their taxes. The government's job is to look out for everyone. Every single individual should be equal in the eyes of the government.

I also hate that picture. Taxation does not justify taxation.

1) taxes are on profits, after bills are paid. Apple has huge profit margins and could easily pay more.
2) prices are based on what consumers will pay. if companies could just "pass costs" along, and consumers would keep buying, no company would ever go out of business.

So, no, higher taxes do not raise prices.

The costs a business incurs during operation are directly related to how much they charge for a good.

Also, taxes are on total revenue, not just profit.

 

[cadillac1234]

You guys realize that companies pass their taxes onto the consumers. So if Apple pays higher taxes, then we pay more for their products. Everyone screams about paying a fair share....then they scream about things costing too much. You can't have it both ways folks.

So using supply side theory, a tax would force the corporations to become more efficient to make up for the tax difference since the consumer would stop buying the products altogether since they are no longer a good value....

 

[FloatingBones]

Not just Congress and the federal tax code are to blame. Apple seems to negotiate deals on local taxes almost everywhere in the US when they build a new facility. They simply pack up and move to another location if the local government holds its ground.

Apple's obligation to its stockholders is to conduct business in an efficient (frugal) fashion. They work to lower all supplier costs, including the suppliers of facilities for their workers. What's unfortunate is that our governments don't seem concerned about conducting its business in an equally-efficient manner.

States have the choice of evaluating whether or not Apple's presence is a positive or a negative to their communities.

Personally I'd like to see Apple engage in a little less tax avoidance, for whether it is legal or not is irrelevant. It is immoral.

IYHO, Apple's activities are immoral. But making the statement doesn't make it true.

Because even if it's legal it's still unethical. If store A has a higher price because they take their moral responsibility while store B does not, allowing them to reduce the price, I would feel bad for buying from store B instead of store A, and that's why consumers should be made aware.

Your statement is a tautology. There is no "moral responsibility" for businesses to pay higher taxes than is legally required.

As consumers, we're free to choose who we do business with for whatever reason. However, imposing your dogmatic definition of "morality" on others with no reasoning to back it up is a FAIL.

 

[econgeek]

That is extremely poor government policy with the Feds pushing their weight around to suit a very narrow agenda. I am 100% against it and believe it is completely wrong....

No, you are here arguing that it is %100 just and you are in favor of it. That contradiction is the contradiction in your argument.

You don't get to have it both ways.

And since you are trying to (and all of the objections you and others have raised in this thread are based on ignorance of history and economics and primarily are just mindless repetition of ideological koans)... I'm bowing out.

Enjoy your country while it burns, suckers.

 

[guzhogi]

This didn't prevent these kids from getting an education, probably even a better education than the ones who went in their place. Those who skate by on political pull are far less likely to learn what they need to learn than those with "eagerness to learn". You can learn whatever you want even without college.

Further, it is the overarching state and its control over the economy that creates this pull in the first place.

So, you're complaining about the rich having better access in a political system as a justification for that political systems existence!

If there were no government control over education, then the rich would have no more pull. (and education would also be much higher quality and cheaper to boot.)

As for clout goes, while less government control probably will mean less government clout, that wouldn't stop colleges from accepting a kid whose dad offered to pay $100,000 a year over a kid, even more eager to learn, whose dad could pay only $40,000 a year.

And don't give the whole "But that extra $60,000 can help make the college better" thing. That could just get you a beautiful campus with no students wanting to learn.

As for better education, yes a person more eager to learn will probably learn more at a no name small school than a kid who got into an Ivy League college just because mom & dad have more clout. However, who would you rather hire, a kid from a no name school or an Ivy League one?

 

[econgeek]

The funniest part about this thread is how people's position is based on their affinity for Apple.

If the article was about Exxon, Citibank or a big insurance company, would people start singing a different tune?

This is a literal ad hominem.

When I argue against taxes, I want Exxon, Citibank and every big insurance company, along with myself, and all the other small businesses, to benefit.

My tune doesn't change.

But since you cannot engage in actual debate, you engage in ad hominem.

 

[Laird Knox]

Perfectly legal, but this is the kind of behaviour that should get alot of attention in order to bring badwill to the companies doing it.

Couldn't agree more.

Taxes are created and collected for good reason, and companies/people who dodge them are cheating that system. This puts pressure on those who do pay taxes, and/or causes governments to have less funds to achieve their goals.

Bad Apple, bad.

There is legality and then there are ethics...

Paying taxes is part of being green and good for the environment. If big business would pay tax the way we think they should, the healthcare issue would solve itself.

Personally I'd like to see Apple engage in a little less tax avoidance, for whether it is legal or not is irrelevant. It is immoral.

Because even if it's legal it's still unethical.

Do you even grasp the concept of ethics as opposed to legal obligation?

If I find a way to kill you without getting arrested, is it legal?
I really dislike this "bend the rules" attitude.
In the good old days, the "spirit of the law" was what mattered. Now, it's digging thorugh thousands of laws to find something where you can bypass it.

It's disgusting and it's harming the society much more than is apparent.

Legal or not, this is a burden on society.

And the even more intelligent consumer will realize that if Apple avoids paying taxes the government will collect the taxes it needs somewhere else, and guess where that is... What we get is a situation where all tax paying citizens are subsidizing Apple's prices.

My post wasn't referring to Apple specifically. I think every single company that does things like this should be exposed for it. The customers should be made aware of it and then it's up to the customer to decide if they find it acceptable.

The neo-capitalists love to say everyone needs to pay their fair share. I agree 100%.

While this is legal for Apple and other companies to do it is far from ethical. I honestly call setting up a PO box or a token office for tax reasons extremely unethical.

How many of you purchase goods online to avoid paying sales tax?

 

[DisMyMac]

Much like we've seen happen in Venezuela.

Venezuela (Hugo Chavez) is controlled by the CIA. Chavez is an actor, not a real dictator at all. Mods locked my thread for saying so without references, so here is one source that agrees and was written well before my posting: http://devilsexcrement.com/2008/04/15/is-chavez-a-cia-agent-or/

 

[jlasoon]

Wow. I cannot believe the Apple apologists. It's voodoo and trickle down economists (which is laughable, the rich don't hold on to their money, they keep it).

Note: You are not rich! Apple is rich, and rich off of your Apple products and cheating the system whether the system allows it or not. The system needs to be overhauled. Apple has billions. Some of you defending Apple is laughable. Wake up people!

Stealing 's $110 Billion reserve would do what exactly? Who would it help? $16 Trillion national debt, Fannie/Freddie $6 Trillion, Student loan $1 Trillion, USA population $44 Trillion, should I go on. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, US Military, and the list goes on. Who does it help? Even if paid a few billion $ more, what good would it do? The systemic problem is not tax evasion, it's the spending & printing.

I'll let you in on a little secret, "There's never enough money" even when you print it.

 

[RedCroissant]

If I find a way to kill you without getting arrested, is it legal?
I really dislike this "bend the rules" attitude.
In the good old days, the "spirit of the law" was what mattered. Now, it's digging thorugh thousands of laws to find something where you can bypass it.

It's disgusting and it's harming the society much more than is apparent.

Did you actually compare Apple's very careful decrease of it's tax liability to MURDER? That statement is incredibly ridiculous. They are an american company but have assets overseas. Income generated legally by those foreign companies should never be considered income that should be taxable under US tax code. If people were to suddenly rise up and demand that an exception be made so that american corporations pay taxes on global income, then the same should apply to any american citizen that earns any income, anywhere. I think people would agree that this would be unacceptable and would fight to prevent such a law from being enacted. Would you want to pay income taxes on money earned say, from gambling in a foreign casino? No, because that income was earned under another country's jurisdiction.

But let's look at other corporations that actually do more to avoid taxes than Apple does that people are ignoring due to their success. Walmart, Target, K-Mart, Mall complexes, Farming industries, Texas Instruments(avoid lots of taxes due to their location surrounded by farmland), Insurance companies that are based in Connecticut, and banks as well that operate all over the country but are only subject to that state's law. And Walmart actually has picked up and moved when their tax incentives are about to run out.

Now should we also approach the subject of religious institutions, which thanks to the United States Supreme Court, are now allowed to incorporate? Religious institutions are "legally" exempt from ALL taxes as far as I am aware. That means that religious institutions/new corporations have zero tax liability regardless of their activities. They also avoid other taxes by using banking regulations to their favor. They do this by opening MULTIPLE accounts and funneling their contributions between them. Once an account reaches a certain limit to where their financial activity would be scrutinized, they open another account and move the interest earned from other accounts into it until that account balance gets too high. These loopholes are in fact harming society far more severely than anything that Apple is doing. Education in the United States is funded mainly by property taxes. That means that whenever a new religious institution moves into an area, the potential tax revenues that fund our school systems also decrease. This should be factored into any calculations when attempting to determine the effects on our contemporary society.

 

[rdowns]

The funniest part about this thread is how people's position is based on their affinity for Apple.

If the article was about Exxon, Citibank or a big insurance company, would people start singing a different tune?

Quite a difference between a company using the tax laws to their advantage and an industry(s) that makes Apple-like profits while receiving billion and billions of tax subsidies.

 

[3282868]

Already answered, many times, here even. You're just repeating this stuff because you can't respond to arguments?

not when arguments are weak and false and the obstinate person will not listen to the opinions of others, no. Banging my head against a brick wall isn't fun.

 

[rman726]

Time for this to spread like wildfire around the internet with Apple being the only target. It will probably be spearheaded by fanboys of the other companies that do the exact same things.

 

[3282868]

I also hate that picture. Taxation does not justify taxation.

You hate it because you do not agree with it, but it's a fact you can't ignore.