Ireland Agrees to Appeal European Commission's Apple Tax Ruling

[apolloa]

Yup. Old man yells at cloud. Perfect.
[doublepost=1472988208][/doublepost]
It's not that simple. The EU competition commission is not a court of law. That Ireland broke competition law is an opinion that Ireland disagrees with. That the tax can be reclaimed retroactively is something Ireland disagrees with. And not just Ireland disagrees.
Reclaiming those taxes could easily cost Ireland more than that 13billion. If corporations see that the agreements with Ireland can not be depended on, they will rethink their plans in Ireland. Tens of thousands of jobs could end up somewhere else. Fewer jobs means less income tax, less VAT, more unemployment benefits.
This is an invitation to the first round of negotiations.

Sigh, no it's a fact they broke it, the law is not optional like people in here seem to think and EU law rules over all else, you agree to that as a country when you join, you have a voice to change it if you don't like it, they broke the regulation, law, it's very clear.

 

[Parkin Pig]

Yup. Old man yells at cloud. Perfect.

And how does that differ from you posting your opinion?

 

[draugminaion]

And how does that differ from you posting your opinion?

I don't write angry ignorant rant letters to newspapers.
[doublepost=1473011085][/doublepost]

Sigh, no it's a fact they broke it, the law is not optional like people in here seem to think and EU law rules over all else, you agree to that as a country when you join, you have a voice to change it if you don't like it, they broke the regulation, law, it's very clear.

The commission is pretty sure it's a fact. Others are pretty sure it is not.
The courts will decide.

 

[dampfnudel]

If Ireland wants to change their tax laws, and have it enforced (for all multinationals) by 2020, then that's fine. But if Apple had followed existing Irish tax laws, then why are they being penalized?

Because Apple knew it was wrong, but decided to follow this unethical path anyway out of pure greed. Frankly, I think Apple should pay at least half of this amount and for the practice to end. That would be fair.

 

[draugminaion]

If Ireland wants to change their tax laws, and have it enforced (for all multinationals) by 2020, then that's fine. But if Apple had followed existing Irish tax laws, then why are they being penalized?

Apple is not being penalized.
If someone buys a stolen car, or gets it as a present, they need to give it back. This is not a penalty.
[doublepost=1473014158][/doublepost]

Because Apple knew it was wrong, but decided to follow this unethical path anyway out of pure greed. Frankly, I think Apple should pay at least half of this amount and for the practice to end. That would be fair.

That makes no sense. Apple asked the one and only authority on Irish taxes what they had to pay and paid that. Paying half is nonsense, they need to pay back their unfair advantage. Receiving half an unfair advantage is still unfair.
If someone gets a stolen present do they get to keep half?

 

[Bigsk8r]

The Irish has already agreed to abandon the the tax structure that Apple is using in 2015 and have given companies until 2020 to find alternatives. So in fact they have already admitted it is wrong.
[doublepost=1472901938][/doublepost]
Stop linking to wall street journal articles. It just takes everyone to a paywall. In addition I am sure it is a US centric view. We have many financial journalist in Europe who have laid this out for what it is and your view is way off base.

Go refill your vagisil. I have never linked WSJ before those write-ups and despite not being a subscriber, I can Google the keywords and find the link without the paywall. Not sure why you can't. Get over it.
[doublepost=1473058544][/doublepost]

Opinion pieces written on this topic are, of course, just that. This one plainly wasn't setting out to be any kind of factual or objective analysis. The clue to what it is should have been clear from the title, "Europe's Apple Tax Ambush", and from the bylines before the main copy - "EU rolls over the US Treasury and Irish tax law to punish an American company" and what is described as an "antitrust raid". The actual issues in play here are deep, complex and profound, to my mind this particular editorial was none of those things.

No. They are simple. Apple has followed - to the letter - every tax code they have ever been presented with.

I didn't stutter or annunciate unclearly there. Those are facts. My original post was based on them, and you don't like the piece from the Wall Street Journal that I shared. Boohoo. Call the Waaaaahhhmbulance.

 

[draugminaion]

It's even worse than most people thought! At least 6 Irish corporations are still being investigated for special deals. Pretty soon it will be revealed that every corporation in Ireland got an unfair advantage from Ireland!

 

[cube]

It's even worse than most people thought! At least 6 Irish corporations are still being investigated for special deals. Pretty soon it will be revealed that every corporation in Ireland got an unfair advantage from Ireland!

There are 1000 investigations in the queue, 30-something cases running. Most of them European. It's not just about the US or Ireland.

 

[dampfnudel]

It's even worse than most people thought! At least 6 Irish corporations are still being investigated for special deals. Pretty soon it will be revealed that every corporation in Ireland got an unfair advantage from Ireland!

Yeah, the Irish government was wheeling and dealing. I can't say that I blame them given the fact that Ireland has had a bad history with keeping their citizens from leaving the country looking for opportunities elsewhere.

 

[k995]

It's even worse than most people thought! At least 6 Irish corporations are still being investigated for special deals. Pretty soon it will be revealed that every corporation in Ireland got an unfair advantage from Ireland!

If every company got it, it wouldn't be unfair. Ireland has the right to not tax its companies.
[doublepost=1473152768][/doublepost]

No. They are simple. Apple has followed - to the letter - every tax code they have ever been presented with.

Yes but that doesn't matter, the issue is 2fold:
1 By lowering apple's taxes to 0 ireland broke EU regulations/agreements.
2 Is it ethical for a company like apple to basically reduce its tax burden to zero by shopping/pressuring countries ?

 

[draugminaion]

If every company got it, it wouldn't be unfair. Ireland has the right to not tax its companies.

You got my joke! Cool.
Yes, that was my point, if lots of corporations got the same deal , how 'special' is it?

Ireland is free to stimulate a certain type of enterprise if they think this is beneficial for the country's economy. If the stimulated type of enterprise is "having your EU HQ in Ireland instead of somewhere else", this will disadvantage other types and other countries. If Ireland thinks that giving a corporation 0.005% corporate income tax rate, plus getting hundreds (thousands) of jobs (that pay income tax, VAT, gas tax, road tax, property tax, etc.) gets the country more money than getting 12.5% corporate income tax, plus nothing, because those jobs are now in London, Paris, Barcelona or Prague, is Ireland allowed to do that?

[doublepost=1473152768][/doublepost]
Yes but that doesn't matter, the issue is 2fold:
1 By lowering apple's taxes to 0 ireland broke EU regulations/agreements.
2 Is it ethical for a company like apple to basically reduce its tax burden to zero by shopping/pressuring countries ?

Regarding 2. would stock holders, in a sense the corporation's owners, consider it ethical not to do it?

 

[Parkin Pig]

I don't write angry ignorant rant letters to newspapers.

You prefer a smaller audience for your angry ignorant rants then?

 

[draugminaion]

You prefer a smaller audience for your angry ignorant rants then?

Nothing says "old man" like letters to the newspaper. Also, I'm not convinced that the audience here is actually smaller than for the letters section of some provincial black goo on dead tree pulp rag.

Which of my wise and serene lessons did you find ignorant or angry?
Please be as detailed as you can manage.

Answer carefully, my wolf can swallow your wombat in one gulp.

 

[k995]

You got my joke! Cool.
Yes, that was my point, if lots of corporations got the same deal , how 'special' is it?

Ireland is free to stimulate a certain type of enterprise if they think this is beneficial for the country's economy. If the stimulated type of enterprise is "having your EU HQ in Ireland instead of somewhere else", this will disadvantage other types and other countries. If Ireland thinks that giving a corporation 0.005% corporate income tax rate, plus getting hundreds (thousands) of jobs (that pay income tax, VAT, gas tax, road tax, property tax, etc.) gets the country more money than getting 12.5% corporate income tax, plus nothing, because those jobs are now in London, Paris, Barcelona or Prague, is Ireland allowed to do that?Regarding 2. would stock holders, in a sense the corporation's owners, consider it ethical not to do it?

As far as I can tell ireland didnt get anything for the 0% tax rate, the factory and workers there are historical and already way before this last 0% deal present. And perhaps if it offered the same deal to every compay in the sector it wouldnt be judges as unfair competition.

Now apple basicly did an acounting trick, moved its profits to ireland and used the factory there as presure to get basicly no taxation. All this without any extr personel in ireland. The irony is that because its upped the GDP of ireland by quite a bit, ireland now ahs to pay more to the EU.

 

[Bigsk8r]

Yes but that doesn't matter, the issue is 2fold:
1 By lowering apple's taxes to 0 ireland broke EU regulations/agreements.
2 Is it ethical for a company like apple to basically reduce its tax burden to zero by shopping/pressuring countries ?

My stance and comments have all been about whether or not Apple has violated a law. They have not. If what you say is true, the EU has a higher probability of getting this loophole closed by imposing fines on Ireland to pressure them to close the hole. Regardless of what the rattling sabres say, Apple does not owe the EU anything.

The only comment I will make about the ethics is this...

If I have to investigate the ethics of every single place I want to buy a product from, I suspect that I will be very frustrated, very quickly.

 

[k995]

My stance and comments have all been about whether or not Apple has violated a law.

Neither the EU nor ireland has said they did.

If what you say is true, the EU has a higher probability of getting this loophole closed by imposing fines on Ireland to pressure them to close the hole.

No because the EU has no control over taxation, it does have control over fair competition.

Regardless of what the rattling sabres say, Apple does not owe the EU anything.

Not sure who you refer to but the fineis to be paid to ireland, niet the EU. The EU has little direct vested intrest in this case.

The only comment I will make about the ethics is this...

If I have to investigate the ethics of every single place I want to buy a product from, I suspect that I will be very frustrated, very quickly.

Not from a consumer (although that never hurts) from a company pov, after all taxes do serve a purpose, if it wasnt for taxation and with it a gov run system apple couldnt operate.

 

[Bigsk8r]

If they haven't violated a law. And over the time they have been in Ireland (well in excess of 20 years), between taxation and salaries to employees that are then spent directly into the economy, have paid billions of dollars, where is it the EU's place to weigh in?

With the money Apple HAS given Ireland over the decades, each town they have presence in could have been completely rebuilt two or more times. If Ireland is happy with the money, and Apple is within all applicable tax codes, everyone else needs to stuff it and stay out.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

If they haven't violated a law. And over the time they have been in Ireland (well in excess of 20 years), between taxation and salaries to employees that are then spent directly into the economy, have paid billions of dollars, where is it the EU's place to weigh in?

With the money Apple HAS given Ireland over the decades, each town they have presence in could have been completely rebuilt two or more times. If Ireland is happy with the money, and Apple is within all applicable tax codes, everyone else needs to stuff it and stay out.

It must be an eye opener for the Irish people though regardless of the jobs Apple has brought to the country. The amount of tax they should have paid would go a long way within the Irish economy and one that is still struggling to get over the banking crisis.

 

[k995]

If they haven't violated a law. And over the time they have been in Ireland (well in excess of 20 years), between taxation and salaries to employees that are then spent directly into the economy, have paid billions of dollars, where is it the EU's place to weigh in?

The part of apple that has production in ireland and the part of ireland that handles the profits of sales are 2 different entities. The production base has been there long and has paid more taxes (certainly in the part) and has of course employed several thousands . The other entity (ASI) is something apple created a lot later and was setup with virtually no employees and its only purpose is to pay zero taxes not he profits it gathers not just in ireland but throughout the world.

With the money Apple HAS given Ireland over the decades, each town they have presence in could have been completely rebuilt two or more times.

Apple has given? Yu mean it paid in taxes and where in return it gets services for? Or it paid its employees?

If Ireland is happy with the money, and Apple is within all applicable tax codes, everyone else needs to stuff it and stay out.

No, ireland has signed agreements with other countries (aka the EU) that stipulate that ireland shall not give unfair advantages to companies. The department in the EU responsible for overseeing that has deemed (correctly so btw) that the 0% taxes on apple profits in ireland are an unfair advantage.

Aka ireland is picking winners and losers in the private market and shouldn't be doing that. Either it gives everybody the same deal apple got or it makes everyone pay the same.

 

[Bigsk8r]

No, ireland has signed agreements with other countries (aka the EU) that stipulate that ireland shall not give unfair advantages to companies. The department in the EU responsible for overseeing that has deemed (correctly so btw) that the 0% taxes on apple profits in ireland are an unfair advantage.

Aka ireland is picking winners and losers in the private market and shouldn't be doing that. Either it gives everybody the same deal apple got or it makes everyone pay the same.

Again, circular argument. This is the EU and Irelands problem. Not Apples.

If the EU comes to Apple and lays down the gauntlet by saying "Our boy over here is giving you an unfair advantage. We can't penalize you directly while we deal with that, but we can get member nations to reject your imports and make it illegal to possess any newer than 2015 product..."

THAT would be a more useful and truthful position for them to take if they want real action and not just the appearance of action.
[doublepost=1473255510][/doublepost]

It must be an eye opener for the Irish people though regardless of the jobs Apple has brought to the country. The amount of tax they should have paid would go a long way within the Irish economy and one that is still struggling to get over the banking crisis.

Oh, I don't doubt that. I realize in my other replies on this that my position makes me look like a blind fanboy. That's not it at all.

What I am tired of is the thinking that if we don't like something, we should just punish those doing it rather than fix the legal framework that allows it. These scenarios pop up in all parts of our culture where if you really dig in, you can see that enforcement or small adjustment of a current procedure or law would fix the problem.

Stop blaming the people following the letter literally, and fix the letter.

 

[twietee]

What I am tired of is the thinking that if we don't like something, we should just punish those doing it rather than fix the legal framework that allows it.

Stop blaming the people following the letter literally, and fix the letter.

I can see where you're coming from but what I don't get is why you are so very certain that this procedure was legally correct to begin with? Taxation is a very complicated issue so I doubt we can or should judge with such certainty.

Maybe it's a country thing? I know that my tax-reports (in Germany) can be re-visited for ten years. So just because "they" say: "ok, everything's fine." doesn't mean that in case they caught up to a wrong doing (which not necessarily has to be intentional on my part) I don't have to pay for stuff that was happeneing a decade ago. You may not like that but that's certainly no new law. As it certainly is no new law that you can't give special deals to one business as you please. Again: this isn't something new and I'm amazed that you (I mean Americans in general) seem to advocate for a government that doesn't treat businesses alike but rather play favorites!?

So that may hurt the wallet of Apple or not (remains to be seen) and the shareholders (especially those that are not living in the EU I'd say) won't like it but when Apple made deals with Ireland they were well aware of it being part of the EU. Do you really think that they didn't check on that front? The USA may work differently in that regard, I have no idea, but just because it's different doesn't make it nonsense or illegal.

My guess is they thought they got away with it but didn't. If this is just a new political pawn after the US fining Deutsche Bank and now VW for billions and billions, who knows. But those businesses were doing something wrong and were rightfully fined so when Apple is found out that it didn't pay as much taxes as they had to (legally binding; EU law beats national law) why on earth should they not pay the rest of it, which is still no that much; comare Irelands 12.5 to your, what, 35%..

 

[cube]

Yes, Apple being involved is normal.

The ruling is about a tax adjustment since 10 years prior to when the investigation started.

BTW, It was the US Congress who inspired the EU to look into Apple.

 

[swajames]

Again, circular argument. This is the EU and Irelands problem. Not Apples.

If the EU comes to Apple and lays down the gauntlet by saying "Our boy over here is giving you an unfair advantage. We can't penalize you directly while we deal with that, but we can get member nations to reject your imports and make it illegal to possess any newer than 2015 product..."

THAT would be a more useful and truthful position for them to take if they want real action and not just the appearance of action.
[doublepost=1473255510][/doublepost]

Oh, I don't doubt that. I realize in my other replies on this that my position makes me look like a blind fanboy. That's not it at all.

What I am tired of is the thinking that if we don't like something, we should just punish those doing it rather than fix the legal framework that allows it. These scenarios pop up in all parts of our culture where if you really dig in, you can see that enforcement or small adjustment of a current procedure or law would fix the problem.

Stop blaming the people following the letter literally, and fix the letter.

You're not coming across as a blind fanboy, there are legitimate positions on either side of the spectrum and with this being an issue that impacts Apple passions will always run high on here.

I do believe it's fair to say that we can't say for certain whether any business who drove lower tax bills from these arrangements did in fact comply with all of the rules and conditions (and that in itself isn't actually what's under review here).

The key point here is that the EU is saying Ireland wasn't in a position to negotiate these deals anyway as they distort the EU internal market. Whether or not any companies that deployed them followed the conditions asked of them is somewhat moot, the EU is saying Ireland should never have entered into these agreements in the first place. It's worth noting that the EU doesn't get any benefit from the "correction" of a tax position (although ironically part of the unwinding of the Irish arrangements has had the impact of increasing Ireland's GDP and thus its EU contributions), the EU is essentially saying that what Ireland has done has potentially harmed a) other businesses who did not or could not enter into these types of arrangements and b) other member states who lose out on potential tax revenues when profits nominally earned there are funneled elsewhere.

It's a highly complex situation for all and while we can't predict the outcome my own sense is that the commission will prevail. As unfortunate and unfair as it may seem or be for businesses that reasonably believed they had a deal and followed that deal, it may yet prove that those deals weren't worth the paper they were written on - as the country offering them wasn't permitted to do so. This is nothing to do with tax, that was just the means to an end with that end being incentives to operate/locate in Ireland. The real issue is was Ireland able to make these deals and that is specifically what the EU is challenging. Time will of course tell on all fronts.

 

[cube]

Ireland just imposed an immediate 25% tax on "vulture" funds who were paying basically nothing. The Irish people was not happy about the situation.

 

[k995]

Again, circular argument. This is the EU and Irelands problem. Not Apples.

Sure it is because apple got the illegal state aid and should not have gotten that, it has to pay that now.

If the EU comes to Apple and lays down the gauntlet by saying "Our boy over here is giving you an unfair advantage. We can't penalize you directly while we deal with that, but we can get member nations to reject your imports and make it illegal to possess any newer than 2015 product..."

THAT would be a more useful and truthful position for them to take if they want real action and not just the appearance of action.

And the EU cant even do this. This department can decide if certain advantages are allowed or not.