Instead of asking why we're cheering on a corporation that "evades" taxes, you should be asking why a corporation is expected to pay such a high percentage of its own money to an entity that didn't earn it.
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.
Nobel-Winning Economist Calls Apple's Irish Tax Arrangement 'Fraud'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Instead of asking why we're cheering on a corporation that "evades" taxes, you should be asking why a corporation is expected to pay such a high percentage of its own money to an entity that didn't earn it.
I'd like to know how much it cost Apple to get the US Tax code changed to make this "legal".
Well said Sir. Apple's behavious is a total disgrace. Its time for a change in the law to prevent this. In my view Apple has immorally evaded $150bn in taxes. An absolute disgrace
Countries, states/provinces, municipality governments has always been giving tax breaks, tax advantages or tax penalties/tariff/duties to suit political agendas ( ranging from attempting to create employment to out right corruption).
Governments give tax breaks to companies and entire industries (car industries, entertainment industries, etc, etc). Each jurisdiction trying to out do the other... almost like competing for a NFL franchise to be located in their city.
Companies will obviously try to legally take advantage of these breaks to it's fullest extent... I don't see this as an exception.
Governments give tax breaks to companies and entire industries (car industries, entertainment industries, etc, etc). Each jurisdiction trying to out do the other... almost like competing for a NFL franchise to be located in their city.
Companies will obviously try to legally take advantage of these breaks to it's fullest extent... I don't see this as an exception.
Nothing. Apple uses Intrnational tax law and a complicit Irish Government to legally evade taxes on its profits.
So then find a way to tax/punish them for their heinous act.
Oh the hypocrisy ... No laws are being broken and nothing that other big companies aren't doing is done. Google, Scamsung etc. all work the same scheme. Some are actually worse than others e.g. Scamsung.
Apple would loose big time if we lowered the tax rate and required them to bring the money back. At present, Apple writes a check to the US for around 8 percent of their profits. Current laws, while complicated, are very beneficial to corporations like Apple. Nothing illegal, very beneficial.
What would be low enough? What amount is high enough for a "fair share"? No matter what the rate is, people like this nobel guy are going to want apple taxed more.
Good for him.
Speaking as a fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner, it's obscene that the world's richest company pays a tax rate that is much lower than you or I pay. If I were the US government, I would force these companies to pay a retrospective tax rate of 40% for all the years that they have diverted profits to Ireland or some other tax haven. Perhaps Trump will do just that.
It's high time that big business paid a fair amount of tax, and that means paying tax in the country in which the product is sold. It's time that we stopped putting small and medium business at a perpetual disadvantage, not to mention the taxpayer who pays for the infrastructure that enables big business to go about their business.
Speaking as a fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner, it's obscene that the world's richest company pays a tax rate that is much lower than you or I pay. If I were the US government, I would force these companies to pay a retrospective tax rate of 40% for all the years that they have diverted profits to Ireland or some other tax haven. Perhaps Trump will do just that.
It's high time that big business paid a fair amount of tax, and that means paying tax in the country in which the product is sold. It's time that we stopped putting small and medium business at a perpetual disadvantage, not to mention the taxpayer who pays for the infrastructure that enables big business to go about their business.
Last edited:
Uhm... because that country provided the infrastructure for apple to become successful? Without law enforcement there is no business security.
Why stop at 40%? Just take it all- that seems "fair".
What a ******** argument.
I can make the same statement that apple Will Never pay their taxes unless it is the cheapest to pay them in the US - which compared to their current tax rate is basically 0
No need to defend. Apple is doing that quite well.
Since you have pop corn to watch this REALITY show:
fraud
frôd/
noun
- wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.
"he was convicted of fraud"
synonyms: fraudulence, cheating, swindling, embezzlement, deceit, deception, double-dealing, chicanery, sharp practice;
Nothing new from this guy that we do not know already.
Opinions from anybody (including mine) about ethics, morals etc. do not trump the laws.
Money is like vapor that floats wherever there is NO movement or very little wind.
Any time the winds pick up, it moves to a safer area in the world.
If Ireland is no longer "calm" the $$$$ will move to wherever, but never to the US for double taxation.
Not even with a tax free voucher.
The effective corporate tax rate in the US is already the lowest in the world. No corporation pays anything remotely approaching the max rate of 39%, and some have negative rates.
Spare me the croc tears for corporations until all offshore scams such as inversions, hidden accounts and disingenuous use of tax breaks meant for small business are fixed.
NOTE: I hold positions in AAPL, but just believe that corporations need to pay for the infrastructure that made their wealth possible.
US IRS and Irish IRS and EU IRS all looked at it since it is fully disclosed and said it was "compliant". They then immediately suggested changes to the rules so AAPL is taxed more in EVERY jurisdiction. That tells you something about tax policy. It is a money grab, not "fairness" or "economically justified".
When Obama was asked about increasing cap gains taxes from 15% to 23.8% and told by economists it would reduce tax revenue, which it has, he said he didn't care about that. He just wanted to punish the rich. When you sell your house or business you are the rich.
Taxes, governments, leaders, they don't have to make sense. See linky2.
When Obama was asked about increasing cap gains taxes from 15% to 23.8% and told by economists it would reduce tax revenue, which it has, he said he didn't care about that. He just wanted to punish the rich. When you sell your house or business you are the rich.
Taxes, governments, leaders, they don't have to make sense. See linky2.
At which point did I say Samsung's behavior is better?
It just happens that we are now talking about apple. Nice try to deflect.
Economist not tax lawyer - so who cares his Nobel prize does not come from understanding the law. Basically he is just expressing his fundemental sentiment - "I want Apple's money". Ahh. So 20th century of him.
I want Apples money too. I want Stiglitz money! I hope I can convince President Clinton to pass laws which tax economists at 90% so I can get some of his money. I really want that money! I mean, so bad. In fact his having it and not me is oppressive and inequality and probably fraud! He is a fraud! I need his money.
I want Apples money too. I want Stiglitz money! I hope I can convince President Clinton to pass laws which tax economists at 90% so I can get some of his money. I really want that money! I mean, so bad. In fact his having it and not me is oppressive and inequality and probably fraud! He is a fraud! I need his money.
It's not legally fraud, though. Not by the letter of the law. And all companies do it. Why legally pay more than you have to?
Yes, it's certainly fraud in the spirit of the law. But again, all companies do it. Every single one. You'd be a pretty crappy CEO/COO if you didn't exploit legal loopholes to avoid paying billions of dollars.
If people have a problem with it, change the law to stop things like that happening. As a poster said earlier: "don't hate the player, hate the game."
Companies and people will always find ways to pay the least amount required by law. If apple is always going to pay the lower rate, then just keep increasing the rate so they will proportionally pay more.
Say Apple pays half of the 35%, then just raise the rate to 75% so Apple will pay 35%. Easy fix.