Tim Cook Calls Apple's Tax Avoidance Accusations 'Total Political Crap'

[maknik]

That's not the job of a CEO of a company. Oh and by the way Tim Cook said he's giving away all his personal fortune (after he pays for his nephew's college education). How much of your fortune are you giving away?

Again, explain what Apple is doing that isn't LEGAL. If the laws are bad blame politicians, not Tim Cook. Do you pay more tax than you legally have to?

It's also not the job of the CEO of a company to engage in public charity (such as the Red stuff), to speak out in favor of gay rights, or do many of the other moral things for which Cook deservedly is praised. He does all sorts of things that mix the personal and corporate, and this is one of them. A robot CEO would just quietly do the tax avoidance; Cook the person is the one who spoke it in favor of it and called his critics "politicized." He invited a moral discussion of the issue, and we are responding.

And while I don't pay more taxes than I owe, I do the ethical and consistent thing: I advocate for higher taxes on the rich (including me) and corporations. If the policies I espouse are passed, I will pay the higher rates. I don't go around saying that tax breaks for the rich and corporations are good things, and I certainly don't go around saying that any discussion of the ethics of taxation and tax avoidance is inherently politicized and off limits. I am quite consistent in my behavior. Our bridges and schools are crumbling, the poverty rate is increasing, and middle-class incomes have stagnated for a generation. The only way to fix this is with more taxes (we've tried the cut-and-grow approach for 30 years, and that's what got us here). Only an idiot thinks the "government" keeps the money -- every cent is spent. The people who think the government should spend less generally have no idea what the government spends money on.

 

[furi0usbee]

I totally agree. They are not breaking any laws, as far as I know.

There are two issues at hand here. Is Apple telling the truth, and is it wrong for them. The first part, Apple is totally lying when they say they are in Ireland for anything other than a tax haven. Second, there is nothing wrong with it. That's what corporations do every day. I don't fault them for taking advantage of the rules.

All Tim has to say is that we are doing nothing different than many other corporations. And it's a non-story for me. But to say you really care about Ireland, and that of all the places in the world, that's your European hub...

 

[maknik]

Apple pays billions in US taxes every year, more than any other US company.

And yet it pays a smaller percent of its income than I do. That's not fair.

If Tim Cook is really against all taxes, he should publicly join the Republican or Libertarian parties. But I don't think he actually believes it.

 

[palmerc]

-> Cook described the tax avoidance accusations as total political crap.

-> He added that repatriating the money is not reasonable due to high corporate tax rates.

Those claims contradict each other. Apple is either avoiding tax or it isn't!

Not contradictory. You can decide not to do something because it isn't beneficial without conceding avoidance which implies an immoral component. The pejorative connotation of avoidance in this context would only be true if apple was morally obligated to pay tax in US for money earned abroad. Tim Cook clearly doesn't feel that is the case and takes umbrage with that assertion.

A better way to put it is... Apple chooses not to pay an unnecessary tax for the purposes of transferring money to the US.

 

[Rogifan]

Took 10 seconds. Seriously there are so many articles explaining it , choose any.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway...bout-apples-tax-avoidance-how-ordinary-it-is/

Again, explain what Apple is doing that isn't LEGAL. If the laws are bad blame politicians, not Tim Cook.

It's also not the job of the CEO of a company to engage in public charity (such as the Red stuff), to speak out in favor of gay rights, or do many of the other moral things for which Cook deservedly is praised. He does all sorts of things that mix the personal and corporate, and this is one of them. A robot CEO would just quietly do the tax avoidance; Cook the person is the one who spoke it in favor of it and called his critics "politicized." He invited a moral discussion of the issue, and we are responding.

And while I don't pay more taxes than I owe, I do the ethical and consistent thing: I advocate for higher taxes on the rich (including me) and corporations. If the policies I espouse are passed, I will pay the higher rates. I don't go around saying that tax breaks for the rich and corporations are good things, and I certainly don't go around saying that any discussion of the ethics of taxation and tax avoidance is inherently politicized and off limits. I am quite consistent in my behavior. Our bridges and schools are crumbling, the poverty rate is increasing, and middle-class incomes have stagnated for a generation. The only way to fix this is with more taxes (we've tried the cut-and-grow approach for 30 years, and that's what got us here). Only an idiot thinks the "government" keeps the money -- every cent is spent. The people who think the government should spend less generally have no idea what the government spends money on.

sorry, my money is not your money or anyone else's and you have no right to it. Maybe people wouldn't need so much government assistance if the government was it taking so much of their money in the first place.

And yet it pays a smaller percent of its income than I do. That's not fair.

If Tim Cook is really against all taxes, he should publicly join the Republican or Libertarian parties. But I don't think he actually believes it.

So Tim Cook should advocate that Apple pay more tax than it is legally required to because you think anything else is unfair? why are corporations paying tax in the first place all they do is pass that on to the consumer. Corporations are made up of people that earn compensation and pay taxes on that. Forcing corporations to pay taxes is just double taxation and it's plain wrong.

 

[sdz]

So Tim Cook should advocate that Apple pay more tax than it is legally required to because you think anything else is unfair? why are corporations paying tax in the first place all they do is pass that on to the consumer. Corporations are made up of people that earn compensation and pay taxes on that. Forcing corporations to pay taxes is just double taxation and it's plain wrong.

Why are you an advocate of big companies like Apple which does NOT want the best for you?!

 

[Jakexb]

It's also a problem created by the EU and Ireland. No matter how Cook wants to spin this, the simple fact is that Apple has a tax haven in Ireland where supposedly its research is performed. Yet, for some reason, features and updates are always introduced in the US first, and the countries of the EU have to wait.

I like Apple in most regards, but in this regard Tim Cook is really trying it on. Is Apple tax haven legal? Yes. Is it immoral? Yes.

Immoral? You can't expect a business to run its accounting based on interpretations and feelings. Businesses need explicit and exact regulation to create a level playing field. The United States could easily make explicit regulation that said companies have to pay taxes on money not brought back to the United States. But most likely, that would cause many companies to completely move their headquarters to friendlier countries that are less greedy. And so they don't. And that makes this all a moot point. Any complaining about it is simply political posturing.

 

[IbisDoc]

Really? I guess you must be doing well, then-- over the past 7 years when that guy was running the government?

Bad guess, I'm actually doing worse. Care to give it another shot, and guess why?

Hi, liberal creep here. I don't know how much money you make, but, if it is as much as you are implying, then, yes, I probably would like to increase your tax rate. Worse than that, I'm going to tell you that you should be happy to live in the U.S., which still has a first amendment for at least the next year.

Hi. A liberal creep is one that wants to raise other people's taxes, but then is outraged at the idea of paying taxes unless the law is changed or an exception is granted. Like Tim Cook and his liberal cronies. And apparently you.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Money a statement of value.

Short-term value. As a medium of exchange. If you are looking for long-term value-- invest it.

Reminds of a classic interview story.

Three accountants were interviewing for a CFO position. The CEO gave the first two a fiscal report and asked what it said about the company profit. The first two gave the CEO a very detailed fiscal answer after a looking at the report. The third didn't even look at the report before asking, "What do you want your profit to be for this year?" The third accountant got the job.

That sums it up all right.

Or these socialist countries can stop spending so much money on "social programs" protecting cronies that should have been out of society leadership generations ago. Get rid of your national healthcare program and let the free market sort it out, healthcare costs plummet.

Source? Do you have an example? What country are you referring to? Let's be specific here-- which countries have private healthcare, spend less per capita than the U.S., and longer life expectancy? How about two out of three?

 

[mrjayviper]

I own and run a business.
I pay 43% in tax on all income. 43%. On. Every. Single. Dime.

​

and you think Apple is doing tax evasion? proof please!

tax avoidance = legal
tax evasion = IRS/tax office looking at your books

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

It's also not the job of the CEO of a company to engage in public charity (such as the Red stuff), to speak out in favor of gay rights, or do many of the other moral things for which Cook deservedly is praised. He does all sorts of things that mix the personal and corporate, and this is one of them.

And, I'm good with that. I completely disagree with the "Friedman doctrine" that corporations should be psychopathic.

A robot CEO would just quietly do the tax avoidance; Cook the person is the one who spoke it in favor of it and called his critics "politicized." He invited a moral discussion of the issue, and we are responding.

Agreed. I think it is fine to discuss it, and, it would be inconsistent of Cook to state otherwise. (I haven't parsed his words carefully enough to understand exactly how he meant his criticism.)

And while I don't pay more taxes than I owe,

That is what I do, too. I don't pay more taxes than I owe. I give money to certain charities-- in that sense, I choose what my extra "taxes" are going to.

I do the ethical and consistent thing: I advocate for higher taxes on the rich (including me) and corporations. If the policies I espouse are passed, I will pay the higher rates. I don't go around saying that tax breaks for the rich and corporations are good things, and I certainly don't go around saying that any discussion of the ethics of taxation and tax avoidance is inherently politicized and off limits. I am quite consistent in my behavior. Our bridges and schools are crumbling, the poverty rate is increasing, and middle-class incomes have stagnated for a generation. The only way to fix this is with more taxes (we've tried the cut-and-grow approach for 30 years, and that's what got us here). Only an idiot thinks the "government" keeps the money -- every cent is spent. The people who think the government should spend less generally have no idea what the government spends money on.

Some people would be surprised that about 60% of federal discretionary spending goes to national defense/military.

(Military+veterans benefits). I'm not saying at the moment whether that is good or bad, but, people who complain about taxes and demand more military spending are-- well, boring.

 

[djgamble]

Yep it's just total political crap that in Australia Apple have all payments funnelled through Ireland so that they pay no tax in Australia. Wait no... Apple's avoiding Australian tax for some reason!

 

[Robert.Walter]

And, I'm good with that. I completely disagree with the "Friedman doctrine" that corporations should be psychopathic.


Agreed. I think it is fine to discuss it, and, it would be inconsistent of Cook to state otherwise. (I haven't parsed his words carefully enough to understand exactly how he meant his criticism.)



That is what I do, too. I don't pay more taxes than I owe. I give money to certain charities-- in that sense, I choose what my extra "taxes" are going to.



Some people would be surprised that about 60% of federal discretionary spending goes to national defense/military.

(Military+veterans benefits). I'm not saying at the moment whether that is good or bad, but, people who complain about taxes and demand more military spending are-- well, boring.

I don't know if you are cherry picking pie charts to make your point or don't know that discretionary spending is a relatively smaller part of the overall federal budget. But you cruised past the first chart showing all spending in order to distort the relatively small part of the budget attributable to defense spending. And as far as I can tell you brought up increasing military spending. Inaccurate and boring. For shame.

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/analysis/2015/presidents-2016-budget-in-pictures/

 

[MH01]

Sure, they *could* hire 100,000, but do they need that many people to run their EU business?

They aren't going to employ more people than are needed to operate their business effectively.

I was talking about employee numbers v income held on Ireland was a sarcastic comment .

 

[McCool71]

the simple fact is that Apple has a tax haven in Ireland where supposedly its research is performed. Yet, for some reason, features and updates are always introduced in the US first, and the countries of the EU have to wait.

I like Apple in most regards, but in this regard Tim Cook is really trying it on. Is Apple tax haven legal? Yes. Is it immoral? Yes.

Designed by Apple in Ireland

 

[McCool71]

LOL. What's immoral is taking 40% of something someone else has earned to pass around to those who haven't contributed anything at all.

In the US this might be the case, but in most other countries taxes actually fund stuff like health care and education which benefits everyone, no matter how rich or poor you are.

 

[MH01]

Again, explain what Apple is doing that isn't LEGAL. If the laws are bad blame politicians, not Tim Cook.

Mate, stop moving the goal posts. You asked what taxes are being avoided as you refused to acknowledge apple was avoiding taxes , I sent you a quick summary of the situation, and now your brining legal into it.

Its tax AVOIDANCE......not tax EVASION. Sometimes you defend apple so blindly you do everything to twist the debates. Ovet 400 posts we have established tax avoidance by definition is legal within the rules, as it exploits LOOPHOLES....

So when one actively uses tax avoidance it's the bad bad laws that forced them...... Mate, INTENT, no one is forced to take advantage of broken tax laws to thier advantage.

I was just trying to establish the most basic point with you, that apple is using tax avoidance. Can you accept that ?

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

I don't know if you are cherry picking pie charts to make your point or don't know that discretionary spending is a relatively smaller part of the overall federal budget.

Neither. I chose that chart exactly because it excludes social security and medicare, which are self-sustaining (for the moment) programs.

But you cruised past the first chart showing all spending in order to distort the relatively small part of the budget attributable to defense spending.

Contrary to what you obviously think, I consider the inclusion of Social Security and Medicare as part of the unified budget in 1969 to be a serious error. (It was suggested by LBJ and implemented under Nixon.) Social Security has always had a separate budget, income, and outflow.

And as far as I can tell you brought up increasing military spending. Inaccurate and boring. For shame.

I have no idea what you are trying to say or what you consider shameful, or why.

However, my point is simple: anyone wanting to increase military spending should be willing to raise taxes for it.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

LOL. What's immoral is taking 40% of something someone else has earned to pass around to those who haven't contributed anything at all.

Why is it immoral? BTW, maybe you haven't noticed, but, people who have been very sick for a long time usually can't pay for their healthcare. In the U.S. So, denying them healthcare is the equivalent of allowing them to die.

is taking 40% of something someone else has earned to pass around to those who haven't contributed anything at all.

You don't like paying taxes. I get it.

 

[MH01]

and you think Apple is doing tax evasion? proof please!

tax avoidance = legal
tax evasion = IRS/tax office looking at your books

I see, you must have ticked the box that says "I'm doing tax avoidance and its legal" on your tax return.

Reality is this.

Tax avoidance / tax evasion = IRS / tax office looking at your books.

You know the difference? They can take you to court for both, if they win avoidance, you pay + interest + penalties . If they win for evasion criminal charges.

Tax avoidance is only legal while the tax office has no grounds to argue thier case, in many situations , tax avoidance goes to court.

both are risky, but at least with avoidance , you do not do jail time. Get in the right scheme, that is legally tight, and yeah, your avoidance is legal.....but that is why there is tax reform....close the loopholes

 

[gnasher729]

I see, you must have ticked the box that says "I'm doing tax avoidance and its legal" on your tax return.

Reality is this.

Tax avoidance / tax evasion = IRS / tax office looking at your books.

You know the difference? They can take you to court for both, if they win avoidance, you pay + interest + penalties . If they win for evasion criminal charges.

Tax avoidance is only legal while the tax office has no grounds to argue thier case, in many situations , tax avoidance goes to court.

both are risky, but at least with avoidance , you do not do jail time. Get in the right scheme, that is legally tight, and yeah, your avoidance is legal.....but that is why there is tax reform....close the loopholes

That is complete and utter nonsense. Tax avoidance is by definition legal. It's the definition of "avoidance" vs. "evasion": If it's legal it's tax avoidance and if it is illegal it is tax evasion. You seem to be talking about incorrectly reporting your income, which is a totally different matter, and not only the tax office but also the SEC would be after Apple if that happened.

 

[furi0usbee]

How much does Ireland really matter to Apple in terms of it's overall business? Reverse the two figures however when talking about Ireland as a tax haven for Apple.

 

[JimmyHook]

Again, if anyone here takes a deduction, or does ANYTHING within the law to lower their tax bill, they are hypocrites if they complain about Apple. Not a single person can logically explain why they should pay more. If you argue they should pay more, explain how much. Because any number you come up with is arbitrary. They are following the laws. If you don't like the laws, lobby for change. Blaming someone for legal conduct is ridiculous.

 

[JimmyHook]

It's also not the job of the CEO of a company to engage in public charity (such as the Red stuff), to speak out in favor of gay rights, or do many of the other moral things for which Cook deservedly is praised. He does all sorts of things that mix the personal and corporate, and this is one of them. A robot CEO would just quietly do the tax avoidance; Cook the person is the one who spoke it in favor of it and called his critics "politicized." He invited a moral discussion of the issue, and we are responding.

And while I don't pay more taxes than I owe, I do the ethical and consistent thing: I advocate for higher taxes on the rich (including me) and corporations. If the policies I espouse are passed, I will pay the higher rates. I don't go around saying that tax breaks for the rich and corporations are good things, and I certainly don't go around saying that any discussion of the ethics of taxation and tax avoidance is inherently politicized and off limits. I am quite consistent in my behavior. Our bridges and schools are crumbling, the poverty rate is increasing, and middle-class incomes have stagnated for a generation. The only way to fix this is with more taxes (we've tried the cut-and-grow approach for 30 years, and that's what got us here). Only an idiot thinks the "government" keeps the money -- every cent is spent. The people who think the government should spend less generally have no idea what the government spends money on.

Paying more taxes than owed is immoral because governments use the money for immoral purposes, like killing people.

 

[JimmyHook]

I've emailed Tim many times, but have only received one response (about the confederate flag issue in the app store) back from his apple.com account. I suppose it responds to his own mail like Jobs. I emailed Steve many times as well, but never heard back. I am thinking long and hard of letting TC know my views on this, but I know he won't agree, so I probably won't email him.


Apple does NOTHING in Ireland but avoid paying taxes on money earned. Period. The end. Anything else you say to defend their "Ireland operation" has no merit. I never said they owe US taxes in Ireland. I said they avoid paying taxes. Apple sells more MacBooks in NYC every week than computers in Ireland probably over an entire year. Apple is ONLY in Ireland to save on taxes. ONLY. Wouldn't be surprised if they have an office in the Cayman Islands too.... but that's probably totally legit as well.

Do you know how many people that company employs in Ireland???? You know nothing if you claim those folks do nothing, and you are insulting those hard workers.