It is called a tax adjustment.Then make Ireland pay up the difference - not Apple or other companies that used Ireland as a go-between.
It is called a tax adjustment.Then make Ireland pay up the difference - not Apple or other companies that used Ireland as a go-between.
My question is what rules in this case?
Ireland set-up a tax, a company opened there and paid such tax accordingly. Ok that the company is Apple, but the same applies to any other company. If Apple paid the due taxes that the soveirgn nation require then I don't see how that the EU can intervene and force Apple to pay a tax that does not exist.
Yes and this interpretation is why this is a dangerous precedent to set. If a company is always at risk that they will owe back taxes because some politician decides to change the rule, companies will have a hard time estimating their cost of doing business. this will bring uncertainty and risk which means less investment as the horde cash to protect against these activities. Bad business all around.If the tax deal Ireland proposed is against EU rules, it is an erroneous application of the law, so Apple receives a tax adjustment. Normal.
It is not a politician changing the rule, but the people in charge of overseeing the proper application of the rules determining that there was a violation.Yes and this interpretation is why this is a dangerous precedent to set. If a company is always at risk that they will owe back taxes because some politician decides to change the rule, companies will have a hard time estimating their cost of doing business. this will bring uncertainty and risk which means less investment as the horde cash to protect against these activities. Bad business all around.
All tax dollars from US companies need to go to the US, including those they earn from abroad.
Dear EU,
This is how we deal with it.
Love,
The U.K. #Brexit
Then make Ireland pay up the difference (or a fine and punish them somehow) - not Apple or other companies that used Ireland as a go-between.
The EU does not tax. Governments pay contributions.Ah the EU. Love taxing anyone as much as possible to prevent their poor countries from going completely bankrupt and having to dissolve the EU. Maybe if it weren't for this beurcratic nonsense and very high taxes some European country could be home to the next Apple.
Nothing wrong with setting up a company in Ireland and paying taxes there. The sketchy part is apple selling patents (that used resources from USA to make ) to the Irish subsidiary for cheap. That results in very little taxes collected in USA. That Irish subsidiary then makes millions from licensing fees for all that patented tech in the iPhone, with zero taxes from that going to USA.
Aka double Irish Dutch sandwich
Taxes are a responsibility of the one who has to pay them, not the country who is collecting them. Ireland may offer a lower tax (probably taking advantage of a loophole within EU legislation) that companies may take or not... but it is the company's responsibility face any consequences of that action as it is under EU legislation
Can the EU force a European country on deciding how the taxes should be structured? Honest question.
Who violated the rule. Apple? There position is that they paid the taxes based on the law. So, if true, the violation was by parliament and the politicians that passed the law. Or are you trying to say that Apple should have told parliament, "hey I know you passed a law so I only have to pay 1.5% taxes, but I know that's wrong so I will 10%, because otherwise I will have violated some rule in Brussels that says I should not follow a law set by parliament."There's also
It is not a politician changing the rule, but the people in charge of overseeing the proper application of the rules determining that there was a violation.
It could be just a deal, not part of a law.Who violated the rule. Apple? There position is that they paid the taxes based on the law. So, if true, the violation was by parliament and the politicians that passed the law. Or are you trying to say that Apple should have told parliament, "hey I know you passed a law so I only have to pay 1.5% taxes, but I know that's wrong so I will 10%, because otherwise I will have violated some rule in Brussels that says I should not follow a law set by parliament."
Nice try - they're politicians! Take your choice: you can go by Mark Twain's definition, or you can do rudimentary Wikipedia research which shows that the EC president is elected, and the members' profiles call them 'politicians!'There's also
It is not a politician changing the rule, but the people in charge of overseeing the proper application of the rules determining that there was a violation.
Agreed. But change the laws then.
Apple hasn't broken any laws. I agree that the laws should change and from that point onward Apple (and all the other companies that use this) should pay the higher taxes.
The EU is not only a trade union. It's predecessors have long been superseded.I actually agree with Apple on this.
EU is a trade arrangement, but not a fiscal arrangement. They do not have a deal like USA where each state is supposed to have a balanced budget so the unfair distribution of taxes from rich states to poor states is politically acceptable to its citizens.
EU has each country running deficits WITHOUT printing its own localized money. They should require balanced budgets and allow other factors to distribute some funds from strong actors to weak actors until the economies can normalise. It was designed by politicians not accountants or intellectually honest economists.
Of course that would require fewer transfer payments and less taxation to accomplish. In dozens of countries essentially all at once.
The dramatic improvement in growth, employment, and value for each currency unit would be well worth it, with some "dislocation and transition issues". They survived WW II, with our help. This would require a similar commitment.
Dear EU,
This is how we deal with it.
Love,
The U.K. #Brexit
Sometimes I have the impression that the UK believes they belong more with the US than with Europe.I wonder how many EU countries would be fine just becoming one of our states?