or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Gatorguy

Well that certainly doesn't seem fair and shows their bias against the wealthy. How would the rich get richer as fast if they had to pay the same tax rates as us little guys? /sFWIW it's hardly going to impact Apple if they pay a few $B of the taxes they already admit to owing IMHO. So what if they're only left with $175B in 'Cash" instead of $$200B when it's all done with. By next year they'll have north of $250B at the rate they're going even paying their taxes. What...
If Apple were to pay the taxes it shouldn't result in higher priced products. Apple already made allowances to pay the taxes and they state the amount in their financials. They just never got around to actually paying them yet.In addition if they pay the taxes there it just get lopped off the top of what they'll owe the US when they bring it on home. It's not double-taxed, collected by both the EU and the US.
The law says the rate is 12.5% IIRC. The deal they made with Apple was a special exception bureaucrats made outside the public eye and at a rate not available to other taxpayers.
When Apple says it's "held" overseas it doesn't mean what you think it does. Most of the money is in fact in US banks according to testimony, but in accounts owned by overseas entities like Apple Operations International.
I think the AI author got confused. The $9B figure would likely come from the combined 2009-2012 figures and not per year. The PDF I linked also shows that. For 2013/14 the figure could be much higher than $9B (Apple has collected a ton o'money the past two years!) while the years previous to 2009 would be much lower since Apple saw nowhere near the revenues they do today.It should be clearer come June/July.
Most of the information came from Apple themselves. Here's the link to the EU initial statement regarding Apple and illegal state aid, which includes detail on how the $9B per year figure is arrived at. Start with page 6 if you are an impatient reader.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/253200/253200_1582634_87_2.pdf
What you meant to say is an analyst you read predicted Facebook might have as much as $25B in revenue by 2016... and if nothing changes... and apparently an analyst you trust.Of course you know as well as I do that things change, and the analyst you trust today is the one you vilify tomorrow. (BTW whatever happened to goldenboy Andy Zacky? ) Facebook is now under the same attack from the EU as Google is experiencing with 5 different countries doing active...
Is there a "criticism of Apple" page too? Why yes there is. Is it all valid?
Street view is pretty much it then? I thought you actually had something to share. Dump the name-calling too. It's a tactic oft-used by someone losing an argument so it doesn't reflect well on you.
I suspect that in a few years the idea that mobile as you understand it today was the be-all will sound quaint. We'll be past mobile before you know it IMO.
New Posts  All Forums: