or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple faces scrutiny again after paying no 2012 corporate taxes in UK
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple faces scrutiny again after paying no 2012 corporate taxes in UK - Page 2

post #41 of 94

"You reap what you sow."

 

We allowed money to drive our elections, so that only those with corporate support got elected, and they in turn created tax laws that favored their corporate sponsors. Only now are we starting to awaken to the result: tax avoidance by the multinationals, supra-taxation on the lower-income masses. The best course of correction is not to blame individual companies complying with the law, but rather to revise political finance law so that politicians can be freed of control by the corporate elite, and then levy fair, sensible, pro-economy tax policies.

post #42 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Perhaps they should have gone to Ireland instead? Meanwhile we have quite a few States in the US that offer special incentives to business. It seems to be a pretty normal state of affairs (no pun intended). Why should Ireland 'get in line' if it suits them not to and is legal? Isn't that called a free market?

The problem here is really that there are no easy and clean-cut answers to any of this. And making that a pro or contra tax discussion won't solve it either.

Ireland tried a lot to attract businesses since the 1990s, and they had to. A lot of companies got highly favourable deals (Apple, MS, Gateway etc.). But in the end, it did not really work for them. Irish banks are in trouble, there's a real estate bubble etc. As a result the richer countries in the EU are supporting Ireland, while Ireland is extracting taxes from those countries, and in the end nobody in the EU including Ireland benefits from it. Goods are expensive, personal and federal debts are rising and all that dead money from Apple and others hangs in low interest investments that do not even create business...

Blaming Ireland does not help, it is even hypocritical. Every single EU country tries to be a tax haven for somebody else, and all countries deliberately leave some loopholes to attract investments. And everybody cries foul and is miffed, when others do the same.

The EU has to decide how they want it to be. The current laws are pretty clear. You can register a business in any member state. Current VAT rates in the EU range from 2.1% to 27% (depending on the country and category of goods) and corporate taxes sit between 1.6% and 40% (depending on the country, sometimes even the city, and the size of a business). You can call that a "harmonised economic area" until the cows come home... but nobody should really act surprised when companies try to use this to their benefit. Calling out big names like Apple is stinking populism. The truth is that absolutely nobody wants to close any of these tax holes, but explaining that to a population that pays 35% in taxes and mandatory health care, nursing and pension funds on $1000 income... would require guts.
post #43 of 94
Of course the conservatives (and I'm not a liberal) are the same ones saying our debt is destroying us while they champion huge billion dollar companies paying zero taxes. And all while saying we need even more trillions for their military contractor buddies. Who do these morons think pays if billion dollar companies don't?
post #44 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
I personally will take every legal deduction, use every legal loophole, delay payment as long as possible, to avoid paying one red cent more than I absolutely have to. If I could find a way to pay no taxes at all I would jump on it. If that makes me a sociopath then so be it. I'm proud to be on your evil list.

 

This debate is the classic battle between individualism and the hive mentality. The individualists cross over the mountain top and find new land. Then the hive shows up with its "community" mindset and screws it all up.

That attitude will ensure we drive on no public highways, drink no public water, breathe no clean air, have no public sanitation, have no vaccine development against contagious disease, have an unreliable food supply and are subject to famine, have no quality and efficacy standards in foods & drugs, have no health inspections of restaurants, and that our children are kept uneducated and ingnorant.  And much, much more.

 

ps: It'll also ensure you have no defense department, police force, or national guard to prevent OTHER individualists from crossing the mountain top and seizing your backyard, as your predecessors seized it from the previous occupants.

post #45 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL View Post

 

I think you're mistaking "fully approved by the government" with "complex accounting practices that the government is actively trying to shut down".

 

And just because it's legal doesn't mean that it's right. Paying no tax is sociopathic behaviour. If everyone did the same, society would collapse. And the more tax that the world's most profitable company doesn't pay, the more the rest of us pay.

 

Google, Amazon, Starbucks et al are no better.


I didn't mistake anything at all.  If the government is trying to shut that down, good.  Until then, it is not illegal.  What is so difficult about that?  Who cares if it's an individual or corporation.  Anything one can do to LEGALLY reduce their taxes and pay only what they are absolutely required to pay is called prudent planning.

And don't even get on your soapbox and preach taxes and morality.  Reducing one's tax liability (legally) is the right thing to do.  Any argument to the contrary and you lost the debate.  Whether it is right to pay minimal taxes or a lower-rate than joe-consumer certainly is irrelevant.  Change the damn tax laws that were passed by the politicians.  Don't hammer companies or people for not doing anything legally wrong.

If society collapses because everyone is doing it, sounds like its stupidity on the government's side for not getting their act together.  Will never happen, and it's ludicrous to play the "what if" scenario.

post #46 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

Where does it say UK investigators went into Apple HQ?  I think you might have this confused with the French raid article.  This info is all from Apple's filings.

And no, its not picking on Apple.  Far from it.  It seems all countries are having the same issue at the moment, the companies are however complying with the law.  All I'm saying is that there needs to be a global agreement on this otherwise the richest companies in the world will continue to pay almost zero tax on their profits (which, again, I'm no criticising them for as it is their duty to maximise their value).

My bad, yes I was mixing the two incidents up as i was replying to both.
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #47 of 94

Thank goodness someone has a grip on reality in this discussion. Describing taxation as theft is simply moronic, misappropriation of collected tax revenue by the government on the other hand could be described as theft.

 

Apple present themselves as a morally forthright company and as such should be paying corporation tax in each and every country in which they operate at a profit. Every business has to pay tax on it's profits and being a multinational corporation does not excuse you from doing so. Why should small to medium sized business owners and operators have to pay a larger proportion of taxes to offset what these large multinationals do not. Under the current tax system what these large companies do  (i realise Apple are not a lone in this practise but this is an apple centric website) may not be legally wrong but it is most certainly morally wrong. Governments exist to serve and protect the interests of it's nations citizens and this is becoming increasingly hard to do when cash rich corporations wield such huge amounts of influence and power. Big business already dictates  the formation ofgovernmental policy in a multitude of key areas here in the UK including, health, defence and educational curriculum, if you can't see the danger in this then you are either blind, apathetic, incredibly stupid or a minion of a corporate paymaster.

post #48 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by irrational-gas View Post

Apple present themselves as a morally forthright company and as such should be paying corporation tax in each and every country in which they operate at a profit.

Nope. They should be paying tax in every country in which they legally must pay tax.
Quote:
Every business has to pay tax on it's profits and being a multinational corporation does not excuse you from doing so.

That's not the argument. Try again.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #49 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


Why preemptively attack people who have different political beliefs? Don't you care how this reflects on your character ?


People complaining that Apple should pay more taxes because it's "the right thing to do", above and beyond their legal obligation are simply whining, or trolling.  Pick one.  That's the only two choices.

Don't like the tax system, change it.  Until then, Apple (and me) will continue to search for every possible, legal method to reduce our tax burden.  Period.

post #50 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

People complaining that Apple should pay more taxes because it's "the right thing to do", above and beyond their legal obligation are simply whining, or trolling.  Pick one.  That's the only two choices.
 

And, as has been stated frequently elsewhere, a company paying taxes where none are legally required is IMMORAL for having stolen that money from shareholders and given it to a political government elsewhere.

post #51 of 94
I own a business park. Several years ago (2007-2008), we put a lot of money into one segment that - frankly - had a disastrous financial outcome. The losses from our business carried back (via our LLC) into our personal taxes, and when the dust all settled, we owed Uncle Sam zero taxes for that year.

I mention this because it is always easy to get off a cheap shot about so-and-so not paying any taxes. The way the tax code now stands - and I'm assuming it got there pretty much via both political parties - is that it's not just collecting revenue but providing incentives (and disincentives). Buy a Nissan Leaf and get a big tax credit. Take a withdrawal from your IRA before turning 59 1/2 and pay a 10% penalty. Donate old clothing to a charity and get a deduction. Replace an old fridge with a new one in your restaurant, and expense (depreciate) it all in one year using Section 179. And so on, and so forth.

If people don't like the fact that Apple didn't pay any UK income tax - and accountants / auditors confirm that they followed all tax laws and didn't do anything illegal - then they need to take it up with the people who write the laws, not with those who follow them.
post #52 of 94
1930's protectionism is about to happen. The best Apple can do is make a very fast buck whilst trade channels are still open.
post #53 of 94
"The California based company's European operations pulled in $36.3 billion in net sales to European customers in 2012. Of that, Apple reported that $15 billion was operating profit."

By any standards, that is an obscene profit margin.
post #54 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

The issue is the Irish tax setup.  The Irish government says corporations incorporated in Ireland pay tax on where they're managed and controlled from (for Apple, this is the U.S.) but US rules (and most other major economies) say the tax should be paid where the company is incorporated.  If Ireland got in line with everyone else, a lot of this would go away.

No, this is a European rule, not Irish. Infact you will find there are a number of English companies that are incorporated in England, and pay no foreign taxes, B Sky B is one, they operate in Ireland and pay no corporate taxes
post #55 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Blame Ireland, not Apple.

Why? Not Ireland's issue
post #56 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

No, this is a European rule, not Irish. Infact you will find there are a number of English companies that are incorporated in England, and pay no foreign taxes, B Sky B is one, they operate in Ireland and pay no corporate taxes
You are correct in that UK companies use Ireland's low tax rate to minimise their tax bill.  However, Apple go one step further, as detailed here.  Basically Apple have a subsidiary that all of their non-US sales are routed through that is incorporated in Ireland, managed and controlled in the U.S. but not tax resident in any country.

Again, nothing wrong with that legally and I would expect Apple to do that as the rules currently allow it.  If governments aren't happy with it they need to get together and come up with a global agreement.
Edited by reefoid - 7/1/13 at 3:42pm
post #57 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by aBeliefSystem View Post

1930's protectionism is about to happen. The best Apple can do is make a very fast buck whilst trade channels are still open.

There's always a funny one in the crowd.

post #58 of 94

I think you'll find that is exactly the argument and I direct your attention to the opening dialogue of the article:

 

" Apple may once again come under the spotlight over taxes, as the iPhone maker's latest filings reveal that it paid no corporate taxes in the United Kingdom last year." 

 

I am aware that it's not Apple's fault there is a tax loophole but the fact remains they and other large multinationals are guilty of exploiting it and there is a world of difference between an individual getting creative with his/her tax return and paying no tax at all which is essentially what Apple are doing here in the UK. Furthermore by not paying corporation taxes on their profit margins it means that these multinationals are effectively preying on our economy, they generate no tax income and very little of their profits are reinvested in the UK, and certainly not anywhere near enough to provide adequate compensation for the tax relief they receive.

 

post #59 of 94
This may not be illegal but it is unethical. The UK has a welfare system and a fantastic National Health Service (all medical care free at source). As a British national I would prefer Apple to respect our welfare system and the cost of running it. You may not have such luxuries in the USA but the majority of our country is proud of our ability to help everyone regardless of wealth or income.
post #60 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewb123 View Post

"The California based company's European operations pulled in $36.3 billion in net sales to European customers in 2012. Of that, Apple reported that $15 billion was operating profit."

By any standards, that is an obscene profit margin.

Nothing obscene about it. The margins are supported by what consumers are willing to pay.

Starbucks, dunkin donuts have margins 60% - 75% on coffee/tea.
post #61 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red View Post

This may not be illegal but it is unethical. The UK has a welfare system and a fantastic National Health Service (all medical care free at source). As a British national I would prefer Apple to respect our welfare system and the cost of running it. You may not have such luxuries in the USA but the majority of our country is proud of our ability to help everyone regardless of wealth or income.

I fully agree with your support for welfare, affordable health services etc. I am more than willing to pay for that myself, too.

Just, seriously, "unethical" does not really work in case of a publicly listed company. They have to create as much income for their shareholders as possible. Paying legally avoidable taxes would require the consent of the owners. Without being cynical about it: this is not going to happen. Furthermore, Apple is not existing in a vacuum. Virtually all of its competitors do the same, some Eastern competitors even enjoy full tax breaks and government subsidies and protectionism in their home countries on top of that. Being "ethical" in such an environment is the first step to being dead.

We can twist that any way we want, without governments setting sustainable rules which then apply equally to all companies, there is no way out of this. And, actually, this would be very simple... All corporate profits get taxed at the point of sale, because this is where the added value is created. No exceptions. Any cost for managing subsidiaries, in Ireland or elsewhere, is tax-deductible at actual documented cost (salaries, rents, etc.). Done. But, as some Austrian comedian once said, getting people in any democracy to vote for something that would benefit everybody, seems impossible.
post #62 of 94
If they broke the law, then pay the penalty.

If they "face scrutiny" it's a non-story.
post #63 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Starbucks, dunkin donuts have margins 60% - 75% on coffee/tea.

And even that is Namby-Pamby (bits and pieces)... Many types of medicine carry a 1000% margin in Western Europe (and up to 5000% in the US). Even some as common as Aspirin, relying on a patent from 1899 and, in its natural form (bark of the willow), used by the ancient Greeks long before the year zero. I guess they are still covering R&D cost here. Try that for "obscene" 1biggrin.gif
post #64 of 94
They
Quote:
Originally Posted by Applehawk View Post

So sick of these articles.  If Apple did something illegal than fine, lets see it.  If they are just following the tax laws which are all screwed up anyway than lets praise them instead since they are looking out for the interests of their shareholders.  They are doing nothing different than most other companies out there.

They aren't doing anything different, they are just better at it than many other companies, and their product mix and lack of an old-growth of international branches allows them to structure the company more effectively to take advantage of various tax codes.
But those who don't like the laws should simply change them not whine at those who manage to make the best of them.
It's envy, greed and blame shifting making loud noises, nothing else.

There isn't just anything illegal about what Apple does (until proven otherwise) but not even anything unethical.
Taxes are not an issue of morality, the are a government created obligation that you fulfill by following the law; there is no such thing as "voluntary" or "charitable" tax payments.
If Apple wants to be charitable with some of the money saved in taxes, they can find their own causes or use it to build solar power plants instead of enabling the government to waste taxes on oil company and "clean coal" subsidies.
Edited by rcfa - 7/1/13 at 7:00pm
post #65 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi View Post

This is not accurate.

When you buy an Apple product in the UK, you pay a VAT of %20. This is a huge amount of money on a MacBook Pro!

The government collects its taxes at sales time. The UK government has made a lot of money from Apple.

Further, since Apple made use of tax writeoffs for employee compensation, and the government taxes the employees income, the government collected taxes there.

For Apple to have paid taxes on that, and then the employee pays taxes on that would be double dipping-- something governments really like to do.

Taxes are theft. This is indisputable objective reality.

I look forward to the AppleInsider article "Apple, once again, doesn't have $4B in product stolen by thieves!"
 

 

The VAT is paid by consumers not by Apple.  The UK gov't is making money from consumers and Apple employees, not from Apple as a corporation.

The U.S. is the same. Some states levy sales taxes or use taxes (from consumers), and IRS collects income taxes both from Apple employees and Apple corporation.  

 

Apple is not paying any corporate tax in UK.  Why this is news?  As long as the tax avoidance strategy is legal, I have no problem with it.

post #66 of 94
Apple deserves the scrutiny -- and there's a lot of commentary on Apple and other corporate tax avoidance at www.applesfiction.com
post #67 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by applesfiction View Post

Apple deserves the scrutiny -- and there's a lot of commentary on Apple and other corporate tax avoidance at www.applesfiction.com

Yeah, and especially the UK government is a good candidate to raise this issue. ROFL.

(Before anybody gets me wrong, I have nothing at all against our UK friends, I am actually marrying one next month - this is only about some facts.)

The UK government has steadily worked on establishing the lowest corporate tax rate in any major European country (20% is far below the US, France and Germany) in order to make businesses move to the UK. (I am not saying this is unethical or bad, I am just pointing it out.) It has (multiple times) lowered the security requirements for even founding a company, resulting in multiple fishy businesses (from all over Europe) settling in the UK. There are several big UK businesses, including banks, consultancies and insurances, that channel billions of Pounds through Ireland, the, aptly named, Channel Islands or other tax havens (from the Bermudas to Labuan, Malaysia). I am yet waiting for them to receive any scrutiny, or being called out by the UK government. Why use Apple for a publicity stunt, when they have so many black sheep in their own flock to choose from?

Let me be clear. If that is what the people in the UK want, so be it. But people should fulfil their number one duty in a democracy: watch those who govern you. One data point? While the ratio of corporate and individual taxes collected is close to 1:1 in France and Germany, it is between 1:3 and 1:4 in the UK. So, when they announce the next cut of benefits, or the next raise of prices... don't look at Apple. They are just an easy target here.
post #68 of 94

The real problem here is the assumption that Apple owes money to the UK. Or the US even. It can't be both. 

 

I think the US has the better claim, but the UK has none. Basically they are - as usual with these kind of idiocies - mistaking sales in a country with Corporation tax owed in that country. Its a bit like Ireland complaining that ARM doesn't pay corporation tax in Ireland.

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #69 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Blame Ireland, not Apple.

Ireland has nothing to do with this story, it is Apple "avoiding" tax in it's retail stores in the UK. Otherwise the UK has not claim on Ireland's tax base.

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #70 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by John F. View Post

What a weird phrasing. Apple UK is only one of Apple's subsidiaries; every European country has its own. This phrasing makes it seem like the billions of operation income across Europe comes to the UK and then flow to Ireland. This is not the case. Each subsidiary gets the money made in each individual country, and has to adhere to each country's tax system. Then the money flows to the Ireland Holding; so to keep the money in one place. Apple pays taxes where the law stipulates and does nothing illegal.

 

However, Apple does have real sales operations for its online store based in Cork Ireland. All online sales across Europe operate from Ireland. So if you buy your Mac online, you officially buy something in Ireland. Same for iTunes and App store, I believe. And Apple adheres to Ireland tax laws for all these sales.

 

Actually if a UK Apple store does sell an iPhone it makes the same profit as any other retailer on the iPhone - the difference between the wholesale and retail price - the Cork Office books the wholesale price. Apple UK which runs retail books the difference. 

 

The idea that Apple Ireland is stealing from the UK is nonsense, thats normal practice. Its like saying that BMW doesn't pay corporation tax in the UK.

 

Of course there is an issue that Apple doesn't pay tax in Ireland. Again, that is misunderstood. Apple does use Ireland's laws to avoid tax due in Ireland (actually it uses a mixture of Ireland and US laws). The entire subcommittee investigating this didn't understand the simplest point about this - if Ireland reforms it's laws the money will go to Ireland not the US. In fact the US can only ever hope to get money back from Apple if it doesn't pay it in Ireland because of double taxation laws. Apple owes more money on repatriation to the US precisely because it has avoided the Irish tax system.

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #71 of 94

When thorougly reading the article you can read that Apple made 15billion operating profits in the EU and 10% of revenues are attributed ot the UK.

That would mean that Apple made ~1,5billion operating profits in the UK, but they are reporting 102million.

Do you really think that selling goods in the UK is so much more expensive than in the rest of the EU?

The question that has to be answered is why has Apple so mediocre profits in the UK!

 

Is Apple Ireland selling the goods to Apple UK more expensive than to others to minimize the taxable profit in the UK?

Would any other reseller sell Apple goods at an ebit of ~2,8%?

I don't know, but these are questions that come to my mind.

 

You are right that it looks like Apple is singled out and that laws - at least within the EU should be homogenized to reduce the incentive to manipulate numbers.

post #72 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I hope the UK powers that be are checking into Google, Microsoft, etc. etc. etc .... 1oyvey.gif


Actually they have all been investigated. Starbucks was in the news last year when they were investigated over transfer pricing. Apparently they've been operating at a loss for years there due to the cost of coffee beans paid to their subsidiary1rolleyes.gif. You read more about Apple because it's an Apple centric site. The articles about competitors are mostly filler. I wouldn't assume this doesn't happen to others without first researching it.

post #73 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by copeland View Post

When thorougly reading the article you can read that Apple made 15billion operating profits in the EU and 10% of revenues are attributed ot the UK.

That would mean that Apple made ~1,5billion operating profits in the UK, but they are reporting 102million.

Do you really think that selling goods in the UK is so much more expensive than in the rest of the EU?

The question that has to be answered is why has Apple so mediocre profits in the UK!

 

Is Apple Ireland selling the goods to Apple UK more expensive than to others to minimize the taxable profit in the UK?

Would any other reseller sell Apple goods at an ebit of ~2,8%?

I don't know, but these are questions that come to my mind.

 

You are right that it looks like Apple is singled out and that laws - at least within the EU should be homogenized to reduce the incentive to manipulate numbers.

 

Apple Europe may make 1.5B operating profits but it does so by selling from Cork. The only corporation profits due in the UK are the profits of Apple UK, which is effectively a retail division. Apple UK, like Currys or other electrical retailers, buys goods from the manufacturer - Apple Ireland - and makes a profit on sales. Currys would do exactly the same.

 

 This isn't tax avoidance, its the way tax works. Its the same for BMW, were it to  make say 1.5B in Europe it would book it to Munich; however if BMW owned it's own showrooms it would create a subsidiary in the UK to run the local retail division. The profit would be the difference between the retail and the wholesale price of the cars sold in those showrooms. 

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #74 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

 

Apple Europe may make 1.5B operating profits but it does so by selling from Cork. The only corporation profits due in the UK are the profits of Apple UK, which is effectively a retail division. Apple UK, like Currys or other electrical retailers, buys goods from the manufacturer - Apple Ireland - and makes a profit on sales. Currys would do exactly the same.

 

 This isn't tax avoidance, its the way tax works. Its the same for BMW, were it to  make say 1.5B in Europe it would book it to Munich; however if BMW owned it's own showrooms it would create a subsidiary in the UK to run the local retail division. The profit would be the difference between the retail and the wholesale price of the cars sold in those showrooms. 

You're correct, except Apple UK makes almost zero profit on their sales as the price they pay the Irish subsidiary for hardware is way above wholesale.  That's the whole point, Apple Ireland buys direct from China and they then sell to each country at almost full retail price to reduce their tax bill in those countries to almost zero.  And because of the Irish setup, they pay almost zero tax there as well.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, or criticising Apple, but just pointing out how they are using the tax systems to pay as little as possible, which they are entitled to do.

post #75 of 94

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb123 View Post

"The California based company's European operations pulled in $36.3 billion in net sales to European customers in 2012. Of that, Apple reported that $15 billion was operating profit."

By any standards, that is an obscene profit margin.

 

British Politicans such as Boris Johnson suggest that if we reduce taxes we will actually collect more.  

 

Heading to a world without taxes means education, health, roads and even water supply could be a thing of the past for some. 

post #76 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

You're correct, except Apple UK makes almost zero profit on their sales as the price they pay the Irish subsidiary for hardware is way above wholesale.  That's the whole point, Apple Ireland buys direct from China and they then sell to each country at almost full retail price to reduce their tax bill in those countries to almost zero.  And because of the Irish setup, they pay almost zero tax there as well.

 

I'm not saying you're wrong, or criticising Apple, but just pointing out how they are using the tax systems to pay as little as possible, which they are entitled to do.

Have you a source for that boldified bit. 

 

If so that is a bit of avoidance for sure.

I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #77 of 94

Quote:

Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

"The real problem here is the assumption that Apple owes money to the UK. Or the US even. It can't be both. 

 

I think the US has the better claim, but the UK has none. Basically they are - as usual with these kind of idiocies - mistaking sales in a country with Corporation tax owed in that country. Its a bit like Ireland complaining that ARM doesn't pay corporation tax in Ireland."

 

Many people are already boycotting Starbucks who's scheming also avoids tax.

The fact that you now have people in the US claiming ownership on British income says Apple is next.

 

Also, if Obama acceded to Apple's repatriation request, tit for tat protectionism will destroy many a world economy. Like Starbucks, I'm wondering if many goods should be allowed in Britain. 


Edited by aBeliefSystem - 7/2/13 at 7:52am
post #78 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post


Actually they have all been investigated. Starbucks was in the news last year when they were investigated over transfer pricing. Apparently they've been operating at a loss for years there due to the cost of coffee beans paid to their subsidiary:rolleyes: . You read more about Apple because it's an Apple centric site. The articles about competitors are mostly filler. I wouldn't assume this doesn't happen to others without first researching it.

I was simply trying to point out the obvious i.e. everyone does it, it is within the law and Apple should not be singled out. If governments don't like it then they should amend their laws.

However, I think you are doing the reverse, i.e. seeing it as an Apple Centric issue is totally belying the reality. Just explain AAPL rationally! Non Apple centric sites have 'Apple's woes' as headlines everywhere you look. Apple is the biggest target for both this sort investigations and journalists and for the same reason. Some bland English politician can stand up and shout about evil Apple and get attention in the British press he wouldn't otherwise ever get and a journalist can write about evil Apple and get hits on ads that covering coffee prices wouldn't attract. Meanwhile Apple keep on making the best products, are virtually alone in innovation in their chosen market and make almost all the profits in those markets.

Of course I am aware of the other investigations but no company in the last year or two has taken more of a beating. /rant over 1biggrin.gif
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
Use duckduckgo.com with Safari, not Google Search
Been using Apples since 1978 and Macs since 1984
Long on AAPL so biased. Strong advocate for separation of technology and politics on AI.
Reply
post #79 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Have you a source for that boldified bit. 

 

If so that is a bit of avoidance for sure.

Can't find the article now, I think I've got it bookmarked at home so will post it up later.

 

In fairness to you, the bit you bolded may be incorrect (near full retail price - me bad!!) but it is definitely a heavily inflated price that is meant to reduce their tax bill in each country.  Its standard practice for multi-nationals.  As was mentioned above, Starbucks do the exact same thing.  Their Swiss subsidiary buys the contracts for coffee beans from the growers and then sell them to each country at vastly inflated prices, hence Starbuck's zero tax bills in several countries.

post #80 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post


I didn't mistake anything at all.  If the government is trying to shut that down, good.  Until then, it is not illegal.  What is so difficult about that?  Who cares if it's an individual or corporation.  Anything one can do to LEGALLY reduce their taxes and pay only what they are absolutely required to pay is called prudent planning.
...
If society collapses because everyone is doing it, sounds like its stupidity on the government's side for not getting their act together.

 

You are right, what Apple and all the other offshorers are doing isn't necessarily illegal.  Show me anywhere in the article where it says that or that charges have been filed?

 

If your closing argument is:  "If society collapses because everyone is doing it, sounds like its stupidity on the government's side for not getting their act together." 

Isn't that saying you agree that the government should get their 'act together' to avoid 'society collapsing?'   Wouldn't the first rational step be to scrutinize the problem, get an understanding of it, and only after that actually try to craft a law that doesn't have all the Swiss cheese holes in it?

 

Appleinsider tries to make this sound like an 'Apple' issue to tug on the emotions and ire of Apple fans, but companies like GE, Exxon, Google, and Microsoft have been under scrutiny for a long time.   Apple just more recently made it into the 'club' of being a big enough factor to scrutinize- and they are one of the biggest beneficiaries of offshoring.  Microsoft was actually pulled before the same committee investigating Apple a year earlier, and more companies are slated to follow.  Still the perception here exists that 'Apple is being persecuted.'

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple faces scrutiny again after paying no 2012 corporate taxes in UK