They're already are. The Corporate States of America is run by the Corporates through Lobbyists. People don't run for office because they want to help the community, they ran for office because of the money that pours in from lobbyists.
Being a politician is a good gig. But do some research and you'll find out how many congressmen actually took a pay cut by entering politics. Quite a few are millionaires or otherwise quite well off. If money alone is the appeal, politics is not the most lucrative place to make it. That's not saying corruption doesn't exist. But it's saying only idiotic conspiracy theorists would believe that's the primary foundation of government.
In addition, and to relate this more to Apple's products, government is responsible for the internet through DARPA, and the web, through CERN. Government regulates the cellular spectrum so that Apple can sell just a small number of variants that will work almost worldwide. Government funding of Bletchley Park led to the computing breakthroughs that made the modern computing industry possible.
Government did not contribute a damn thing? Fantasy.
Correct however at the same time they should come down from their high horses and realise that there is a world beyond the US. As the US is not Apple's biggest market anymore, more money is earned internationally and this is nothing but logical.
Apple pays taxes where the money was earned and this is also true for using local infrastructures.
Yeah, the downfall of one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen is attributable to a single thing as simple as taxation
History runs to a different beat for anti-tax libertarians, doesn't it?
Well, to be fair, I haven't studied the history of the Roman Republic and Empire in enough detail myself to make a particular claim here. But...that said...it's not an unreasonable claim in general. The point here is that taxation (forcibly taking people's property) becomes the fuel, the oxygen to the fire if you will, to a great many other evils. This is happening in the US as we speak. The "empire-ization" of the US has grown and been fueled by taxation (and borrowing). So while, surely there are other factors at play...it, when tracing back to root causes, certainly a claim worthy of consideration,
If the US government wants to give incentives to companies to actually bring more foreign money into the US, don't double tax it at 35%, this way no sane person rightfully wants to bring any of it into the country.
Double tax implies Apple have paid significant tax already. They haven't. Their tax rate through their Irish subsidiaries is less than 1%.
Incorporating a company gives certain government-granted privileges, not least of which is limited liability, a massive, massive boon for shareholders.
Now this is a legitimate argument. In fact, I'd argue that in a true free-market, the only entity like this that could exist would be the corporation's ancestor: the joint-stock company (early versions of which did not have limited liability...which, as you note, is a government granted benefit.)
Except the government is responsible for building the roads that deliver Apple's products, the government also set up the system that educated many of the people who work at Apple. The government also make the laws that mean Apple can sue when Samsung infringes their IP. Apple move that IP to other countries & rent it back to decrease their tax bill, is that a reasonable way to do buisness, move assets to places tax is lower despite creating the IP in the US?
The same government pays for the courts & prison that stop people walking into Apple stores, factories & taking the products without paying.
Can we stop pretending that a) Apple has not paid taxes that pay for these things also, and, more importantly, b) that these thing can only be provided via taxation?
Except the government is responsible for building the roads that deliver Apple's products, the government also set up the system that educated many of the people who work at Apple. The government also make the laws that mean Apple can sue when Samsung infringes their IP. Apple move that IP to other countries & rent it back to decrease their tax bill, is that a reasonable way to do buisness, move assets to places tax is lower despite creating the IP in the US?
In addition, and to relate this more to Apple's products, government is responsible for the internet through DARPA, and the web, through CERN. Government regulates the cellular spectrum so that Apple can sell just a small number of variants that will work almost worldwide. Government funding of Bletchley Park led to the computing breakthroughs that made the modern computing industry possible.
Government did not contribute a damn thing? Fantasy.
Geeze, seriously Crowly?
"The Budda" Won't have any idea what you are even talking about. You are just as well to be making your points to a road apple.
Well, to be fair, I haven't studied the history of the Roman Republic and Empire in enough detail myself to make a particular claim here. But...that said...it's not an unreasonable claim in general. The point here is that taxation (forcibly taking people's property) becomes the fuel, the oxygen to the fire if you will, to a great many other evils. This is happening in the US as we speak. The "empire-ization" of the US has grown and been fueled by taxation (and borrowing). So while, surely there are other factors at play...it, when tracing back to root causes, certainly a claim worthy of consideration,
I don't think it's reasonable to say things like "it's not an unreasonable claim" when you self-confess to not having studied the history. It's unreasonable to claim anything when you don't have any significant facts to draw upon.
Yeah, the downfall of one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen is attributable to a single thing as simple as taxation
History runs to a different beat for anti-tax libertarians, doesn't it?
I never said I was anti-tax. I think if you look at my other posts you will see that I believe in taxation, I just believe in a much simpler solution that is applied more even handedly by using a tax code that is not so full of exceptions for this and that. Those that claim that the govt. adds no value clearly don't understand and are living in a dream world. Those that think corporations should pay more than what is due under the law are also living in a dream world. To be competitive you have to try to play on a level playing field -- the corporation also has a fiduciary responsibility to make a reasonable profit for the stock holders which I would argue includes paying no more or less than what is required by law. Therein lies the problem -- the tax laws should not be written so obtusely that there is so much room for "interpretation".
BTW: @Crowley: I don't pretend to think that the Roman empire was toppled solely by excessive taxation but if you don't think it played a big role in it, and many other revolutions (including the US), then you to are dreaming.
Double tax implies Apple have paid significant tax already. They haven't. Their tax rate through their Irish subsidiaries is less than 1%.
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
I don't think it's reasonable to say things like "it's not an unreasonable claim" when you self-confess to not having studied the history. It's unreasonable to claim anything when you don't have any significant facts to draw upon.
Except I didn't claim I don't have significant facts to draw upon. Perhaps not about the Roman empire specifically, yes. But there are plenty of examples besides them. Plus, you know, logical deduction.
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
This is nothing more than the greedy US government needing money that non-government agencies, or even private citizens, have. The government has no right to Apple or Google's funds that they have EARNED. The government did not contribute a damn thing to their research, development, investments, planning, production or marketing and sales of products. It is an insult that the government with the biggest debt in the history of mankind on this planet, and still spending like there's no tomorrow, has the audacity to question the financial practices of the most valuable company in the world and tell them what they are doing wrong. They should be at the feet of Apple, Exxon, Google, Johnson & Johnson, Coca Cola, Walmart and other successful businesses begging them for advice, and listening to it. Pathetic.
First, given the inclination, the government can do anything it wants. So deal with that. It tramples on the little people's so called rights everyday. Second, the US spends billions of dollars of US tax payer money funding oversea operations that primarily benefit companies like Apple. For instance, the US's trade representative is currently strong arming countries like Canada to pass draconian copy right related legislation. That costs money, doesn't benefit regular US citizens, and helps companies like Apple. Third, the government doesn't contribute directly to me doing my job in the US everyday, but yet I get taxed.
Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. We want good roads, good schools, and public safety net programs. That has always been the backbone of the US economy.
Correct however at the same time they should come down from their high horses and realise that there is a world beyond the US. As the US is not Apple's biggest market anymore, more money is earned internationally and this is nothing but logical.
Apple pays taxes where the money was earned and this is also true for using local infrastructures.
True enough, though the numbers show that Apple's international effective corporate tax rate is a joke. A reasonable adjustment would be to allow corporations to pay a top-up tax to the IRS when repatriating, rather than the full 35%, with no allowance for local taxes paid.
I'm rather surprised that isn't the way it is already.
Question, because I don't know the ins-and-outs of the federal system, does the Federal corporation tax apply after State corporation taxes have been taken, or before or in parallel?
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
Seriously? That's a reasonable reaction? Can you try not shouting through your tears of rage?
Before people in Congress start throwing rocks at Apple, maybe they should look into Louis Vuitton? Any bags that are left over at the end of the year are burned up, and they take the tax credit. For one thing, they are so way overpriced it is ridiculous, and then they get a tax break because most people aren't stupid enough to pay $2800 for a bag that will be out of style in two years. This just makes me sick that the tax laws in this country allow this to happen. I wish somebody would look into it and fix it. "F" them all.
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
In genuine answer to your bluster. Double taxation when used in the context of moral hazard implies that there's a danger that companies will be unduly punished. For them to be unduly punished they must have paid a significant amount of tax in the first place, for any "double" taxation to pose any real impediment.
Of course I understand the technical logical meaning of double taxation. But let's take a look at the real world here. Double taxation clearly isn't something that threatens to wipe out Apple's profits with two high waves of government profit seizure. How can I say that? Because their effective tax rate in Ireland is less than 1%.
Seriously? That's a reasonable reaction? Can you try not shouting through your tears of rage?
This is, beyond anyone's doubt, trolling. You have, by your own hand, lost the 'argument' you claimed to have.
What are you really angry about?
How blind and obtuse you're pretending to be. Why someone would willingly make themselves look stupid is beyond me, but I guess that comes with whatever territory you're standing on.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleh1234
They're already are. The Corporate States of America is run by the Corporates through Lobbyists. People don't run for office because they want to help the community, they ran for office because of the money that pours in from lobbyists.
Being a politician is a good gig. But do some research and you'll find out how many congressmen actually took a pay cut by entering politics. Quite a few are millionaires or otherwise quite well off. If money alone is the appeal, politics is not the most lucrative place to make it. That's not saying corruption doesn't exist. But it's saying only idiotic conspiracy theorists would believe that's the primary foundation of government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
In addition, and to relate this more to Apple's products, government is responsible for the internet through DARPA, and the web, through CERN. Government regulates the cellular spectrum so that Apple can sell just a small number of variants that will work almost worldwide. Government funding of Bletchley Park led to the computing breakthroughs that made the modern computing industry possible.
Government did not contribute a damn thing? Fantasy.
Correct however at the same time they should come down from their high horses and realise that there is a world beyond the US. As the US is not Apple's biggest market anymore, more money is earned internationally and this is nothing but logical.
Apple pays taxes where the money was earned and this is also true for using local infrastructures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
Yeah, the downfall of one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen is attributable to a single thing as simple as taxation
History runs to a different beat for anti-tax libertarians, doesn't it?
Well, to be fair, I haven't studied the history of the Roman Republic and Empire in enough detail myself to make a particular claim here. But...that said...it's not an unreasonable claim in general. The point here is that taxation (forcibly taking people's property) becomes the fuel, the oxygen to the fire if you will, to a great many other evils. This is happening in the US as we speak. The "empire-ization" of the US has grown and been fueled by taxation (and borrowing). So while, surely there are other factors at play...it, when tracing back to root causes, certainly a claim worthy of consideration,
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynic
If the US government wants to give incentives to companies to actually bring more foreign money into the US, don't double tax it at 35%, this way no sane person rightfully wants to bring any of it into the country.
Double tax implies Apple have paid significant tax already. They haven't. Their tax rate through their Irish subsidiaries is less than 1%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
Incorporating a company gives certain government-granted privileges, not least of which is limited liability, a massive, massive boon for shareholders.
Now this is a legitimate argument. In fact, I'd argue that in a true free-market, the only entity like this that could exist would be the corporation's ancestor: the joint-stock company (early versions of which did not have limited liability...which, as you note, is a government granted benefit.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Droid
Except the government is responsible for building the roads that deliver Apple's products, the government also set up the system that educated many of the people who work at Apple. The government also make the laws that mean Apple can sue when Samsung infringes their IP. Apple move that IP to other countries & rent it back to decrease their tax bill, is that a reasonable way to do buisness, move assets to places tax is lower despite creating the IP in the US?
The same government pays for the courts & prison that stop people walking into Apple stores, factories & taking the products without paying.
Can we stop pretending that a) Apple has not paid taxes that pay for these things also, and, more importantly, b) that these thing can only be provided via taxation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
Quote:
Originally Posted by Droid
Except the government is responsible for building the roads that deliver Apple's products, the government also set up the system that educated many of the people who work at Apple. The government also make the laws that mean Apple can sue when Samsung infringes their IP. Apple move that IP to other countries & rent it back to decrease their tax bill, is that a reasonable way to do buisness, move assets to places tax is lower despite creating the IP in the US?
In addition, and to relate this more to Apple's products, government is responsible for the internet through DARPA, and the web, through CERN. Government regulates the cellular spectrum so that Apple can sell just a small number of variants that will work almost worldwide. Government funding of Bletchley Park led to the computing breakthroughs that made the modern computing industry possible.
Government did not contribute a damn thing? Fantasy.
Geeze, seriously Crowly?
"The Budda" Won't have any idea what you are even talking about. You are just as well to be making your points to a road apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970
Well, to be fair, I haven't studied the history of the Roman Republic and Empire in enough detail myself to make a particular claim here. But...that said...it's not an unreasonable claim in general. The point here is that taxation (forcibly taking people's property) becomes the fuel, the oxygen to the fire if you will, to a great many other evils. This is happening in the US as we speak. The "empire-ization" of the US has grown and been fueled by taxation (and borrowing). So while, surely there are other factors at play...it, when tracing back to root causes, certainly a claim worthy of consideration,
I don't think it's reasonable to say things like "it's not an unreasonable claim" when you self-confess to not having studied the history. It's unreasonable to claim anything when you don't have any significant facts to draw upon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
Yeah, the downfall of one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen is attributable to a single thing as simple as taxation
History runs to a different beat for anti-tax libertarians, doesn't it?
I never said I was anti-tax. I think if you look at my other posts you will see that I believe in taxation, I just believe in a much simpler solution that is applied more even handedly by using a tax code that is not so full of exceptions for this and that. Those that claim that the govt. adds no value clearly don't understand and are living in a dream world. Those that think corporations should pay more than what is due under the law are also living in a dream world. To be competitive you have to try to play on a level playing field -- the corporation also has a fiduciary responsibility to make a reasonable profit for the stock holders which I would argue includes paying no more or less than what is required by law. Therein lies the problem -- the tax laws should not be written so obtusely that there is so much room for "interpretation".
BTW: @Crowley: I don't pretend to think that the Roman empire was toppled solely by excessive taxation but if you don't think it played a big role in it, and many other revolutions (including the US), then you to are dreaming.
Originally Posted by Crowley
Double tax implies Apple have paid significant tax already. They haven't. Their tax rate through their Irish subsidiaries is less than 1%.
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
I don't think it's reasonable to say things like "it's not an unreasonable claim" when you self-confess to not having studied the history. It's unreasonable to claim anything when you don't have any significant facts to draw upon.
Except I didn't claim I don't have significant facts to draw upon. Perhaps not about the Roman empire specifically, yes. But there are plenty of examples besides them. Plus, you know, logical deduction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
+1
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebudda
This is nothing more than the greedy US government needing money that non-government agencies, or even private citizens, have. The government has no right to Apple or Google's funds that they have EARNED. The government did not contribute a damn thing to their research, development, investments, planning, production or marketing and sales of products. It is an insult that the government with the biggest debt in the history of mankind on this planet, and still spending like there's no tomorrow, has the audacity to question the financial practices of the most valuable company in the world and tell them what they are doing wrong. They should be at the feet of Apple, Exxon, Google, Johnson & Johnson, Coca Cola, Walmart and other successful businesses begging them for advice, and listening to it. Pathetic.
First, given the inclination, the government can do anything it wants. So deal with that. It tramples on the little people's so called rights everyday. Second, the US spends billions of dollars of US tax payer money funding oversea operations that primarily benefit companies like Apple. For instance, the US's trade representative is currently strong arming countries like Canada to pass draconian copy right related legislation. That costs money, doesn't benefit regular US citizens, and helps companies like Apple. Third, the government doesn't contribute directly to me doing my job in the US everyday, but yet I get taxed.
Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society. We want good roads, good schools, and public safety net programs. That has always been the backbone of the US economy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBell
Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized society.
I want to slap anyone that repeats this tired old non sequitur.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynic
Correct however at the same time they should come down from their high horses and realise that there is a world beyond the US. As the US is not Apple's biggest market anymore, more money is earned internationally and this is nothing but logical.
Apple pays taxes where the money was earned and this is also true for using local infrastructures.
True enough, though the numbers show that Apple's international effective corporate tax rate is a joke. A reasonable adjustment would be to allow corporations to pay a top-up tax to the IRS when repatriating, rather than the full 35%, with no allowance for local taxes paid.
I'm rather surprised that isn't the way it is already.
Question, because I don't know the ins-and-outs of the federal system, does the Federal corporation tax apply after State corporation taxes have been taken, or before or in parallel?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
Seriously? That's a reasonable reaction? Can you try not shouting through your tears of rage?
What are you really angry about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley
True enough, though the numbers show that Apple's international effective corporate tax rate is a joke.
Yes, we know what your opinion is.
Before people in Congress start throwing rocks at Apple, maybe they should look into Louis Vuitton? Any bags that are left over at the end of the year are burned up, and they take the tax credit. For one thing, they are so way overpriced it is ridiculous, and then they get a tax break because most people aren't stupid enough to pay $2800 for a bag that will be out of style in two years. This just makes me sick that the tax laws in this country allow this to happen. I wish somebody would look into it and fix it. "F" them all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Again with your made up crap! Double tax implies being taxed twice. That's the definition of the word "double". That you can't wrap your head around the concept that you get to decide neither what is "significant" nor what is an acceptable amount of times to tax someone is YOUR problem.
In genuine answer to your bluster. Double taxation when used in the context of moral hazard implies that there's a danger that companies will be unduly punished. For them to be unduly punished they must have paid a significant amount of tax in the first place, for any "double" taxation to pose any real impediment.
Of course I understand the technical logical meaning of double taxation. But let's take a look at the real world here. Double taxation clearly isn't something that threatens to wipe out Apple's profits with two high waves of government profit seizure. How can I say that? Because their effective tax rate in Ireland is less than 1%.
Now seriously, calm down.
Originally Posted by Crowley
Seriously? That's a reasonable reaction? Can you try not shouting through your tears of rage?
This is, beyond anyone's doubt, trolling. You have, by your own hand, lost the 'argument' you claimed to have.
What are you really angry about?
How blind and obtuse you're pretending to be. Why someone would willingly make themselves look stupid is beyond me, but I guess that comes with whatever territory you're standing on.