About two-thirds of the money is outside the US. And rightly so.
It is all after-tax cash. Apple 'dodges' no taxes. Not a cent. They have paid their 'fair share' of taxes where and when they are required to, including in the US. They are the single largest tax-paying corporation in the US.
About two-thirds of the money is outside the US. And rightly so.
It is all after-tax cash. Apple 'dodges' no taxes. Not a cent. They have paid their 'fair share' of taxes where and when they are required to, including in the US. They are the single largest tax-paying corporation in the US.
I think they're way behind Exxon in taxes paid. There's probably some subtle disclaimer there somewhere in Apple's statement.
Not at all. There's gotta be a qualifier or disclaimer in there somewhere unless Apple paid more than $31Billion in income taxes last year.
EDIT: ...and there is. The actual statement from your link was:
"Apple is likely the largest corporate income tax payer in the US, having paid nearly $6 billion in taxes to the US Treasury in FY2012."
Apple will spend the money - I believe that some time in the near future, they will purchase a few satellites to deliver internet or they will purchase a few cable companies in order to deliver internet to homes. It seems to me that Apple is going to change TV and Radio as we know it as they steadily add Channels to iTV - but all this requires internet and the cable companies at some point will lose money as people will no longer need tv content from cable companies thanks to apple streaming for free and paid for by advertisers - just like the old days when Antenna's used to be on our homes - content was free.
Tim Cook has said repeatedly that Apple is a products company, plain and simple. If they became a financial institution all of a sudden that would be diametrically opposed to being a products company. Doesn't make any sense at all
But some hardware companies do find themselves backing into finance: GE is a huge "bank", IIRC.
Apple will spend the money - I believe that some time in the near future, they will purchase a few satellites to deliver internet or they will purchase a few cable companies in order to deliver internet to homes.
It seems to me that Apple is going to change TV and Radio as we know it as they steadily add Channels to iTV - but all this requires internet and the cable companies at some point will lose money as people will no longer need tv content from cable companies thanks to apple streaming for free and paid for by advertisers - just like the old days when Antenna's used to be on our homes - content was free.
Satellites could make sense, especially powering a faster version of the internet: they do keep expanding their server farm footprint...
But entire space programs (the Mars Rover missions come to mind) cost a fraction of their holdings...
Tim Cook has said repeatedly that Apple is a products company, plain and simple. If they became a financial institution all of a sudden that would be diametrically opposed to being a products company. Doesn't make any sense at all
If 'icloud' is a product, then 'iBank' can be one too;-)
Apple provides services, and even does financing.
Look at Passbook as something you can 'put cash in' and all of a sudden Apple's providing pre-paid e-spending cards.
It doesn't have to be 'apple' it could be a wholly owned subsidiary, paid for by cash, of course... and can be in several different [safe banking] countries.
My first choice wouldn't be a bank, but a payment card processor (reduce the fees on CC transactions as your own PCP).
Then as an 'ecard' issuer (cut more fees... turn your fingerprint&phone into a credit card for all in-app purchases)
Then as a bank (primarily to support ACH xfers directly from other banks, and cutting out credit cards altogether.).
Basically, your AppleID can have a checking account, or even a loan attached.
And yet Icahn is telling Apple to get rid of all of its money.
Why would you want Apple to hold on to its vast cash positions that's generating very little returns? Do you want Apple to start a prop trading side business?
Why would I want Apple to run its business responsibly? Can’t imagine.
Since when did holding large cash positions = practicing responsible business and when did not holding large cash positions = irresponsible business practice?
No, that was a budget surplus, not a financial one. We haven’t been out of debt for decades.
Everyone runs on debt. Everyone has debt. And no one is every not in debt. If you have money in the bank, that money is an asset to you, but a liability (debt) on the bank's accounts. Almost every one uses credit cards. That's a debt. Home loans, debt. You work an hour. You have hours worth of assets, and your employer or client has an equivalent amount of debt.
If 'icloud' is a product, then 'iBank' can be one too;-)
Apple provides services, and even does financing.
Look at Passbook as something you can 'put cash in' and all of a sudden Apple's providing pre-paid e-spending cards.
It doesn't have to be 'apple' it could be a wholly owned subsidiary, paid for by cash, of course... and can be in several different [safe banking] countries.
My first choice wouldn't be a bank, but a payment card processor (reduce the fees on CC transactions as your own PCP).
Then as an 'ecard' issuer (cut more fees... turn your fingerprint&phone into a credit card for all in-app purchases)
Then as a bank (primarily to support ACH xfers directly from other banks, and cutting out credit cards altogether.).
Basically, your AppleID can have a checking account, or even a loan attached.
And an ATM in every Apple Store;-)
Why would you want Apple to hold on to its vast cash positions that's generating very little returns? Do you want Apple to start a prop trading side business?
It's always good to have a reserve. Why spend it just to spend it?
Comments
I think they're way behind Exxon in taxes paid. There's probably some subtle disclaimer there somewhere in Apple's statement.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2013/03/17/companies-paying-highest-income-taxes/1991313/
And yet, apple employees still live paycheck to paycheck with only a 3% "Cost of living" increase.
Since when did inflation only grow 3% year?
About two-thirds of the money is outside the US. And rightly so.
It is all after-tax cash. Apple 'dodges' no taxes. Not a cent. They have paid their 'fair share' of taxes where and when they are required to, including in the US. They are the single largest tax-paying corporation in the US.
I think they're way behind Exxon in taxes paid. There's probably some subtle disclaimer there somewhere in Apple's statement.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2013/03/17/companies-paying-highest-income-taxes/1991313/
Are you implying that Tim Cook must have lied to a Senate panel:
TESTIMONY OF APPLE INC. BEFORE THE PERMANENT ...
Not at all. There's gotta be a qualifier or disclaimer in there somewhere unless Apple paid more than $31Billion in income taxes last year.
EDIT: ...and there is. The actual statement from your link was:
"Apple is likely the largest corporate income tax payer in the US, having paid nearly $6 billion in taxes to the US Treasury in FY2012."
And yet, apple employees still live paycheck to paycheck with only a 3% "Cost of living" increase.
Since when did inflation only grow 3% year?
Only during the past 133 years? In fact, less than 3% (Mean = 2.27%; Median = 2.33%):
http://www.multpl.com/inflation/
Not at all. There's gotta be a qualifier or disclaimer in there somewhere unless Apple paid more than $31Billion in income taxes last year.
EDIT: ...and there is. The actual statement from your link was:
Apple is likely the largest corporate income tax payer in the US, having paid nearly $6 billion in taxes to the US Treasury in FY2012.
Apple did. In the US, as I said in my original post. Move along.
Cook never once said they were the largest US corporate taxpayer. Geesh, it's not my quote it's Cooks, so ignore "likely" if it makes you happier.
Apple did. In the US, as I said in my original post. Move along.
Cook never once said they were the largest US corporate taxpayer. Geesh, it's not my quote it's Cooks, so ignore "likely" if it makes you happier.
I couldn't be happier.
Likewise, you're free to believe/quote/ignore whatever you want, if that makes you happier. It's a free country.
Thanks, I'm pretty happy myself. Been a good business day so far. Actually a much better than average couple of weeks for that matter.
It seems to me that Apple is going to change TV and Radio as we know it as they steadily add Channels to iTV - but all this requires internet and the cable companies at some point will lose money as people will no longer need tv content from cable companies thanks to apple streaming for free and paid for by advertisers - just like the old days when Antenna's used to be on our homes - content was free.
It's nothing more than idea backed by confidence.
Sounds like Apple to me: making the best products in the world is the idea, and they’re confident they can do it.
Tim Cook has said repeatedly that Apple is a products company, plain and simple. If they became a financial institution all of a sudden that would be diametrically opposed to being a products company. Doesn't make any sense at all
But some hardware companies do find themselves backing into finance: GE is a huge "bank", IIRC.
Apple will spend the money - I believe that some time in the near future, they will purchase a few satellites to deliver internet or they will purchase a few cable companies in order to deliver internet to homes.
It seems to me that Apple is going to change TV and Radio as we know it as they steadily add Channels to iTV - but all this requires internet and the cable companies at some point will lose money as people will no longer need tv content from cable companies thanks to apple streaming for free and paid for by advertisers - just like the old days when Antenna's used to be on our homes - content was free.
Satellites could make sense, especially powering a faster version of the internet: they do keep expanding their server farm footprint...
But entire space programs (the Mars Rover missions come to mind) cost a fraction of their holdings...
Tim Cook has said repeatedly that Apple is a products company, plain and simple. If they became a financial institution all of a sudden that would be diametrically opposed to being a products company. Doesn't make any sense at all
If 'icloud' is a product, then 'iBank' can be one too;-)
Apple provides services, and even does financing.
Look at Passbook as something you can 'put cash in' and all of a sudden Apple's providing pre-paid e-spending cards.
It doesn't have to be 'apple' it could be a wholly owned subsidiary, paid for by cash, of course... and can be in several different [safe banking] countries.
My first choice wouldn't be a bank, but a payment card processor (reduce the fees on CC transactions as your own PCP).
Then as an 'ecard' issuer (cut more fees... turn your fingerprint&phone into a credit card for all in-app purchases)
Then as a bank (primarily to support ACH xfers directly from other banks, and cutting out credit cards altogether.).
Basically, your AppleID can have a checking account, or even a loan attached.
And an ATM in every Apple Store;-)
And yet Icahn is telling Apple to get rid of all of its money.
Why would you want Apple to hold on to its vast cash positions that's generating very little returns? Do you want Apple to start a prop trading side business?
Why would I want Apple to run its business responsibly? Can’t imagine.
Why would I want Apple to run its business responsibly? Can’t imagine.
Since when did holding large cash positions = practicing responsible business and when did not holding large cash positions = irresponsible business practice?
Everyone runs on debt. Everyone has debt. And no one is every not in debt. If you have money in the bank, that money is an asset to you, but a liability (debt) on the bank's accounts. Almost every one uses credit cards. That's a debt. Home loans, debt. You work an hour. You have hours worth of assets, and your employer or client has an equivalent amount of debt.
No one is ever out of debt.
That would be dangerous.
It's always good to have a reserve. Why spend it just to spend it?