Apple could face huge tax bill as Obama calls for new taxes on offshore profits in FY2016 budget

1567911

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 203
    You always need to leave room to negotiate. Most likely the numbers would be different in a final bill. The one time taxation fee is probably the most likely to be negotiated. I wonder if the republican controlled congress would be ok with some sort of shuffling around of corporate taxes. This tax structure will benefit some companies so there may be money spent lobbying for it.
  • Reply 162 of 203
    unded wrote: »
    Buy Blackberry and move Apple headquarter to Canada where they have lower corporate taxes. If the government won't change tax laws to be able to compete with other countries, Billions of dollars in savings are billions of reasons to move out of the U.S.


    Remember, there's more to life than taxes.

    Besides, Apple is building that big spaceship corp headquarters. They are born and bred California. That's not likely to change.
  • Reply 163 of 203
    "Another ten years of Fox News and the USA will be a dust bowl with a flammable water table ringed by coastal cities that generate all the remaining economic activity." - corrections

    Yeah, it's a shame there's a single news outlet that voices a view contrary to the propaganda machine. Gotta snuff that out!

    And those smug coastal cities will have collapsed into urban chaos under their wild free-spending socialist programs while the lesser cities in "flyover states" they so happily deride will continue producing the food and energy that keep this country alive.

    Stupid hipsters.
  • Reply 164 of 203
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by johnb0529 View Post

     

    So let me get this straight...the people who complain about offshoring low wage jobs, now want to offshore complete US Corporations?   What CEO isn't going to look at moving to a lower taxed country, as part of the fiduciary responsibility to shareholders?   If this goes through, the US will not only lose low wage jobs, but also all mid to high level jobs to foreign countries!  

     

    The US needs to compete with the whole world! if our taxes, wages and employees don't fit the companies needs, they will move!  

     

    I love to hear these people without any boardroom experience or shareholders to explain too that just scream "yeah tax them, they don't need all that money"...sorry, free world market that the US pushes for does not allow for that attitude! 


     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Boltsfan17 View Post

     



    What about the 15 million plus illegal immigrants the Democrats are supporting. Are they going to pay up too? 


    Well if they became American I guess they'd pay income tax.  But otherwise they are already paying every single other type of the thousands of taxes we have correct?

  • Reply 165 of 203
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    Sure I can because any city in America has its own cesspool of welfare users. You can't deny this.

    You do realize there was a time in this country when the welfare state didn't exist? Sure it was bad for a few individuals but it certianly did encourage far more to get off their dead asses and find some work.

    Obviously you missed out on something in high school called history.

     

    If you actually took the time to speak to that 'cesspool of welfare users', as you so pejoratively label them, you would find that the vast, vast majority would love to have the job and the home that you undoubtedly have.

    You should thank your lucky stars that, by accident of birth you are not one of them, or by accident of life you have not become one of them.

    Obviously you missed out on something in life called humanity.

  • Reply 166 of 203
    If you actually took the time to speak to that 'cesspool of welfare users' that you so pejoratively label them, you would find that the vast, vast majority would love to have the job and the home that you undoubtedly have.
    You should thank your lucky stars that, by accident of birth you are not one of them, or by accident of life you have not become one of them.
    Obviously you missed out on something in life called humanity.

    There seems to be this pervasive assumption that if you're presented better opportunities in life —  being born into a better family, being born more physically healthy, being born more intelligent than the average person in certain ways, being born with fewer negative mental abnormalities (e.g.: severe anxiety or bipolar disorder), having more positive opportunities in life, having fewer negative obstacles in life — you somehow earned it all and therefore your success undeniably means you work harder than those that aren't as well off as you. It's fucking bullshit, but I don't think they can ever comprehend that making choices in life is still a limited endeavour compared to the lack of choices we must all endure.
  • Reply 167 of 203
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

     

    What Tim Cook actually asked for was a comprehensive simplification of the US tax code to make it fair, even if it would result in higher taxes for Apple. What's being proposed by Congress and the President is a short term bandaid to supply some money for the highway fund before it RUNS OUT this summer. 


    Yes this is ridiculous a plan, but it sounds cool:

     

    Apple should just buy the advertising/naming rights to the Interstate Highway System.  Have exclusive advertising rights and setup digital roadside billboards.  I'm sure they can work something out.

  • Reply 168 of 203
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

     



    Education time: http://usdebtclock.org/

     

    $921 billion on Medicare, $859 billion on Social Security, $310 billion on welfare, $249 billion on pensions.

     

    None of those are enumerated in the Constitution. Defense is, and that's only $595 billion. Is there waste there? Certainly! But people seem to be sticking to this Bush-era concept about defense being the budget hog, and it's not even close anymore.


     

    Those numbers are not the biggest problem, the problem number on that page is the 689 trillion in currency and derivatives.  Up a mere 600 trillion since the year 2000.

  • Reply 169 of 203
    lundkeman wrote: »
    Those numbers are not the biggest problem, the problem number on that page is the 689 trillion in currency and derivatives.  Up a mere 600 trillion since the year 2000.

    What's a few hundred trillion in worthless currency between friends?
  • Reply 170 of 203
    Regardless of how much or how little PrezBO's tax policy levies on Apple or any other corporation, the simple fact is that corporations do not pay taxes, ever.

    If you as a company sold a widget for $10 and had to give $2.50 of that to the government, wouldn't you raise the cost of the widget by $2.50 to pay for the taxes? Now it's $12.50 for a customer to buy it, and your tax is paid by the customer, not by the company.

    Every single time the government steps in to get more money from corporations, they're soaking the end consumer, not the company.

    Apple will write whatever amount on a check that their accountants say they have to write, but they'll make sure they have the money in the bank to cover it first, and they get that money from their customers. It doesn't magically appear simply because the government says they want it.

    Problem with most politicians is that they think of this stuff in a vacuum, never considering "cause-and-effect." So when they say they'll increase taxes, they delude themselves into believing all other things remain equal. Unfortunately, things do not remain equal, and the customers end up being the losers.
  • Reply 171 of 203
    bugsnwbugsnw Posts: 717member

    Wizard69 and WhiteFalcon, I agree with your posts. Capitalism has been the 800 lb gorilla that has made the US the best, most productive, wealthiest country on the planet. Our secret in America is entrepreneurialism. Hey, that's how Apple got started. Even a liberal Steve Jobs couldn't stand Obama and said (and likely wished) he would be a 1-term president. Well...we got what we voted for.

     

    Taxing offshore profits without them even being repatriated? Certainly violates some law. Of course, Congress does change the tax laws often. Remember Clinton's RETROACTIVE tax hike? That did bring in a lot of extra revenue because no one had any prior knowledge on how to avoid it. But that's a dangerous game. Corporations have to be able to trust that the tax laws will not be capriciously changed every time the govt. needs to fund another inefficiently run program.

     

    Let's imagine that we all have our Roth IRAs. You worked your entire life. You paid the taxes. You stuck that money in there, post taxes, and now are going to retire. You were a diligent saver and now it's time to retire and play golf. Wait....Obama's son was elected and, like his father, needs to fund another program. So he retroactively taxes your Roth IRA. You saved and invested based on what you understood to be a level playing field. Well, shoot....you're a sucker. Besides, there's some people who won't work that need free college.

     

    Under Obama, we have far too many people sitting in the cart and not enough people pushing it. Of course, that takes $$$ and robs our economy of vibrant growth.

     

    You will never make stupid people smart by allowing dumb people to cheat by copying off of their exams. You will never make poor people wealthy by taking more from the rich. Some people work hard and strive and do cool stuff. Some don't. Steve Jobs should be rewarded. People who do not want to work or contribute can only be carried so far by those that do.

     

    Yes, the wealthy will always get wealthier. Hell, if I had a few million laying around like Trump, I would have done what he did - buy up a lot of excellent but distressed real estate. When the market recovers, he will do quite well.

     

    I am not against a safety net. I think SS is ok...but sure could be made better if it were invested in American companies (stock market). The safety net cannot be a lifetime thing. Entitlements are the primary drivers of our debt. We need more people pushing the cart and fewer people lounging inside the cart.

     

    Flat tax, simply the tax code, and watch business roar. Watch as a 30T GDP economy easily pumps out 6 Trillion in revenue....all our financial problems disappear with growth. Pro-growth policies should be championed everywhere.

     

    The rich will get richer. But they always do. In fact, the chasm is greater under Obama than ever. Why? Because the rich get richer as always while everyone else struggles, like running in mud, under the gray clouds of a crappy economy.

     

    You want people to not work for 4 years? Give them unemployment benefits that go out 4 years. Want them to work sooner? You have to cut them off. Clinton recalibrate himself under a republican congress and our economy did quite well.

     

    Be careful about being champions of sudden, capricious changes in tax law. This proposal is DOA, but it shows how Obama thinks. If he had his way, he'd simply confiscate Apple's entire cash hoard and every other corporation what was unfairly making more money than poor folk.

  • Reply 172 of 203
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member

    I can hardly wait for the anti-government polemic from DED we are bound to get now that there is a new perceived enemy of Apple.  It will make a change from the usual evildoers I suppose

  • Reply 173 of 203
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

     

    However, keep in mind that South Korea only charges Samsung an effective tax rate of <5%. When Samsung sells a Note 4 in the US, those profits are essentially not taxed by South Korea. When Apple sells an iPhone 6 in Korea, it pays Korean income tax (higher than Samsung's) and then is expected to pay the difference up to 35% to the US. 


     

    But of course it's far more complicated than that. Do you really think that the billions of dollars of profit that Apple books in Ireland (at very low tax rate) was only from products sold in Ireland? Or is some of that Ireland profit really revenue from sales in another country which was written off as an expense to license/use intellectual property owned by Apple Ireland?

     

    Edit: I should add lest anyone thing otherwise, I think Obama's plan is a horrible idea. Even if you think that Apple should have been paying more in taxes, changing tax law retroactively and trying to tax money that was untaxible at the time the transaction took place is foolish (at best). If you don't like the tax law, fine, change it...but only going forward. You can't change the rules of the game after the game has ended.

  • Reply 174 of 203
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Boltsfan17 View Post

     

    This is a terrible idea by Obama. His master plan of ruining businesses continues. 


    How? It's a great time to be able to bring cash home, right? Apple have to sell bonds to finance their business in that State while I have hundred of billion dollars offshore that they are not able to use.  That sucks. At least with this, they can bring all their money home to invest here in America. I hope this will change at the end for future earnings only, not retro tax for already earned income. Retro tax is bad like: your tax law sucks and you now want to fix it by robbing more money from business...that's the communist's way, not in countries with capitalism. Also, Barbara Boxer's proposal is good for current companies with cash pile offshore. Let's bring all the cash home, US companies. From now on, you only pay 19% on abroad income. 

  • Reply 175 of 203
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post

     

    How? It's a great time to be able to bring cash home, right? Apple have to sell bonds to finance their business in that State while I have hundred of billion dollars offshore that they are not able to use.  That sucks. At least with this, they can bring all their money home to invest here in America. I hope this will change at the end for future earnings only, not retro tax for already earned income. Retro tax is bad like: your tax law sucks and you now want to fix it by robbing more money from business...that's the communist's way, not in countries with capitalism. Also, Barbara Boxer's proposal is good for current companies with cash pile offshore. Let's bring all the cash home, US companies. From now on, you only pay 19% on abroad income. 




    The Rand Paul initiated and Barbara Boxer endorsed plan calls for 6.5% on so-called "repatriated" money. Far more agreeable for businesses. Obama is smoking some wacky tobacco.

  • Reply 176 of 203
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,240member

    This is a smart move by Obama. So called "tax holidays" unfairly favour companies with lots of cash that can afford to keep it overseas. If you grant them, companies are only going to manipulate their taxation behaviour in the future.

     

    I obviously don't know the detail on this bill (and with politics the devil is always in the detail). But speaking generally It's not a good idea to allow companies to repatriate cash at 5% when you can tax at a higher percentage regardless of whether they repatriate or not.

     

    The companies are not at fault; they are merely acting to maximise shareholder return. It is us that needs to provide a clear international corporate taxation structure that stops profit from falling between the cracks and throwing away taxation revenue, especially revenue that increases with positive business activity. 

  • Reply 177 of 203
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dunks View Post

     

    This is a smart move by Obama. So called "tax holidays" unfairly favour companies with lots of cash that can afford to keep it overseas. If you grant them, companies are only going to manipulate their taxation behaviour in the future.

     

    I obviously don't know the detail on this bill (and with politics the devil is always in the detail). But speaking generally It's not a good idea to allow companies to repatriate cash at 5% when you can tax at a higher percentage regardless of whether they repatriate or not.

     

    The companies are not at fault; they are merely acting to maximise shareholder return. It is us that needs to provide a clear international corporate taxation structure that stops profit from falling between the cracks and throwing away taxation revenue, especially revenue that increases with positive business activity. 




    Obama can say anything he wants at this point. He's going nowhere for two more years, then we'll finally be rid of the freeloader. He can go bother his old buddy, the mayor of Chicago for freebies.

  • Reply 178 of 203
    pmcdpmcd Posts: 394member
    boltsfan17 wrote: »

    Same here. I question the legality of that. 

    That has never stopped them before. The U.S. For example has extended US laws to foreign companies with ties to Cuba.

    I am unclear as to whether profits earned by sales in other countries would be subject to U.S. taxes. That would be similar to the way U.S. citizens must report all earnings even if they currently reside in another country. I should imagine that would involve tax treaties. I don't know if there are tax treaties for corporations operating in different countries. This is not as simple as it first looks.
  • Reply 179 of 203
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     



    The Rand Paul initiated and Barbara Boxer endorsed plan calls for 6.5% on so-called "repatriated" money. Far more agreeable for businesses. Obama is smoking some wacky tobacco.


    Absolutely. Retro tax on already earned income is BS..

  • Reply 180 of 203
    fallenjtfallenjt Posts: 3,976member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dunks View Post

     

    This is a smart move by Obama. So called "tax holidays" unfairly favour companies with lots of cash that can afford to keep it overseas. If you grant them, companies are only going to manipulate their taxation behaviour in the future.

     

    I obviously don't know the detail on this bill (and with politics the devil is always in the detail). But speaking generally It's not a good idea to allow companies to repatriate cash at 5% when you can tax at a higher percentage regardless of whether they repatriate or not.

     

    The companies are not at fault; they are merely acting to maximise shareholder return. It is us that needs to provide a clear international corporate taxation structure that stops profit from falling between the cracks and throwing away taxation revenue, especially revenue that increases with positive business activity. 


    Well, companies already paid local taxes at the countries they operated their business. 6.5% additional tax to repatriate cash is plausible, but 19% on the already earned incomes is totally BS. I agreed with Obama on many things, but this and driver licenses for illegal immigrants...

Sign In or Register to comment.