Apple slams story of cash hidden in Jersey to reduce taxes, calls itself 'largest taxpayer...

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 103
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,635member
    avon b7 said:
    unphocus said:
    Why is it so high a tax rate for US company to bring home earnings? It’s like the US Government doesn’t want US multinational company to bring back any earnings to the US. High repatriation tax rate makes company looks for loopholes to pay less taxes. The US Congress should be saying “we see what’s happening; let’s reduce repatriation tax rate to make is easy for company to bring back earning from abroad so these companies can use the money to create more jobs” or something to that nature. It boggles my mind the stupidity of high repatriation tax rate. 
    I take a slightly different viewpoint. Earnings are made in tax years and rules apply to those years. Whatever the rules are, companies in any given tax jurisdiction, should abide by those rules and push for a change in tax legislation if they consider them to be unfair.

    From a moral perspective, I believe witholding payment of taxes until such a time is 'right' for the company, is wrong. As is the idea that a company itself, can determine how much to make available for taxation. Especially if that same option is not open to competitors.

    You can be sure that some here will roll out the shareholder argument and that Apple must do all it can to maximise it's return to shareholders, even if it means employing questionable accounting practices. That is missing the point entirely.
    You seem to have a very loose grip on this situation.  What Apple is doing is deferring taxes by holding profits outside the US.  That’s legal, and for very good reason.  US companies that earn profits outside the US have the option of spending those profits outside the US, to grow operations, build factories or retail outlets, acquire companies, etc.  Profit so spent will never be repatriated and therefore will never be subject to US taxes.  And indeed, Apple does invest/spend some of its foreign profits in this manner.  So companies have a perfect right to hold profits overseas while weighing their best use.  In Apple’s case, the company apparently feels that a change to the tax rate for repatriated profits would tip the balance toward repatriating a significant amount of those profits, but without a reduction in the tax rate feels it should wait, keeping its options open.  The rest is merely the specific mechanics of where the profits are domiciled to be held outside the US.   And there’s nothing illegal about Apple’s practices in that regard, nor is what Apple doing something not available to any other corporation that wishes to apply the resources (tax experts) to do so.  In fact, it’s been reported that many other corporations do exactly the same, including Google, GE, etc. 


    The legality of the situation is to be verified in this particular case and does not limit itself to US jurisdiction. The Spanish government for example has stated it will investigate all the names included in the leaks. Everything will have to be cross referenced.

    As we have seen in recent times, investigations have revealed practices deemed to be legal by the corporations involved but illegal by tax authorities.

    The EU has already stated that Apple's tax setup effectively allowed it to determine how much it made available for taxation. What wasn't made available for taxation in the year it was due, is very likely part of the sum you are referring to as deferrable but this will have to be verified. 
  • Reply 22 of 103
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,040member
    avon b7 said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:
    cali said:
    avon b7 said:
    This is a damage control statement. The article by the BBC is a damning revelation that leaves Apple in a bad moral light.

    The questionnaire leak alone paints a picture which will make everyone in PR at Apple squirm.

    This is going to be like quicksand in the sense that any move to defend itself will probably make things worse. Just like this statement has done. I can see it being torn apart line by line for deliberately trying to distract from the reality that the leaks have put onto the table.

    Apple has been the largest tax payer in the world this isn’t news.

    iPhone X sales are off the charts and more to come from other products. This is “damage control” from the iKnockoff paid media.
    If you wanted to defend Apple you could have tried to tackle what is actually in the news. The leaked information, instead of rehashing Apple's PR.

    In that regard, Apple says, and let's be clear on this, 'initial sales' are 'off the charts'. In the earnings call TC simply described them as 'very strong'.


    He might not be going by what Cook says, but by what Apple gave as its guidance for next quarter. 
    Which is for Apple's entire product catalogue and services, for just one quarter and not just for the iPhone X.
    And what do you think is going to responsible for such a massive leap in guidance from a company that traditionally gives very conservative figures for the next quarter?

    Service growth is fairly linear, so do you think it is increasing Mac sales, or perhaps iPads or the Apple Watch? Perhaps the iPod Shuffle is having a last hurrah. 

    It really doesn’t matter. If it’s across Apple’s entire catalogue then we’ve got some very healthy diversification.  If it is the iPhoneX then the naysayers, such as yourself, got it wrong … again. 



  • Reply 23 of 103
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,040member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    unphocus said:
    Why is it so high a tax rate for US company to bring home earnings? It’s like the US Government doesn’t want US multinational company to bring back any earnings to the US. High repatriation tax rate makes company looks for loopholes to pay less taxes. The US Congress should be saying “we see what’s happening; let’s reduce repatriation tax rate to make is easy for company to bring back earning from abroad so these companies can use the money to create more jobs” or something to that nature. It boggles my mind the stupidity of high repatriation tax rate. 
    I take a slightly different viewpoint. Earnings are made in tax years and rules apply to those years. Whatever the rules are, companies in any given tax jurisdiction, should abide by those rules and push for a change in tax legislation if they consider them to be unfair.

    From a moral perspective, I believe witholding payment of taxes until such a time is 'right' for the company, is wrong. As is the idea that a company itself, can determine how much to make available for taxation. Especially if that same option is not open to competitors.

    You can be sure that some here will roll out the shareholder argument and that Apple must do all it can to maximise it's return to shareholders, even if it means employing questionable accounting practices. That is missing the point entirely.
    You seem to have a very loose grip on this situation.  What Apple is doing is deferring taxes by holding profits outside the US.  That’s legal, and for very good reason.  US companies that earn profits outside the US have the option of spending those profits outside the US, to grow operations, build factories or retail outlets, acquire companies, etc.  Profit so spent will never be repatriated and therefore will never be subject to US taxes.  And indeed, Apple does invest/spend some of its foreign profits in this manner.  So companies have a perfect right to hold profits overseas while weighing their best use.  In Apple’s case, the company apparently feels that a change to the tax rate for repatriated profits would tip the balance toward repatriating a significant amount of those profits, but without a reduction in the tax rate feels it should wait, keeping its options open.  The rest is merely the specific mechanics of where the profits are domiciled to be held outside the US.   And there’s nothing illegal about Apple’s practices in that regard, nor is what Apple doing something not available to any other corporation that wishes to apply the resources (tax experts) to do so.  In fact, it’s been reported that many other corporations do exactly the same, including Google, GE, etc. 


    The legality of the situation is to be verified in this particular case and does not limit itself to US jurisdiction. The Spanish government for example has stated it will investigate all the names included in the leaks. Everything will have to be cross referenced.

    As we have seen in recent times, investigations have revealed practices deemed to be legal by the corporations involved but illegal by tax authorities.

    The EU has already stated that Apple's tax setup effectively allowed it to determine how much it made available for taxation. What wasn't made available for taxation in the year it was due, is very likely part of the sum you are referring to as deferrable but this will have to be verified. 
    You’re throwing out a lot of theoretical without anything concrete:

    ”will investigate”
    ”but this has to be verified”

    really amounts to little more more than wishful thinking. And bearing in mind this liability has already been accounted for, it’ll make no difference. 


    StrangeDaysjony0
  • Reply 24 of 103
    avon b7 said:
    cali said:
    avon b7 said:
    On the subject at hand, the devil is in the details. When TC said, and not too long ago, Apple didn't have its cash stashed away on some Caribbean island, he obviously didn't count on the Paradise Papers possibility. Now, rightly or wrongly, people will look at that claim and use it against him.

    He is making a rod for his own back.
    Channel islands are not in the Caribbean. And anyway, that statement was meant by TC as a way of saying Apple aren't dodging taxes (where "dodging" means violating international tax law). So yeah, the press can push out half truths (based on half-assed investigation and poor understanding of the complexities), and try to imply immoral or illegal behaviour for the sake of producing click-bait articles, but Apple's response was the perfect. That its also an embarrassing smack-down of these journalists isn't Apple's fault.
  • Reply 25 of 103
    This is a global problem. Apple is no different from other companies doing the same, but their huge success magnifies the situation.

    All international companies treat their tax liability and employees with contempt. And Apple do to - they do little to protect their factory workers or their Apple store employees who are on minimum wage despite each probably selling >$1million of product every year
  • Reply 26 of 103
    bshankbshank Posts: 140member
    lymf said:
    The problem is not so far away from incentives given to companies in ever state to attract their business from another place. On a much larger scale obviously and only for the bigger companies but still, it shows that if a state or country will allow companies to profit from the system, obviously companies will do it. Is it legal? Probably. Moral? Not really. But logical and to be expected from any giant multinational company. If there is a loophole, it is there to be used. The solution is to close the loophole.
    Keep your morals to yourself
    2old4funradarthekat
  • Reply 27 of 103
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,234member
    I read an article a while back by an international banking expert, this news is not new. This guy said anyone who thinks that US companies international earning are sitting in an off shore bank is fouling themselves. It may be sitting in international bank, but most likely the actual account and money is in US bank, most likely NYC. The expert said no US company would want to leave that kind of cash off shore, they would want to maintain control over that money and not let the control be done outside the US.
    jony0
  • Reply 28 of 103
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,044member
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:
    This is a damage control statement. The article by the BBC is a damning revelation that leaves Apple in a bad moral light.

    The questionnaire leak alone paints a picture which will make everyone in PR at Apple squirm.

    This is going to be like quicksand in the sense that any move to defend itself will probably make things worse. Just like this statement has done. I can see it being torn apart line by line for deliberately trying to distract from the reality that the leaks have put onto the table.

    The fact is that Apple is engaging in the time-honoured tradition of tax avoidance which is perfectly legal. In fact, everyone in the leaked documents is engaged in legal tax avoidance. Hell, if I could afford a high-falluttin’ tax barrister, I’d be engaged in legal tax avoidance. 

    As much as you would like this to result in the downfall of Apple, I’m afraid it won’t.  Apple is probably the most conservative company when it comes to accounting. They assume that all the tax they avoid (yes, that is what they’re doing) does not belong to them and so it is still counted as a liability. If they had to pay it tomorrow, it wouldn’t make a ripple on the balance sheet, and tomorrow everyone will move onto something else … until next year’s leak.
    I think that's inaccurate sir. IIRC three, maybe four years ago Apple themselves noted in financials that if they were to they'd owe upwards of an additional $30B in corporate taxes over and above any deferred taxes set aside previously if all their profits were taxed. That sum is likely far higher now. But you are correct in the sense that Apple, like other corporations, has set aside funds on their balance sheet to cover what revenues they have planned to make taxable. If there's no deferred taxes noted on a substantial amount of Apple's revenues, and there is not, Apple has no plans to "bring it home" and pay taxes on it. So yeah it would definitely be a ripple if Apple found themselves required to pay standard corporate taxes on all their profits.
  • Reply 29 of 103
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,528moderator
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    unphocus said:
    Why is it so high a tax rate for US company to bring home earnings? It’s like the US Government doesn’t want US multinational company to bring back any earnings to the US. High repatriation tax rate makes company looks for loopholes to pay less taxes. The US Congress should be saying “we see what’s happening; let’s reduce repatriation tax rate to make is easy for company to bring back earning from abroad so these companies can use the money to create more jobs” or something to that nature. It boggles my mind the stupidity of high repatriation tax rate. 
    I take a slightly different viewpoint. Earnings are made in tax years and rules apply to those years. Whatever the rules are, companies in any given tax jurisdiction, should abide by those rules and push for a change in tax legislation if they consider them to be unfair.

    From a moral perspective, I believe witholding payment of taxes until such a time is 'right' for the company, is wrong. As is the idea that a company itself, can determine how much to make available for taxation. Especially if that same option is not open to competitors.

    You can be sure that some here will roll out the shareholder argument and that Apple must do all it can to maximise it's return to shareholders, even if it means employing questionable accounting practices. That is missing the point entirely.
    You seem to have a very loose grip on this situation.  What Apple is doing is deferring taxes by holding profits outside the US.  That’s legal, and for very good reason.  US companies that earn profits outside the US have the option of spending those profits outside the US, to grow operations, build factories or retail outlets, acquire companies, etc.  Profit so spent will never be repatriated and therefore will never be subject to US taxes.  And indeed, Apple does invest/spend some of its foreign profits in this manner.  So companies have a perfect right to hold profits overseas while weighing their best use.  In Apple’s case, the company apparently feels that a change to the tax rate for repatriated profits would tip the balance toward repatriating a significant amount of those profits, but without a reduction in the tax rate feels it should wait, keeping its options open.  The rest is merely the specific mechanics of where the profits are domiciled to be held outside the US.   And there’s nothing illegal about Apple’s practices in that regard, nor is what Apple doing something not available to any other corporation that wishes to apply the resources (tax experts) to do so.  In fact, it’s been reported that many other corporations do exactly the same, including Google, GE, etc. 


    The legality of the situation is to be verified in this particular case and does not limit itself to US jurisdiction. The Spanish government for example has stated it will investigate all the names included in the leaks. Everything will have to be cross referenced.

    As we have seen in recent times, investigations have revealed practices deemed to be legal by the corporations involved but illegal by tax authorities.

    The EU has already stated that Apple's tax setup effectively allowed it to determine how much it made available for taxation. What wasn't made available for taxation in the year it was due, is very likely part of the sum you are referring to as deferrable but this will have to be verified. 
    You’re throwing out a lot of theoretical without anything concrete:

    ”will investigate”
    ”but this has to be verified”

    really amounts to little more more than wishful thinking. And bearing in mind this liability has already been accounted for, it’ll make no difference. 


    It’s just weasel words.  
    pscooter63StrangeDayspatchythepiratejony0
  • Reply 30 of 103
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,528moderator
    kkqd1337 said:
    This is a global problem. Apple is no different from other companies doing the same, but their huge success magnifies the situation.

    All international companies treat their tax liability and employees with contempt. And Apple do to - they do little to protect their factory workers or their Apple store employees who are on minimum wage despite each probably selling >$1million of product every year
    Apple does more than any known company to protect workers in their manufacturing and supply chains.  They also doubled, then doubled agin, within a span of only a few years after Cook became CEO, the wages of the manufacturing workers.  They run audits and continuously improve.  Do you imagine a toaster oven manufacturer, which would also be located in China or elsewhere in SE Asia, provides anything near the safety and working conditions as the high-tech and highly visible manufacturing facilities used by Apple?  Are you thinking straight?  

    Apple store employees pull down in the neighborhood of $17/hour, last report I read.  That’s hardly minimum wage.  Now, that’s store employees here in the states, where about 300 of Apple’s 500 stores are located.  I’d be willing to bet they pay competitive and desireable salaries in the other 200 stores worldwide too.  
    StrangeDayspatchythepiratejony0
  • Reply 31 of 103
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,528moderator

    maestro64 said:
    I read an article a while back by an international banking expert, this news is not new. This guy said anyone who thinks that US companies international earning are sitting in an off shore bank is fouling themselves. It may be sitting in international bank, but most likely the actual account and money is in US bank, most likely NYC. The expert said no US company would want to leave that kind of cash off shore, they would want to maintain control over that money and not let the control be done outside the US.
    Absolutely.  You can see from Apple’s filings that a good deal of it is invested in US Treasuries and other securities, like mortgage backed securities.  It earns about 1%, by the way.  So yeah, it’s relatively safe.  The notion of the money being ‘offshore’, the expert should have gone on to say, is not where the money isphysically held, but is rather a legal status of the money for taxation purposes.  Apple cannot spend that money here in the states on capital projects, R&D, share buybacks, dividends, etc, until it is repatriated (another legal term that doesn’t suggest physical movement of the cash).
    jony0
  • Reply 32 of 103
    In my opinion, this is just more evidence that the United States needs to switch to a consumption tax model rather than an income tax model ala the Fairtax. Fairtax.org
    jony0
  • Reply 33 of 103

    Gosh, you mean that Apple is taking steps to keep as much of its own assets as possible, instead of giving it to money grubbing statists, who did absolutely nothing to earn that money, who think that it's somehow immoral and against the laws of nature for one entity to have more money than another?

    Avoiding taxes is the moral high ground, not the low road.

    jony0
  • Reply 34 of 103
    aplnubaplnub Posts: 2,572member
    Apple hid their money in Bitcoin.
  • Reply 35 of 103
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,544member
    Oh what do you know...The Guardian is posing a negative article about Apple. I don't know what their beef is with Apple, but they seem to go to great lengths to get anything negative about Apple and write about it. 
    StrangeDayspatchythepiratejony0
  • Reply 36 of 103
    hriw-annon@xs4all.nlhriw-annon@xs4all.nl Posts: 11unconfirmed, member
    avon b7 said:

    avon b7 said:
    This is a damage control statement. The article by the BBC is a damning revelation that leaves Apple in a bad moral light.

    The questionnaire leak alone paints a picture which will make everyone in PR at Apple squirm.

    This is going to be like quicksand in the sense that any move to defend itself will probably make things worse. Just like this statement has done. I can see it being torn apart line by line for deliberately trying to distract from the reality that the leaks have put onto the table.

    What leaks?????  Apple's rebuttal specifically states that when the move the Jersey was made Apple notified Ireland, the EU and the US.  Seems to me that Apple's move was fully transparent and there was no attempt to hide its actions.
    The Paradise Papers.
    Isn't a leak supposed to be something that was secret?
    StrangeDaysjony0loquitur
  • Reply 37 of 103

    Gosh, you mean that Apple is taking steps to keep as much of its own assets as possible, instead of giving it to money grubbing statists, who did absolutely nothing to earn that money, who think that it's somehow immoral and against the laws of nature for one entity to have more money than another?

    Avoiding taxes is the moral high ground, not the low road.

    Avoiding taxes is the moral high ground, not the low road. - That is some logic, that I have read in AI forum in a long long time. You may NEED to think next time, before you post!!!

  • Reply 38 of 103
    hriw-annon@xs4all.nlhriw-annon@xs4all.nl Posts: 11unconfirmed, member
    macxpress said:
    Oh what do you know...The Guardian is posing a negative article about Apple. I don't know what their beef is with Apple, but they seem to go to great lengths to get anything negative about Apple and write about it. 
    No beef. Putting "Apple" in a headline gets the clicks. Make it something people get riled up about, success guaranteed. The Guardian needs to pay the rent somehow.
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 39 of 103
    metrixmetrix Posts: 220member
    It certainly appears that the EU and other entities are pursuing Apple's wealth only years and years after its generating all this profit.
    Apple will see an attack from all directions because the competition is sensing a huge shift due to the success of the latest iPhone. The adults are going crazy over Animoji, I can see kids just going nuts for this. This may be the Elmo of this Christmas.
  • Reply 40 of 103
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 2,635member
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:
    cali said:
    avon b7 said:
    This is a damage control statement. The article by the BBC is a damning revelation that leaves Apple in a bad moral light.

    The questionnaire leak alone paints a picture which will make everyone in PR at Apple squirm.

    This is going to be like quicksand in the sense that any move to defend itself will probably make things worse. Just like this statement has done. I can see it being torn apart line by line for deliberately trying to distract from the reality that the leaks have put onto the table.

    Apple has been the largest tax payer in the world this isn’t news.

    iPhone X sales are off the charts and more to come from other products. This is “damage control” from the iKnockoff paid media.
    If you wanted to defend Apple you could have tried to tackle what is actually in the news. The leaked information, instead of rehashing Apple's PR.

    In that regard, Apple says, and let's be clear on this, 'initial sales' are 'off the charts'. In the earnings call TC simply described them as 'very strong'.


    He might not be going by what Cook says, but by what Apple gave as its guidance for next quarter. 
    Which is for Apple's entire product catalogue and services, for just one quarter and not just for the iPhone X.
    And what do you think is going to responsible for such a massive leap in guidance from a company that traditionally gives very conservative figures for the next quarter?

    Service growth is fairly linear, so do you think it is increasing Mac sales, or perhaps iPads or the Apple Watch? Perhaps the iPod Shuffle is having a last hurrah. 

    It really doesn’t matter. If it’s across Apple’s entire catalogue then we’ve got some very healthy diversification.  If it is the iPhoneX then the naysayers, such as yourself, got it wrong … again. 



    As I said, the X will prove itself or not next September. 

    Guidance for this quarter is is based on the new phones AND the old phones plus everything else they have in the catalogue.

    The biggest structural change with regards to this Christmas season against last year is the presence of phones at all the major price points. They are likely to have options at most price points for the majority of products. 
Sign In or Register to comment.