Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
In general tax avoidance is where people or companies game the system ie use a loop hole not designed as such by legislators. It’s not expensing something or taking a deduction on pension or charity contributions. That’s a design.
On the second point companies tend to sell at a price that generates demand. That’s econ 101.
So, Apple will not pay this tax. Other companies might, but not Apple. Because demand for Apple’s products is relatively inelastic. The consumer will pay.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
As the director of a small business we pay corporation tax as it was intended. Almost all small companies do. It’s only large corporations that can afford to set up the shell organisations to shuffle profits from one country to another to artificially lower their tax burden in countries with lower tax rates. The crazy thing is that the U.K. has one of the lowest corporation tax rates in Europe.
What is morally repugnant is that companies 1000 times smaller than Apple are paying more in taxes that support our services. Corporation taxes are higher than they could be because of this shit that huge companies like Apple pull by not contributing in proportion to their true profits.
When you look at Apple’s cash mountain it becomes obvious that they can afford to pay the same rate of tax as every local business does.
I don’t believe that Apple’s prices would increase significantly. It is a tax on profit, not revenue.
Apple are paying their taxes in America, or have agreed to do so. And this is a tax on revenue not profits. There is no legal way I can think of that the EU cannot also charge you this tax as well as Apple. If you sell abroad then you will pay tax on the revenue you make there. Not the profits. Do you think that makes sense?
Even if it was charged of regional profits how would that be worked out.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
In general tax avoidance is where people or companies game the system ie use a loop hole not designed as such by legislators. It’s not expensing something or taking a deduction on pension or charity contributions. That’s a design.
On the second point companies tend to sell at a price that generates demand. That’s econ 101.
So, Apple will not pay this tax. Other companies might, but not Apple. Because demand for Apple’s products is relatively inelastic. The consumer will pay.
its probably true that Econ 101 does not apply to Apple in terms of supply and demand. In any case nobody is gong to pay this ill thought out tax.
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
There’s a difference between taking tax deductions you’re legally entitled to and gaming the international tax system. Many international companies are willing to use unlawful tax strategies that haven’t yet been ruled illegal. Just look at Apple’s tax arrangements with Ireland.
European citizens are fortunate that they have governments that are willing to work together to close loopholes and have the combined clout to make it possible.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
In general tax avoidance is where people or companies game the system ie use a loop hole not designed as such by legislators. It’s not expensing something or taking a deduction on pension or charity contributions. That’s a design.
On the second point companies tend to sell at a price that generates demand. That’s econ 101.
So, Apple will not pay this tax. Other companies might, but not Apple. Because demand for Apple’s products is relatively inelastic. The consumer will pay.
its probably true that Econ 101 does not apply to Apple in terms of supply and demand. In any case nobody is gong to pay this ill thought out tax.
It's so "ill-thought out" that you haven't even seen a proposal for it yet, just a bunch of speculative incensed comments on an Apple message board, which are obviously going to be much more insightful than the work of actual lawmakers.
Save the judgement for when you have some evidence dude.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
I bet you don't voluntarily pay more than your tax authority tells you to. But you think Apple should.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
In general tax avoidance is where people or companies game the system ie use a loop hole not designed as such by legislators. It’s not expensing something or taking a deduction on pension or charity contributions. That’s a design.
On the second point companies tend to sell at a price that generates demand. That’s econ 101.
So, Apple will not pay this tax. Other companies might, but not Apple. Because demand for Apple’s products is relatively inelastic. The consumer will pay.
its probably true that Econ 101 does not apply to Apple in terms of supply and demand. In any case nobody is gong to pay this ill thought out tax.
It's so "ill-thought out" that you haven't even seen a proposal for it yet, just a bunch of speculative incensed comments on an Apple message board, which are obviously going to be much more insightful than the work of actual lawmakers.
Save the judgement for when you have some evidence dude.
I mean, despite the nonsense spouted by both Britain's tabloid and supposedly rational media, Apple is basically an old school manufacturing company. It manufactures goods, and sell the goods into retail channels. They own some, but by no means most, of these channels. You can also buy online but thats probably a tiny proportion of sales, and as far as I know is already taxed with VAT in the recipients country.
This could also describe BMW ( except perhaps for the last part). Certainly would describe most manufacturing companies, electronic device manufacturers, or wine growers, or whatever.
If this tax is a tax on where the item is clicked on ( or watched in the case of google ads) then it is in fact workable, but it will effect Google and Amazon. However this is Apple insider, and the claim is that this will tax Apple. I can't see how it can tax Apple and not Renault, or French wine producers. I doubt if that is the aim though.
I love the Apple ecosystem but I wish they would pay their fair share of tax. Much of what we pay in tax goes in to making a country civilised and humane. Massive corporations, like Apple Inc., should recognise their moral duty to serve the citizens of those countries in which they generate obscene profits by contributing more than new tech. Tax aids the welfare of the most needy and deprived.
Apple claim to act within the fiscal laws of each and every territory, however, this they achive by using mechanisms which are beyond the reach of yer average Joe or even yer more than average Joe.
Does it not trouble each and every one of you that the 62 richest billionaires own as much wealth as the poorer half of the earth's population?
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
In general tax avoidance is where people or companies game the system ie use a loop hole not designed as such by legislators. It’s not expensing something or taking a deduction on pension or charity contributions. That’s a design.
On the second point companies tend to sell at a price that generates demand. That’s econ 101.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
As the director of a small business we pay corporation tax as it was intended. Almost all small companies do. It’s only large corporations that can afford to set up the shell organisations to shuffle profits from one country to another to artificially lower their tax burden in countries with lower tax rates. The crazy thing is that the U.K. has one of the lowest corporation tax rates in Europe.
What is morally repugnant is that companies 1000 times smaller than Apple are paying more in taxes that support our services. Corporation taxes are higher than they could be because of this shit that huge companies like Apple pull by not contributing in proportion to their true profits.
When you look at Apple’s cash mountain it becomes obvious that they can afford to pay the same rate of tax as every local business does.
I don’t believe that Apple’s prices would increase significantly. It is a tax on profit, not revenue.
Founded an app development company in 2012, I can only fully agree with this post
The EU already has a tax based on revenue. It's called VAT (Value Added Tax).
In addition, the European Commission does not have the right to raise taxes. That privilege is - for the time being - reserved to the sovereign treasuries of the EU member states.
This is a case of the EU massively overstepping its competencies and a Commission that, yet again, acts without any democratic mandate.
I'm very glad that the UK has voted to kick it to the kerb.
That’s right. There’s a tax on revenue already. The difference is it isn’t really paid by the company, it is paid by the consumer and collected by the company.
it looks like this tax comes from the company’s actual earnings. Which means that potentially a loss making company may owe taxes in some countries, which can only see them leave those countries. It’s not clear whether this is an additional corporation tax to the existing corporation (HQ) tax, or can be deducted from it. It’s also interesting that the EU seeks to be targeting US companies. Surely BMW will also pay this tax to France, Ireland etc. No mention of that.
And of course this is both a raid on US revenue, and a totally new competency for the EU itself. Apple is now tax compliant, as it has agreed to repatriate taxes to the US. If taxes are already paid in Europe then fewer are owed in the US. Thisleads to a trade or tax war.
Where does this crazy idea that taxes paid in europe = less taxes paid in the US and vice-versa?! Surely the US only collects taxes on sales within it's own borders and any sales outwith that has no bearing whatsoever on a company's US bank balance.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
In general tax avoidance is where people or companies game the system ie use a loop hole not designed as such by legislators. It’s not expensing something or taking a deduction on pension or charity contributions. That’s a design.
On the second point companies tend to sell at a price that generates demand. That’s econ 101.
So, Apple will not pay this tax. Other companies might, but not Apple. Because demand for Apple’s products is relatively inelastic. The consumer will pay.
its probably true that Econ 101 does not apply to Apple in terms of supply and demand. In any case nobody is gong to pay this ill thought out tax.
We need wait and see what the details of the proposal are first. All we have so far is the mention of it in an interview.
It's not just BIG business that does this, a local car garage owner every year would suddenly have a new ferrari or invest in a few housing projects just as the company had to file it's returns, suddenly they went from a big profit making company to just breaking even and with that, paying as little tax as "legally" possible. Big business just does it on an international scale, and as such the tax avoidance is in the millions or billions rather than thousands.
I love the Apple ecosystem but I wish they would pay their fair share of tax. Much of what we pay in tax goes in to making a country civilised and humane.
This is true in theory, but it assumes the tax revenue is fairly and efficiently used. I’d say there is so much bloat and misuse that any case of ‘tax avoidance’ is pittance in the pool of tax issues. Whether you like big or small government there is no bigger problem with taxes than the population being taxed too much because of government bloat and misuse. It seems to me the focus on ‘tax avoidance’ is just ‘tax misuse misdirection’ by the government. I don’t think the government should get more tax money to misuse.
Much as a love Apple’s products, this type of tax avoidance is morally repugnant. A move to tax on revenue will fix this shenanigans. Large multinationals have got away with paying almost no corporation tax in the same markets that domestic companies have to pay full dues for years.
Great. Much as you “love Apple’s products” are you willing to pay a higher price for them to cover those higher taxes? What? You think Apple and the others will simply absorb those higher taxes and not pass them on to you? You the consumer pay for everything or didn’t you know that?
Do you take every tax deduction your are legally allowed to take? If you do then you are morally repugnant by your own standard.
Here is the problem, the people who complain Apple is doing what is legally allowed, is not the same if they do what is legally allow, of course they take full advantage of the tax code since it benefits them, but no one else is allow to take the same advantage.
BTW, when the new tax code came out in the US, it was reveal that 60% of people filling a personal income return do not itemize their deduction so they never got full advantage of the tax code. That is their own fault, that is why the government was saying 80% of the people will pay less taxes since they now have higher automatic standard deductions.
I found that most people are upset that companies take every deduction they can but most people did not and some how this was not fair to them.
This appears to be just a tax on products sold in each European country - so sell 1,000,000 iphones in france, pay france government between 2-6% of those 10 sales, sell 2,000,000 iphones in the UK, apple pays UK government 2-6% of those 20 sales (whether that is 2-6% of the revenue or profit to be decided). Apple won't have to pay any tax to the EU on iphones sold outside the EU.
This would seem to be a relatively easy way to counter the problem with big companies paying virtually no Corporation Tax (a tax on profits in that specific country) due to the measures that these big companies take to reduce that tax through shell corporations in other countries. I'm a small business owner so it also irks me that larger companies can get away with paying virtually no corporation tax, however, at the end of the day big companies are not strictly speaking doing anything illegal and yes, if I could do what they do I probably would as well (as would ost people). At the end of the day it's a ridiculously complicated system which allows this to happen. It's up to politicians to sort out the law so those loopholes so they do not exist in the first place but can;t see that happening any time soon, so easier to introduce this proposed system instead.
Would be interesting to know how they will determine which companies will be liable for this tax. Will it be based on a sales/profits basis, so if company x sells more than y number of products, or gets z $ in profit/revenue then they are liable?
I don't know why people don't seem to know this, but Corporations DON'T pay taxes!!!! Well, they do, but they don't. They may write the check for them, but it's YOU the customer that is paying the taxes. If the taxes go UP, the prices go UP right along with them. Apple is not just going to eat it, they'll pass it right along to you. In effect, you're just taxing yourself more money!!! The government in effect steals more of your money, and then wastes it on all kinds of CRAP!!!
Comments
Even if it was charged of regional profits how would that be worked out.
European citizens are fortunate that they have governments that are willing to work together to close loopholes and have the combined clout to make it possible.
Save the judgement for when you have some evidence dude.
But you think Apple should.
This could also describe BMW ( except perhaps for the last part). Certainly would describe most manufacturing companies, electronic device manufacturers, or wine growers, or whatever.
If this tax is a tax on where the item is clicked on ( or watched in the case of google ads) then it is in fact workable, but it will effect Google and Amazon. However this is Apple insider, and the claim is that this will tax Apple. I can't see how it can tax Apple and not Renault, or French wine producers. I doubt if that is the aim though.
Apple claim to act within the fiscal laws of each and every territory, however, this they achive by using mechanisms which are beyond the reach of yer average Joe or even yer more than average Joe.
Does it not trouble each and every one of you that the 62 richest billionaires own as much wealth as the poorer half of the earth's population?
I hope Apple includes this sales tax in customer it’s receipts.
Of of course there was mention of dropping tax on profits.
Here is the problem, the people who complain Apple is doing what is legally allowed, is not the same if they do what is legally allow, of course they take full advantage of the tax code since it benefits them, but no one else is allow to take the same advantage.
BTW, when the new tax code came out in the US, it was reveal that 60% of people filling a personal income return do not itemize their deduction so they never got full advantage of the tax code. That is their own fault, that is why the government was saying 80% of the people will pay less taxes since they now have higher automatic standard deductions.
I found that most people are upset that companies take every deduction they can but most people did not and some how this was not fair to them.
This would seem to be a relatively easy way to counter the problem with big companies paying virtually no Corporation Tax (a tax on profits in that specific country) due to the measures that these big companies take to reduce that tax through shell corporations in other countries. I'm a small business owner so it also irks me that larger companies can get away with paying virtually no corporation tax, however, at the end of the day big companies are not strictly speaking doing anything illegal and yes, if I could do what they do I probably would as well (as would ost people). At the end of the day it's a ridiculously complicated system which allows this to happen. It's up to politicians to sort out the law so those loopholes so they do not exist in the first place but can;t see that happening any time soon, so easier to introduce this proposed system instead.
Would be interesting to know how they will determine which companies will be liable for this tax. Will it be based on a sales/profits basis, so if company x sells more than y number of products, or gets z $ in profit/revenue then they are liable?