France proceeding with digital tax, regardless of international reform efforts

Posted:
in AAPL Investors
The French government is going ahead with its digital tax effort on Apple and other tech multinational companies, and is no longer waiting on an international tax reform effort to do so.

Trump and Macron in 2018 | Image Credit: Shealah Craighead
Trump and Macron in 2018 | Image Credit: Shealah Craighead


Under pressure from the coronavirus, France is going ahead with its long-standing plan to tax Apple, Google, Facebook, and others.

"Never has a digital tax been more legitimate and more necessary," Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire told Reuters on Monday. "In any case, France will apply as it has always indicated a tax on digital giants in 2020 either in an international form if there is a deal or in a national form if there is no deal."

Originally proposed in December of 2018, the so-called GAFA - Google, Apple, Facebook, and Amazon - tax, would apply 3% sales tax on sales generated in France by major multinational firms. France pulled back on demanding the retroactive down payments in January, in an effort to prevent the U.S. from applying tariffs to French-made goods.

"What we're proposing is to give ourselves time and to show our goodwill, to postpone the remaining payments to December," a French Finance Ministry source said at the time, regarding the delay. However, with Monday's statement, this tax may be applied immediately and perhaps retroactively as well.

France has attempted to use the tax to reacquire taxes from revenue that goes through various processes by firms to reduce their outlay, such as the "Double Irish" performed by Apple. The European Union is working to reform taxes across the continent to minimize such activities, but while individual countries can apply regional laws relatively quickly, any Europe-wide measure will take longer to implement.

Major tech companies have come under fire for shifting funds around the European union to minimize their tax outlay, and in some cases funneling revenue through operations in countries with extremely low tax rates or other arrangements. Tax structures have led to criticism from various organizations, and in the case of Apple in France, led to protests in Apple Stores over the use of loopholes.

A 2016 ruling by the European Commission declared Ireland had to collect billions in back taxes from Apple, after being found to have extended preferential tax treatment to the company. Apple has since paid the entire 13.1 billion euro ($15.3 billion) balance, as well as 1.2 billion euro in interest, into an escrow account controlled by the Irish government.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Time to hit them back in that case and return the favor.
    williamlondonandrewj5790SpamSandwichcat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 21
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,701member
    apple ][ said:
    Time to hit them back in that case and return the favor.
    They have already factored that risk in. 


    prismatics
  • Reply 3 of 21
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 20,404member
    France is making a serious mistake. They will have to withdraw it. They’re using this as a means to signal to fellow EU countries, who are not in a mood to follow France’s lead. And they think that the US is beleaguered and in no mood to hit back. They couldn’t be more wrong. 

    France’s tax problem is with Ireland and the Netherlands. Not US tech companies. They’d be better off trying to fix the former. 
    edited May 2020 williamlondoncat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 21
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Good on them. Nice to see some gumption. 
    pscooter63DAalseth
  • Reply 5 of 21
    aderutteraderutter Posts: 605member
    Surely any retrospective aspect would be double taxation seeing as Apple paid the Irish tax bill?
    So any retrospective tax should come from the Irish government not Apple.
    And yes these possibilities will already be factored in by Apple.
    cat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 21
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    aderutter said:
    Surely any retrospective aspect would be double taxation seeing as Apple paid the Irish tax bill?
    So any retrospective tax should come from the Irish government not Apple.
    And yes these possibilities will already be factored in by Apple.
    No, a corporation tax legal judgement in Ireland (that is arguably not "paid", since it is under appeal and held in escrow) does not have any bearing on a new sales tax in France.

    Corporation tax and sales tax regularly co-exist and are not "double taxation" in any meaningful sense.  Not that there's anything intrinsically wrong with that anyway.
    edited May 2020
  • Reply 7 of 21
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,375member
    Since France is unilaterally imposing a highly discriminatory excise tax on a select few companies using some private criteria (like "they have lots of money and we want some of it - oui") it seems only fair that these targeted companies should be able to unilaterally and with great discrimination increase prices on all of their products and services sold in France to fully compensate for those country-specific losses. If this results in the need for French citizens to pay 4000 euro for an iPhone SE or 200 euro for a month of Facebook access, what is the problem?

    Hey, at the end of the day they'd still get to say they "got one over" on Apple, Google, Facebook, etc., and can run a victory lap around their depleted wallets, or murses, whatever the case. Yeah, I'd hate that the French people would essentially be punished for the gross incompetence and stupidity of their government, to which we can all say in collective unison - welcome to the club brother! We feel your pain, but we love your baguettes. 
    andrewj5790aderutterwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 21
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,701member
    dewme said:
    Since France is unilaterally imposing a highly discriminatory excise tax on a select few companies using some private criteria (like "they have lots of money and we want some of it - oui") it seems only fair that these targeted companies should be able to unilaterally and with great discrimination increase prices on all of their products and services sold in France to fully compensate for those country-specific losses. If this results in the need for French citizens to pay 4000 euro for an iPhone SE or 200 euro for a month of Facebook access, what is the problem?

    Hey, at the end of the day they'd still get to say they "got one over" on Apple, Google, Facebook, etc., and can run a victory lap around their depleted wallets, or murses, whatever the case. Yeah, I'd hate that the French people would essentially be punished for the gross incompetence and stupidity of their government, to which we can all say in collective unison - welcome to the club brother! We feel your pain, but we love your baguettes. 
    France can set its taxes and Apple can set its prices. 

    As long as neither break any laws in the process, there is no problem. 
    crowleymontrosemacsmuthuk_vanalingamprismatics
  • Reply 9 of 21
    dewme said:
    Since France is unilaterally imposing a highly discriminatory excise tax on a select few companies using some private criteria (like "they have lots of money and we want some of it - oui") it seems only fair that these targeted companies should be able to unilaterally and with great discrimination increase prices on all of their products and services sold in France to fully compensate for those country-specific losses. If this results in the need for French citizens to pay 4000 euro for an iPhone SE or 200 euro for a month of Facebook access, what is the problem?

    Hey, at the end of the day they'd still get to say they "got one over" on Apple, Google, Facebook, etc., and can run a victory lap around their depleted wallets, or murses, whatever the case. Yeah, I'd hate that the French people would essentially be punished for the gross incompetence and stupidity of their government, to which we can all say in collective unison - welcome to the club brother! We feel your pain, but we love your baguettes. 
    Not sure you thought through this fully, before you posted your comment. Apple can set its prices for their products as they please. And Apple knows very well that consumer will decide on the purchase as they please. And price does play a significant role in the purchase decision of the customer.
  • Reply 10 of 21
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    I thought the purpose of unifying the EU was to implement a common currency and harmonize the taxes so the entire EU would be “more competitive” than countries like the US and China?
    DAalsethcat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 21
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,375member
    dewme said:
    Since France is unilaterally imposing a highly discriminatory excise tax on a select few companies using some private criteria (like "they have lots of money and we want some of it - oui") it seems only fair that these targeted companies should be able to unilaterally and with great discrimination increase prices on all of their products and services sold in France to fully compensate for those country-specific losses. If this results in the need for French citizens to pay 4000 euro for an iPhone SE or 200 euro for a month of Facebook access, what is the problem?

    Hey, at the end of the day they'd still get to say they "got one over" on Apple, Google, Facebook, etc., and can run a victory lap around their depleted wallets, or murses, whatever the case. Yeah, I'd hate that the French people would essentially be punished for the gross incompetence and stupidity of their government, to which we can all say in collective unison - welcome to the club brother! We feel your pain, but we love your baguettes. 
    Not sure you thought through this fully, before you posted your comment. Apple can set its prices for their products as they please. And Apple knows very well that consumer will decide on the purchase as they please. And price does play a significant role in the purchase decision of the customer.
    Yes I understand the effect of price on the marketing equation (one of the 4Ps). These taxes/tariffs ultimately get passed to consumers so they should absolutely know up front that the price hike is a result of their own government's actions, not Apple's. I feel the same way across the board. If the US imposes a 25% tariff on goods from a certain country I'd like to see that cost called out on the product's sticker price, e.g.. manufacturer price = 400, government tariff = 100, sticker price = 500. Would this impact demand? Absolutely. But ultimately I believe it's better than allocating/hiding the added cost of doing business in one country across the entire customer base by increasing the product cost, or to retaliate through sales of an entirely different product or manufacturer, like increasing import tariffs of wine from the offending country. Yes it's a tough situation with no easy answer, but it's always the consumers who get caught on the losing end of the deal, and they are ultimately the ones who sponsor the leaders who are making these decisions for them, so why not expose them directly to the real data. 
  • Reply 12 of 21
    Who thinks Apple will just eat this extra 3% tax and who thinks Apple will just increases prices in France by 3% (or so)?  It would funny of trivial apps on the French App Store start showing up at 1.03€.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 21
    aderutteraderutter Posts: 605member
    crowley said:
    aderutter said:
    Surely any retrospective aspect would be double taxation seeing as Apple paid the Irish tax bill?
    So any retrospective tax should come from the Irish government not Apple.
    And yes these possibilities will already be factored in by Apple.
    No, a corporation tax legal judgement in Ireland (that is arguably not "paid", since it is under appeal and held in escrow) does not have any bearing on a new sales tax in France.

    Corporation tax and sales tax regularly co-exist and are not "double taxation" in any meaningful sense.  Not that there's anything intrinsically wrong with that anyway.
    Yeah I missed that it was a sales tax. I do think trying to apply it retrospectively would be illegal though.
  • Reply 14 of 21
    leavingthebiggleavingthebigg Posts: 1,291member
    I take France’s decision to move forward with this tax is as knee-jerk retaliation against Apple for choosing not to open iOS Bluetooth for background processing for the French COVID-19 contact tracing app. The other companies are also being hit. 
    cat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 21
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,783member
    Can’t blame them. There’s been calls for reform for a couple of decades. There’s no reason to treat tech like a special case any more. But EU negotiations have gone nowhere. 
  • Reply 16 of 21
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,701member
    I thought the purpose of unifying the EU was to implement a common currency and harmonize the taxes so the entire EU would be “more competitive” than countries like the US and China?
    I can't speak for the future, but the euro was an opt in originally, and taxes are managed by member states and that is why they vary across the EU.

    The EU is already more competitive as a bloc. The UK recently found that out as the EU managed a purchase order for medical supplies as a bloc. 

    Ironically, the U.K was invited in but IIRC they flummoxed the paperwork side of things. 
  • Reply 17 of 21
    beowulfschmidtbeowulfschmidt Posts: 2,141member
    The French government is going ahead with its digital tax effort cash grab on Apple and other tech multinational companies

    Fixed that for ya.
    cat52watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 21
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    avon b7 said:
    They have already factored that risk in. 


    That's good then, because nobody should be surprised or mad when we do strike back.
    cat52anantksundaramwatto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 21
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    avon b7 said:
    I thought the purpose of unifying the EU was to implement a common currency and harmonize the taxes so the entire EU would be “more competitive” than countries like the US and China?
    I can't speak for the future, but the euro was an opt in originally, and taxes are managed by member states and that is why they vary across the EU.

    The EU is already more competitive as a bloc. The UK recently found that out as the EU managed a purchase order for medical supplies as a bloc. 

    Ironically, the U.K was invited in but IIRC they flummoxed the paperwork side of things. 
    Just a quick correction here. 

    They didn’t flummox anything. Still sniffing their own Brexit hubris, they thought as ‘world-class negotiators’ they could go it alone. They failed and tried to lie about by pretending they missed all the email messages related to it. 

    Only thing saving their bacon is that the EU bloc efforts didn’t pan out either. 
    edited May 2020 muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 21
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,701member
    Rayz2016 said:
    avon b7 said:
    I thought the purpose of unifying the EU was to implement a common currency and harmonize the taxes so the entire EU would be “more competitive” than countries like the US and China?
    I can't speak for the future, but the euro was an opt in originally, and taxes are managed by member states and that is why they vary across the EU.

    The EU is already more competitive as a bloc. The UK recently found that out as the EU managed a purchase order for medical supplies as a bloc. 

    Ironically, the U.K was invited in but IIRC they flummoxed the paperwork side of things. 
    Just a quick correction here. 

    They didn’t flummox anything. Still sniffing their own Brexit hubris, they thought as ‘world-class negotiators’ they could go it alone. They failed and tried to lie about by pretending they missed all the email messages related to it. 

    Only thing saving their bacon is that the EU bloc efforts didn’t pan out either. 
    Not sure how the EU effort panned out in the end (in terms of actual final supply) but using bloc negotiating power is far better than going it alone. I'm with you on the screw up of the UK efforts.

    https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_523
    edited May 2020
Sign In or Register to comment.