EU details appeal against Apple and Ireland's $14.4 billion tax ruling

Posted:
in General Discussion
The European Union claims judges used "contradictory reasoning" when finding in favor of Apple and Ireland over a $14.4 billion tax payment.


Apple's Ireland headquarters


Having previously confirmed that it would appeal the court decision that found in favor of Apple and Ireland, the European Union has now published a summary of the arguments it put forward.

According to Bloomberg, newly released filings show that the EU believes, "the General Court committed several errors of law" in its ruling.

The European Commission's appeal centers on two points. Allegedly, the court failed to correctly weigh the EU's analysis, and they also wrongly assessed the value of intellectual property issues. The EC also argues that the ruling was "contradictory" in places.

The appeal was reportedly filed on September 25, 2020, the final day that the EU was eligible to contest the decision.

It asks for the judgement under appeal to be set aside, and the case to be referred back to the General Court "for reconsideration of the pleas not already assessed."

The original case concerned how Ireland allegedly allowed Apple an unfair tax arrangement. The European Commission subsequently ordered Apple to pay $14.4 billion in back taxes.

Apple paid that amount into an escrow account while appeals continued. In July 2020, the General Court in Luxembourg determined that the EU "did not succeed in showing to the requisite legal standard" that Apple had benefited.

Apple has not commented.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    Ah, here we go again.

    Even if Apple loses - which it won’t, is my prediction - it’ll be Ireland that really loses. 
    watto_cobrabshank
  • Reply 2 of 12
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Ultimately it comes down to this:
    Can a company operate and make profits in one country while shielding themselves from taxation by positioning a so called "headquarters" in a tax haven?

    Currently the main defense is:  "Well, it's legal" (although some dispute that in this case).   And corporate leaders are obligated to promote their organizations to the best of their abilities under the law. But laws are made to protect society so it won't last.

    The companies and their home countries can do their best to shield from them from responsibility, but ultimately it will fail.  The only question is:  "when, not if".
    edited February 2021
  • Reply 3 of 12
    steven n.steven n. Posts: 1,228member
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    JWSCwatto_cobrabshank
  • Reply 4 of 12
    entropysentropys Posts: 3,793member
    Bureaucrats will continue to pursue this as they aren’t using their money.

    the last thing they want to do is complete for business with Ireland. In fact, they don’t want to compete at all.

    all your money belongs to us.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 12
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    avon b7GeorgeBMacmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 6 of 12
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 1,202member
    crowley said:
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    Putting aside the fact that the court ruling doesn’t agree with your position, what form did state aid to Apple take in Ireland?
    watto_cobrabshank
  • Reply 7 of 12
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    JWSC said:
    crowley said:
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    Putting aside the fact that the court ruling doesn’t agree with your position, what form did state aid to Apple take in Ireland?

    Tax haven
  • Reply 8 of 12
    crowley said:
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    Except the "state aid and competition" angle didn't work out all that well in the last round, did it?
    watto_cobrabshank
  • Reply 9 of 12

    JWSC said:
    crowley said:
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    Putting aside the fact that the court ruling doesn’t agree with your position, what form did state aid to Apple take in Ireland?

    Tax haven
    Um... what? Elaborate? Cite? Explain?

    Just asserting something on a complex topic such as this is silly.
    watto_cobrabshank
  • Reply 10 of 12
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    JWSC said:
    crowley said:
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    Putting aside the fact that the court ruling doesn’t agree with your position, what form did state aid to Apple take in Ireland?
    It's not my position, it's what's the EU say.  This has all been laid out many times.  I don't see why you need me to do it for you.  
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 11 of 12
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    crowley said:
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    Except the "state aid and competition" angle didn't work out all that well in the last round, did it?
    So what?  The decision went the other way first time and now there's a new appeal.  The most recent decision isn't necessarily the correct one.
    muthuk_vanalingamGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 12 of 12
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member

    JWSC said:
    crowley said:
    steven n. said:
    Ultimately it comes down to this:

    Is it legal for a company to act within the laws enacted within a company and then be punished when some other country thinks they are not fair?

    Currently, the main defense is "It isn't fair/moral" (although many dispute that is the case) and elected officials are unable (or politically unwilling) to actually fix the problem legislatively.  Instead, they hope the courts will overstep their mandate and effectible write new laws the legislative branches are unwilling to do themselves.
    No, the main defence is that it isn't legal.  Ireland is subject to EU laws about state aid and competition, and Apple operating with Ireland are also subject to EU laws.  That's the way things work in the EU, EU law is held as supreme above local law, in the same way that federal law is held as supreme above state law in the USA.  No one is hoping that the courts will overstep their mandate at all, I'm not sure where you've drawn that conclusion from.
    Putting aside the fact that the court ruling doesn’t agree with your position, what form did state aid to Apple take in Ireland?

    Tax haven
    Um... what? Elaborate? Cite? Explain?

    Just asserting something on a complex topic such as this is silly.

    You asked.   I answered.   Sorry if it wasn't the answer you wanted to hear.
Sign In or Register to comment.