LOL. That's still not fair taxes. Do you seriously think Apple uses the most resources in the USA? Apple by far pays the most Federal taxes. But do they use the roads, utilities, ect more than companies like Walmart or Chevron? Hell no.
Pays or makes allowances to pay at some future point if nothing changes?
Both Exxon and Chevron are far FAR ahead of them with $31B and $20B "paid" in corporate taxes in 2013. Apple didn't even come close to those two.
As long as they make one, I, and many others, will be happy, as long as the camera doesn't protrude.
As to the tax, seeing as it is just 4% more, it's going to make no material difference to Apple.
No, the tax is 25% more. Apple is paying zero on this kind of earning. They are paying 21% on there non diverted UK earnings which turns into a mere 11 million pounds. The vast majority of their earnings are diverted. This will make a huge dent (about 19%) if Apple can not figure a way around it.
The government of any civilised country should aim to provide public services for its citizens and it does that through tax revenue. Each individual - that's me - has to pay each year and each company doing business here (who does not have the luxury of an army of tax advisors in their phone book) should also pay their fair share. Fair meaning fair, not simply their legal commitment.
If the law has convenient loopholes that as being used by wealthy corporations then those loopholes should be closed.
And just what is fair? Who gets to decide what "fair" is? My opinion, being a 34-year-old from a middle class family with a middle class income, is that everyone should pay the same percent of income in taxes. Many Americans, including the president, think that "fair" means the rich should pay a much higher percentage than others. However these same people who scream "fair share" on TV never explain what it really means or why fair and equal aren't the same when it comes to taxes. They also never define who is rich and who is middle class.
Pays or makes allowances to pay at some future point if nothing changes?
Apple wouldn't "by far pay the most Federal taxes" anyway. Both Exxon and Chevron are far FAR ahead of them with $31B and $20B "paid" in 2013. You really should check the things you think are fact more often than you seem to do.
Did Chevron and Exxon pay that in income taxes, or does that include the mineral royalties they also pay? Oil companies pay special taxes, called mineral royalties or something similar, which are not part of the comparison, in addition to their income taxes on profits.
According to Market Watch, Chevrons domestic (US) income taxes were 2010 -- 1.88B, 2011 -- 2.49B, 2012 -- 2.36B, 2013 -- 135M, 2014 -- 1.08B
Did Chevron and Exxon pay that in income taxes, or does that include the mineral royalties they also pay? Oil companies pay special taxes, called mineral royalties or something similar, which are not part of the comparison, in addition to their income taxes on profits.
According to Market Watch, Chevrons domestic (US) income taxes were 2010 -- 1.88B, 2011 -- 2.49B, 2012 -- 2.36B, 2013 -- 135M, 2014 -- 1.08B
Because much of the profit was realized overseas both Exxon and Chevron paid those taxes overseas, deducting the expense from the taxes owed the US. Regarding your numbers for Apple from MarketWatch they far exceed what Tim Cook stated to be fact in the Senate hearings. I think they've made an error unless you believe Mr Cook didn't know what he was talking about.
"Last year (2012) , our U.S. federal cash effective tax rate was about 30.5%, and we paid the U.S. Treasury nearly $6 billion in cash." Your link says about $8.5B. https://www.apple.com/pr/pdf/timcookopeningstatement.pdf
Good news, particularly for those companies whose executives like to lecture the rest of us on ethics. I particularly like the fact that this new tax is actually higher than the usual corporate taxes.
Countries also need to pass laws that create a different sort of Double Irish. Evade taxes that the rest of us pay and, when caught, corporations pay twice as much. Unlike most people, Apple, Amazon, Google, Starbucks, and the rest can afford to pay lawyers and tax accountants to stay within the law.
I can understand a tax of 5% or less, but 25%? That's insanity! Is the U.K. wanting to put the companies out of business while sitting on their fat, lazy arses?
Well, raise prices on all UK Apple products to cover the tax. Put the pain where it belongs.
Be sure and put it on the receipts as well, "Google Tax - 25%".
The tax we are talking about is corporate tax on profits made by a company, so the pain can only be put on the company who made the profits, and definetly not on the customers, who somewhere already contributed to the profits as part of the selling price.
I can understand a tax of 5% or less, but 25%? That's insanity! Is the U.K. wanting to put the companies out of business while sitting on their fat, lazy arses?
The tax is paid on profits made. If a company does not make profits, it must not pay this tax. So explain to me how a cmpany can go out of business by such a tax.
The tax is paid on profits made. If a company does not make profits, it must not pay this tax. So explain to me how a cmpany can go out of business by such a tax.
Because it is another expense which means they have to raise their prices to compensate. It is not that difficult to understand -- all corporate taxes are paid by the consumer. When pricing their product, taxes are an expense that factors in to the overall cost.
Too high taxes means price too high and they cannot sell the product.
The tax is paid on profits made. If a company does not make profits, it must not pay this tax. So explain to me how a cmpany can go out of business by such a tax.
A high tax always just causes hurt no matter how you slice it or dice it.
Because much of the profit was realized overseas both Exxon and Chevron paid those taxes overseas, deducting the expense from the taxes owed the US. Regarding your numbers for Apple from MarketWatch they far exceed what Tim Cook stated to be fact in the Senate hearings. I think they've made an error unless you believe Mr Cook didn't know what he was talking about.
"Last year (2012) , our U.S. federal cash effective tax rate was about 30.5%, and we paid the U.S. Treasury nearly $6 billion in cash." Your link says about $8.5B.
The tax we are talking about is corporate tax on profits made by a company, so the pain can only be put on the company who made the profits, and definetly not on the customers, who somewhere already contributed to the profits as part of the selling price.
You definitely need to learn how economics works. The pain is put directly on the customers through higher prices.
The tax we are talking about is corporate tax on profits made by a company, so the pain can only be put on the company who made the profits, and definetly not on the customers, who somewhere already contributed to the profits as part of the selling price.
In order to maintain profit margins, the selling prices of iPhones in the UK will go up as a result of the tax. Where do you think that the 25% comes from?
You do realize that ALL corporate taxes are paid by the consumer, in the end, right?
You do realize when tax breaks are given to business that the consumer makes up the difference, right? Take my state businesses pay very low taxes & no property tax, education funding has been cut, police forces etc., are being downsized, the roads & infrastructure are a decaying mess etc. The solution (from a Republican Governor & legislature) raise taxes. They have decided to raise taxes on citizens by taxing pensions, raising property taxes on the citizens & now trying to raise the sales tax to fix roads. There has to be some balance.
Starbucks paid virtually no UK tax, whereas a small local coffee shop has to pay corporation tax of 20% on their profits - low in comparison to most EU countries and a lot lower than the United States, but not as low as Starbucks who paid 0%. If you run a business in the UK you should pay the local taxes like everyone else.
My argument is the person said Apple needs to pay for their share of utilities, roads, services by the US govt. My argument is Apple pays the most US taxes but I doubt they use the most resources from the US govt
Comments
Pays or makes allowances to pay at some future point if nothing changes?
Both Exxon and Chevron are far FAR ahead of them with $31B and $20B "paid" in corporate taxes in 2013. Apple didn't even come close to those two.
As long as they make one, I, and many others, will be happy, as long as the camera doesn't protrude.
As to the tax, seeing as it is just 4% more, it's going to make no material difference to Apple.
No, the tax is 25% more. Apple is paying zero on this kind of earning. They are paying 21% on there non diverted UK earnings which turns into a mere 11 million pounds. The vast majority of their earnings are diverted. This will make a huge dent (about 19%) if Apple can not figure a way around it.
And just what is fair? Who gets to decide what "fair" is? My opinion, being a 34-year-old from a middle class family with a middle class income, is that everyone should pay the same percent of income in taxes. Many Americans, including the president, think that "fair" means the rich should pay a much higher percentage than others. However these same people who scream "fair share" on TV never explain what it really means or why fair and equal aren't the same when it comes to taxes. They also never define who is rich and who is middle class.
Who would do it this time?
Pays or makes allowances to pay at some future point if nothing changes?
Apple wouldn't "by far pay the most Federal taxes" anyway. Both Exxon and Chevron are far FAR ahead of them with $31B and $20B "paid" in 2013. You really should check the things you think are fact more often than you seem to do.
Did Chevron and Exxon pay that in income taxes, or does that include the mineral royalties they also pay? Oil companies pay special taxes, called mineral royalties or something similar, which are not part of the comparison, in addition to their income taxes on profits.
According to Market Watch, Chevrons domestic (US) income taxes were 2010 -- 1.88B, 2011 -- 2.49B, 2012 -- 2.36B, 2013 -- 135M, 2014 -- 1.08B
More numbers can be found at http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/cvx/financials
Same site, Apple paid in domestic income taxes
2010 -- 2.81B, 2011 -- 4.65B, 2012 -- 8.42B, 2013 -- 10.42B, 2014 -- 9.48B
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/aapl/financials
Does not say but that may include state taxes in addition to Federal taxes.
Apple FAR outpaces Chevron in income taxes paid.
--
http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/01/08/companies-paying-the-most-taxes/2/
Because much of the profit was realized overseas both Exxon and Chevron paid those taxes overseas, deducting the expense from the taxes owed the US. Regarding your numbers for Apple from MarketWatch they far exceed what Tim Cook stated to be fact in the Senate hearings. I think they've made an error unless you believe Mr Cook didn't know what he was talking about.
"Last year (2012) , our U.S. federal cash effective tax rate was about 30.5%, and we paid the U.S. Treasury nearly $6 billion in cash." Your link says about $8.5B.
https://www.apple.com/pr/pdf/timcookopeningstatement.pdf
25% of offshore profits -good luck with that. That will almost certainly get appealed to court. BTW, a 20% sales tax (VAT) is absurd.
Countries also need to pass laws that create a different sort of Double Irish. Evade taxes that the rest of us pay and, when caught, corporations pay twice as much. Unlike most people, Apple, Amazon, Google, Starbucks, and the rest can afford to pay lawyers and tax accountants to stay within the law.
Well, raise prices on all UK Apple products to cover the tax. Put the pain where it belongs.
Be sure and put it on the receipts as well, "Google Tax - 25%".
The tax we are talking about is corporate tax on profits made by a company, so the pain can only be put on the company who made the profits, and definetly not on the customers, who somewhere already contributed to the profits as part of the selling price.
I can understand a tax of 5% or less, but 25%? That's insanity! Is the U.K. wanting to put the companies out of business while sitting on their fat, lazy arses?
The tax is paid on profits made. If a company does not make profits, it must not pay this tax. So explain to me how a cmpany can go out of business by such a tax.
The tax is paid on profits made. If a company does not make profits, it must not pay this tax. So explain to me how a cmpany can go out of business by such a tax.
Because it is another expense which means they have to raise their prices to compensate. It is not that difficult to understand -- all corporate taxes are paid by the consumer. When pricing their product, taxes are an expense that factors in to the overall cost.
Too high taxes means price too high and they cannot sell the product.
The tax is paid on profits made. If a company does not make profits, it must not pay this tax. So explain to me how a cmpany can go out of business by such a tax.
A high tax always just causes hurt no matter how you slice it or dice it.
Corporate taxes.
http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/01/08/companies-paying-the-most-taxes/2/
Because much of the profit was realized overseas both Exxon and Chevron paid those taxes overseas, deducting the expense from the taxes owed the US. Regarding your numbers for Apple from MarketWatch they far exceed what Tim Cook stated to be fact in the Senate hearings. I think they've made an error unless you believe Mr Cook didn't know what he was talking about.
"Last year (2012) , our U.S. federal cash effective tax rate was about 30.5%, and we paid the U.S. Treasury nearly $6 billion in cash." Your link says about $8.5B.
https://www.apple.com/pr/pdf/timcookopeningstatement.pdf
The domestic taxes probably includes state and local taxes in addition to Federal taxes.
The tax we are talking about is corporate tax on profits made by a company, so the pain can only be put on the company who made the profits, and definetly not on the customers, who somewhere already contributed to the profits as part of the selling price.
You definitely need to learn how economics works. The pain is put directly on the customers through higher prices.
The tax we are talking about is corporate tax on profits made by a company, so the pain can only be put on the company who made the profits, and definetly not on the customers, who somewhere already contributed to the profits as part of the selling price.
In order to maintain profit margins, the selling prices of iPhones in the UK will go up as a result of the tax. Where do you think that the 25% comes from?
I said USA federal tax. I was talking about USA roads, utilities, ect. Apple pays the most USA taxes by far.
They make more money.
You do realize that ALL corporate taxes are paid by the consumer, in the end, right?
You do realize when tax breaks are given to business that the consumer makes up the difference, right? Take my state businesses pay very low taxes & no property tax, education funding has been cut, police forces etc., are being downsized, the roads & infrastructure are a decaying mess etc. The solution (from a Republican Governor & legislature) raise taxes. They have decided to raise taxes on citizens by taxing pensions, raising property taxes on the citizens & now trying to raise the sales tax to fix roads. There has to be some balance.
That wasn't my argument.
My argument is the person said Apple needs to pay for their share of utilities, roads, services by the US govt. My argument is Apple pays the most US taxes but I doubt they use the most resources from the US govt
Where are these sort of taxes based on usage?