Though I have little stomach for taxes, as tax money is always used nationally for unconstitutional and/or militaristic and/or corporatist purposes....
FairTax.org
Did you write this after you dropped off your kids at public school?
Why do techie guyz (in general, not in particular to the original poster) always think they know and understand tax laws and the such when the subject comes up? That and also their pseudo-libertarian proclivities which probably might at odds with just about everything they do.
Fairtax.org (which SS appears to link anytime there's a tax story on AI) sounds like a nut-case outfit with a (regressive) consumption tax agenda.
Even if if something semi-intelligent like a value-added tax was being proposed, one could take them a little more seriously.
No. 'Evasion' is illegal, 'avoidance' is not. So, AI gets it right.
Nope. Apple don’t claim that they don’t avoid tax. If they did, they would be lying. They avoid many state taxes (corporation tax or equivalent) in the EU by funnelling money around and making it “look” like all the profit is made in Ireland, when it clearly isn’t. However, everything they do is legal, so they do not evade tax. Therefore, AI’s statement should read:
"Apple has also steadfastly denied allegations that it evades taxes in Europe as well.”
Because, what Apple actually steadfastly states, is that they pay all tax legally owed. This is absolutely not the same as claiming that they don’t avoid tax.
Of course they avoid taxes. Every sensible company does it: it's totally legal (and ethical in my view).
Nope. Apple don’t claim that they don’t avoid tax. If they did, they would be lying. They avoid many state taxes (corporation tax or equivalent) in the EU by funnelling money around and making it “look” like all the profit is made in Ireland, when it clearly isn’t. However, everything they do is legal, so they do not evade tax. Therefore, AI’s statement should read:
"Apple has also steadfastly denied allegations that it evades taxes in Europe as well.”
Because, what Apple actually steadfastly states, is that they pay all tax legally owed. This is absolutely not the same as claiming that they don’t avoid tax.
Of course they avoid taxes. Every sensible company does it: it's totally legal (and ethical in my view).
They do not 'evade' taxes. Period.
Dude, seriously, you need to re-read what I have written.
Cook told Rose that he would "love to bring it home," but current policies are outdated and unfair.
"It would cost me 40 percent to bring it home, and I don't think that's a reasonable thing to do," Cook said.
??
If the US rate is 35%, less the corporate taxes already paid overseas in the country of origin, it couldn't be anywhere close to 40% to bring it home could it? Am I missing something?
Tim Cook probably knows more about it than you do.
He's dead right too. The US government has no valid claim on that money. It wasn't earned in the US. The Irish Government's policy is correct. So long as you pay your taxes on what you've actually earned in Ireland by selling to Irish consumers that's the only tax you'll pay as well as your standard corporation tax. What the US government wants Apple to do is to pay VAT and income tax in every country it operates in (which it currently does) and then pay the US government another 40% on that already taxed profit. It's madness. And fringe politicos are taking advantage of the public's lack of understanding of the tax system to politicise it. Even the EU commission is doing it. It's all just dirty politics.
What is completely different to what Apple and Google are doing is the type of stuff Starbucks has been known to do which is to actively avoid tax on domestic income. That's different. But not wanting to repatriate your profits because you'll have to give 40% of it away is completely reasonable. It's what any of us would do too, despite the moral high ground certain Bernie Bots might claim.
i was going to +1 you until the nonsense about Bernie Sanders. i havent heard Sanders state his opinion on repatriating. further, Sanders is the only candidate who 1) voted against the wars. 2) voted against the Patriot Act. 3) is opposed to domestic spying. he does support increasing SS and payroll taxes so billionaires dont pay in at the same exact level as i do, and im fine with that because its fair.
Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton both want to put in place measures to try to prevent "inversion" transactions in which US companies merge with foreign companies to essentially change their "citizenship" and no longer be subject to repatriation taxes.
Cook told Rose that he would "love to bring it home," but current policies are outdated and unfair.
"It would cost me 40 percent to bring it home, and I don't think that's a reasonable thing to do," Cook said.
??
If the US rate is 35%, less the corporate taxes already paid overseas in the country of origin, it couldn't be anywhere close to 40% to bring it home could it? Am I missing something?
Tim Cook probably definitely knows more about it than you do.
Way to answer the question about what I wasn't getting. LOL!
So you don't know either. Watching the interview Sunday might clear it up.
Federal Tax Rates for US Companies are < 12%. Talk to GE about paying taxes. They received billions in a refund. Sorry, but the reason everyone is whining is they jumped all their accounting to overseas to hide as much of the wealth as possible, and now that they aren't getting a one time repatriation rate of 5% they cry wolf. It's a BS claim by Cook and he knows it. The company net profits since 2005.
Not gross, but Net Profits. If you think they've paid 1/10th of that in total taxes you are a fool.
In 2012 they reportedly paid $6 billion while net profits were $41.73 billion.
I don't feel an ounce of pity for them or any company raping the nations while tax payers in the US and abroad, per capita pay considerably more than they do.
We are talking about effective corporate tax Rates: The actual rates they pay:
I'm sorry, but the idea that the President should give them a 5% one time repatriation makes me want to puke.
You went off-shore to dodge taxes, not because they were abhorrently represessive, but because the tax code allowed it to be legally done and save you billions in the process. Eat it. Suck it up and pay back what you ethically absued.
I have no problem with high taxes on the wealthiest. (In fact, the old progressive tax was by far the fairest way to go. Unfortunately, it was never unhooked from the inflation rate, and thus became regressive, taxing people with a higher percentage whose actual earning power wasn't changing as inflation drove their earnings up. Sadly, instead of adjusting the progressive tax to make it non-regressive by linking it to the inflation rate, Ronald Reagan and his cronies axed the progressive tax program and replaced it with our present "plateau" version.)
As an older person on fixed income who is FAR from being one of the wealthy, I rebel against the unfairness of the present corporate tax structure, not because I am against taxing the wealthier more, but because I'm against taxing the non-wealthy the same as the wealthy! Consider: Apple the corporation must pay $40 out of every $100 in net income for U.S. income tax, even when the income isn't earned in this country. But Apple doesn't really "own" that net income; it's stockholders do. And they get it back one way: via dividends. Now, dividends are also taxed, and if those dividends are earned inside of a 401k or an IRA, then that income is taxed AS REGULAR INCOME when it comes out.
In my case, I pay 25% tax. Thus, I am taxed off my dividend earnings via Apple's corporate tax $40 out of every $100, and then I am taxed again 25% of the remaining $60, or $15, for a total tax of $55 or 55%.
Meanwhile, "The tax rate on long-term capital gains beginning 2013 for those in the
39.6% bracket is 20% plus a 3.8% surcharge for high-income filers" (from Wikipedia). Yep. They actually pay a smidge LESS than I do!
Yeah, Tim Cook is right: The tax system is broken. But contrary to public opinion, it was partially broken when it was a progressive tax due to lack of inflation indexing, and then completely broken by Ronald Reagan and the Republicans decades ago.
Apple, most business/corporate operations, and the Apple CEO are fine with their stand on business policies. I, and many others, who are not lemmings...will not purchase any type of Apple product, phone, or service. The tax and corporation laws will eventually change. Perhaps by legislation, or perhaps by a revolution that is influenced by the decline in the status of the average American Citizen. The average American Citizen continues to work very hard, long hours, and receives little of the rewards. The rewards are leeched away by the bogus, "job/wealth creators." There is another name I prefer, "slave masters." How many Presidents, including the current one, are not very wealthy, and very corrupt? How Many Senators/Congressman are not very wealthy, and very corrupt? I pray for this Nation. We have made a god of wasted consumption, and wasted lives. Our business leaders are more often criminals, rather than innovators. After all, the only crime is in being found out, the only goal is improving personal wealth/corporate bottom line, isn't it? Public relations and fake efforts can cover the rest. It is the same in the Federal and State Governments, for the most part.
He's dead right too. The US government has no valid claim on that money. It wasn't earned in the US. The Irish Government's policy is correct. So long as you pay your taxes on what you've actually earned in Ireland by selling to Irish consumers that's the only tax you'll pay as well as your standard corporation tax. What the US government wants Apple to do is to pay VAT and income tax in every country it operates in (which it currently does) and then pay the US government another 40% on that already taxed profit. It's madness. And fringe politicos are taking advantage of the public's lack of understanding of the tax system to politicise it. Even the EU commission is doing it. It's all just dirty politics.
What is completely different to what Apple and Google are doing is the type of stuff Starbucks has been known to do which is to actively avoid tax on domestic income. That's different. But not wanting to repatriate your profits because you'll have to give 40% of it away is completely reasonable. It's what any of us would do too, despite the moral high ground certain Bernie Bots might claim.
i was going to +1 you until the nonsense about Bernie Sanders. i havent heard Sanders state his opinion on repatriating. further, Sanders is the only candidate who 1) voted against the wars. 2) voted against the Patriot Act. 3) is opposed to domestic spying. he does support increasing SS and payroll taxes so billionaires dont pay in at the same exact level as i do, and im fine with that because its fair.
pretty sure Rand Paul also did all of that
And what Sanders wants to do isn't fair. SS payments and benefits are linked, he wants to break that link by having people pay beyond the level that are linked to their eventual benefits.
^ where is the edit button. I also wanted to add that I haven't seen one way or the other but would assume that Sanders wants to make employers match his newly uncapped payroll tax. Between this and his $15 minimum wage, Sanders would destroy the economy. This is coming from someone who has always voted democrat.
The tax on US corporations bringing money earned overseas into the US is nuts. Apple's top competitor in the smartphone business is Samsung. When Samsung brings money into the US to invest in US operations, they only get tax incentives. If Apple wants to do the same thing, they get penalized. How does it make any sense at all to favor a foreign corporation over their US competitor in our tax code? As has been mentioned, Apple has already been taxed on their overseas profits in the countries they were earned in.
Comments
Even if if something semi-intelligent like a value-added tax was being proposed, one could take them a little more seriously.
They do not 'evade' taxes. Period.
I agree with you. Apple do not evade taxes.
3 is a function of pass-through, and that depends on a number of factors, too numerous to explain.
If we're in agreement, it's all good.
So you don't know either. Watching the interview Sunday might clear it up.
BTW, fixed your comment
http://www.statista.com/statistics/267728/apples-net-income-since-2005/
$232.78 Billion.
Not gross, but Net Profits. If you think they've paid 1/10th of that in total taxes you are a fool.
In 2012 they reportedly paid $6 billion while net profits were $41.73 billion.
I don't feel an ounce of pity for them or any company raping the nations while tax payers in the US and abroad, per capita pay considerably more than they do.
We are talking about effective corporate tax Rates: The actual rates they pay:
http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-corporate-tax-rates/
I'm sorry, but the idea that the President should give them a 5% one time repatriation makes me want to puke.
You went off-shore to dodge taxes, not because they were abhorrently represessive, but because the tax code allowed it to be legally done and save you billions in the process. Eat it. Suck it up and pay back what you ethically absued.
As an older person on fixed income who is FAR from being one of the wealthy, I rebel against the unfairness of the present corporate tax structure, not because I am against taxing the wealthier more, but because I'm against taxing the non-wealthy the same as the wealthy! Consider: Apple the corporation must pay $40 out of every $100 in net income for U.S. income tax, even when the income isn't earned in this country. But Apple doesn't really "own" that net income; it's stockholders do. And they get it back one way: via dividends. Now, dividends are also taxed, and if those dividends are earned inside of a 401k or an IRA, then that income is taxed AS REGULAR INCOME when it comes out.
In my case, I pay 25% tax. Thus, I am taxed off my dividend earnings via Apple's corporate tax $40 out of every $100, and then I am taxed again 25% of the remaining $60, or $15, for a total tax of $55 or 55%.
Meanwhile, "The tax rate on long-term capital gains beginning 2013 for those in the 39.6% bracket is 20% plus a 3.8% surcharge for high-income filers" (from Wikipedia). Yep. They actually pay a smidge LESS than I do!
Yeah, Tim Cook is right: The tax system is broken. But contrary to public opinion, it was partially broken when it was a progressive tax due to lack of inflation indexing, and then completely broken by Ronald Reagan and the Republicans decades ago.
I like Rand’s idea of a “one page” code, but as he has not expounded on this theory, I’ll simply stick with a call for a single, flat tax.
pretty sure Rand Paul also did all of that
And what Sanders wants to do isn't fair. SS payments and benefits are linked, he wants to break that link by having people pay beyond the level that are linked to their eventual benefits.
Never mind the 18 trillion in new spending!