Irish cabinet votes to appeal EU's $14.5B tax penalty on Apple

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 56
    at 0.005% that would mean the $400m tax Cook says apple paid that year would mean Apple would've had to have had a taxable income of $8 trillion dollars.
    edited September 2016 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 42 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,298member
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/merkel-backs-ireland-in-apple-showdown-35018106.html

    Angela Merkel has expressed fears the €13bn Apple tax ruling will hurt investment in Europe, putting her on the same side as Ireland in a looming showdown over the limits of national sovereignty and the rights of the federally minded European Commission. She is understood to be taking particular issue with the retroactive nature of the ruling - which seeks payment of €13bn in taxes dating back over a decade and based on standards and rules introduced later.

    Merkel is afraid that investment will leave Europe, with a cheat on diesel emission tests being the high bar for innovation.
    edited September 2016
  • Reply 43 of 56
    Simply crazy that Ireland does not want to collect the $14.5 billion Apple owes. 
  • Reply 44 of 56
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    gwydion said:
    artdent said:
    To those in favor of this penalty, do you somehow think that by Apple paying more taxes you will pay less? If so, I'd like some of what you've been smoking.

    Perhaps you feel Apple has too much money and should spread the wealth. Who do you think is going to pay the bill for higher corporate taxes? Apple? Not hardly. It'll be paid for by the consumer in the form of higher prices for Apple products. So, if you're an Apple customer, you're essentially asking to pay more in taxes yourself. Great plan.

    Oh, no, I don't way to pay less taxes, I want that Apple, IKEA, Google, the 35 European companies found having illegal state aids by Belgium like Apple in Ireland and the other companies in Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands or Ireland with secret deals with those governments to pay the taxes owed, nothing more, nothing less.

    Taxes owed to EU countries or to the US
    There is no fracking tax owed to the EU, The EU says Ireland should tax the company more like other companies in the EU; that's it.
    They're arguing about wether the EU is right about these fact they say this gives those companies an advantage.
    Ireland disagrees and they're appealing. They do have a fracking right to their own fiscal policy (especially in respect to arbitrary future laws!); if not, well the EU will fall apart.
    Introducing retroactive taxes in particular is akin to the worse of socialism (basically seizing assets once they've been made productive!, nationalizing those profits retroactively).

    And those things weren't secret either. Stop peddling bullshit.
    edited September 2016
  • Reply 45 of 56
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    justbobf said:
    Simply crazy that Ireland does not want to collect the $14.5 billion Apple owes. 
    They're not owed according to fracking Irish laws, that's why. The EU gave a big FU to Irish home rule.
    Not only that, arbitrary future laws may have a retroactive effect!!!
    tmay
  • Reply 46 of 56
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,011member
    at 0.005% that would mean the $400m tax Cook says apple paid that year would mean Apple would've had to have had a taxable income of $8 trillion dollars.
    "You're not reading it right"  So it really boils down to semantics and technicalities.

     According to the EU Commission press release:
     "Apple Sales International recorded profits of US$ 22 billion (c.a. €16 billion) but under the terms of the tax ruling only around €50 million were considered taxable in Ireland, leaving €15.95 billion of profits untaxed. As a result, Apple Sales International paid less than €10 million of corporate tax in Ireland in 2011 – an effective tax rate of about 0.05% on its overall annual profits. In subsequent years, Apple Sales International's recorded profits continued to increase but the profits considered taxable in Ireland under the terms of the tax ruling did not. Thus this effective tax rate decreased further to only 0.005% in 2014."

     But according to Apple's attorney Bruce Sewell:
     "That’s not true. We pay tax on our activity in Ireland at the statutory 12.5%. We are the largest tax payer in Ireland, the largest tax payer in the US and the largest tax payer in the world. We paid $13 billion in tax last year and had a reported global tax rate of 26.4%. This isn’t an argument about how much tax we pay, but where we pay it. The European Commission appears to believe that despite the fact these profits are legitimately attributable to our head office in Cupertino and subject to tax on a deferred basis, they should be taxed in Ireland.

     So according to PED here's the bottom line:
     - Apple's statement assumes it will pay U.S. taxes on its European profits when it brings that money home—but only after the tax rate is reduced from its current 35% tax rate
    -The European Commission's statement assumes Apple will never pay U.S. taxes on those profits.

    PED30.com has an article on this if anyone is curious enough to read it. 


    edited September 2016 analogjack
  • Reply 47 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,298member
    justbobf said:
    Simply crazy that Ireland does not want to collect the $14.5 billion Apple owes. 
    I"m guessing that the current jobs and jobs growth is worth more to the economy than a one time windfall, that might see the same companies leave Ireland, not that these companies are stating that.
    edited September 2016
  • Reply 48 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,298member
    gatorguy said:
    at 0.005% that would mean the $400m tax Cook says apple paid that year would mean Apple would've had to have had a taxable income of $8 trillion dollars.
    "You're not reading it right"  So it really boils down to semantics and technicalities.

     According to the EU Commission press release:
     "Apple Sales International recorded profits of US$ 22 billion (c.a. €16 billion) but under the terms of the tax ruling only around €50 million were considered taxable in Ireland, leaving €15.95 billion of profits untaxed. As a result, Apple Sales International paid less than €10 million of corporate tax in Ireland in 2011 – an effective tax rate of about 0.05% on its overall annual profits. In subsequent years, Apple Sales International's recorded profits continued to increase but the profits considered taxable in Ireland under the terms of the tax ruling did not. Thus this effective tax rate decreased further to only 0.005% in 2014."

     But according to Apple's attorney Bruce Sewell:
     "That’s not true. We pay tax on our activity in Ireland at the statutory 12.5%. We are the largest tax payer in Ireland, the largest tax payer in the US and the largest tax payer in the world. We paid $13 billion in tax last year and had a reported global tax rate of 26.4%. This isn’t an argument about how much tax we pay, but where we pay it. The European Commission appears to believe that despite the fact these profits are legitimately attributable to our head office in Cupertino and subject to tax on a deferred basis, they should be taxed in Ireland.

     So according to PED here's the bottom line:
     - Apple's statement assumes it will pay U.S. taxes on its European profits when it brings that money home—but only after the tax rate is reduced from its current 35% tax rate
    -The European Commission's statement assumes Apple will never pay U.S. taxes on those profits.

    PED30.com has an article on this if anyone is curious enough to read it. 


    I'll wait for a couple of days to read it; I like Philip and his site but don't frequent it enough to pay for it. The comments seem to agree with your post.

    Needless to say, Apple is not the only company that would be impacted by this in Ireland.

    The question I would have is whether it is appropriate to dump a potential trillion and a half dollars of investment on the U.S. market all at once or create an annuity scheme where companies are given a number of quarters over a period of time in which they can participate at the legislated rate. That's a lot of potential investment that might go to large mergers and acquisitions versus investment in innovation and acquisition of small companies for their IP.

    As for the EU, I wouldn't have a problem with a small "parking fee" that could be mitigated by modest investments within the other EU countries; how about Scotland when it leaves Great Britain and joins the EU?
  • Reply 49 of 56
    1st1st Posts: 443member
    justbobf said:
    Simply crazy that Ireland does not want to collect the $14.5 billion Apple owes. 
    (1) does apple really owe ireland anything? (2) ireland  need money (any gov. need money) is  irrelavent  to how much tax need to pay before the law set in place.  (3) any gov would love to have 14.5 B extra, ireland or other place.  (4) EU ask  ireland to collect it to pay the debt? that more likely the motive...
  • Reply 50 of 56
    That's funny. If I were you, I'd be far more worried about why the EU is incapable of producing an Apple, or a Google, or a Facebook, or an Amazon, or an EBay, or a Netflix, or a Tesla, or an Uber, or a SpaceX (notwithstanding yesterday's unfortunate event), or heck, the remote semblance of a Silicon Valley. Even China (admittedly by blatant copying, usually) has been able to.

    Do you wonder if there's something wrong with you folks across the pond? Why do you consume so many of America's products and services on these types innovations, and not produce your own?
    Ahem - ARM. Oh, but ....
  • Reply 51 of 56
    crowleycrowley Posts: 8,244member
    tmay said:

    As for the EU, I wouldn't have a problem with a small "parking fee" that could be mitigated by modest investments within the other EU countries; how about Scotland when it leaves Great Britain and joins the EU?
    Scotland can't leave Great Britain any more than it can leave the Northern Hemisphere, Great Britain is an island.  It can leave the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.


    edited September 2016
  • Reply 52 of 56
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,298member
    crowley said:
    tmay said:

    As for the EU, I wouldn't have a problem with a small "parking fee" that could be mitigated by modest investments within the other EU countries; how about Scotland when it leaves Great Britain and joins the EU?
    Scotland can't leave Great Britain any more than it can leave the Northern Hemisphere, Great Britain is an island.  It can leave the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
    Thanks for the correction.
  • Reply 53 of 56
    blitz1blitz1 Posts: 413member
    Give the Irish a referendum. I didn't speak to a single person on my trip to Dublin who didn't congratulate me on getting out of the EU.
    Yes, please do.
    We'll see the (tax) HQs coming to the continent as they won't have any use in Ireland any more (no access to single market)
  • Reply 54 of 56
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,011member
    toddzrx said:
    apple ][ said:
    I think that we're once again going to have travel across the pond and kick some Euro ass, like we had to do before. It's been a while, but it looks like that time will maybe soon come again.

    This is Ireland's mess and they need to deal with it and clean up their affairs. Either that, or lose a significant portion of their business dealings with various, big, multi-national companies.

    Either Ireland is a country, or it's not.

    Either the Irish control Ireland or the Belgians and Germans do. As more and more countries are finding out, being a part of the EU is ending up being a whole lot more than they bargained for or ever imagined.

    There is also a rare, old US law that can be activated and used to punish Euro companies and citizens in the US. Perhaps it's time to dig out that old US law and apply it.


    I would not be surprised at all if this is the start of the process that sees Ireland leave the EU.  I say more power to them.
    That could be a whole lot more harmful to the Irish economy. 
    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/brexit-japan-demands-free-transfer-data-cloud/

  • Reply 55 of 56
    JanNLJanNL Posts: 309member
    apple ][ said:

    Either the Irish control Ireland or the Belgians and Germans do. As more and more countries are finding out, being a part of the EU is ending up being a whole lot more than they bargained for or ever imagined.
    Presume you don't mean the Belgians, but Brussels (as the capital of the EU)?!
    The Belgians are, even there from the start of the "EU", just a pawn. Germany (and France) are the heavyweights, and the example of making 1 country important (instead of what they make believe one European continent).
  • Reply 56 of 56
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,291member
    Since people still debating over this issue, let me re-post from other thread.
    1. EU ordered Apple to pay $14.5B to Ireland, a money that Ireland refuse to take. Let's that sink in a bit. Ireland appeal EU decision, they don't want Apple's money. It's like: Mom asked you to pay your brother but you brother said 'no, I don't want it.' So will you pay your brother or not?2
    2. Ireland is part of EU means only all goods sold in other EU countries can be handled single-market style by EU. Taxation however is handled by individual countries, varies by each government tax policies. EU has no say in here.
    3. Ireland has the lowest corporate income tax. As per above: By EU own policy, all profit from sales in other EU countries can be legally put in Ireland and the tax can be legally handled by Ireland. Logically, legally and from business stand point: Apple has done NO MISTAKE.

    The problem is the arrangement between Apple and Ireland. EU said:  "Apple only paid an effective corporate tax rate that declined from 1% in 2003 to 0.005% in 2014 on the profits of Apple Sales International.” Or in the words, EU declared: “illegal under EU state aid rules, because it gives Apple a significant advantage over other businesses that are subject to the same national taxation rules.” 
     My question is WHY? See points number 1 to 3 above again and answer that if this is not some political bullshit from EU. 
    The Irish government would, of course, be glad to enjoy a $14.5 billion tax revenue windfall. Their concern, however, is that taking the money could end up killing the goose that laid the golden egg. Ireland is a small country, with about 6.4 million inhabitants; it’s a little bit remote; and historically it’s traditionally been a bit of an economic backwater.
    And then, what does this have to do with Apple avoiding American taxes? If you are an American company, you owe taxes on all your profits, wherever the profits are earned. Except there’s a loophole. You are allowed to “defer” paying taxes on your foreign profits as long as that money is still owned by your foreign subsidiary. Here is hoping that Congress will change the law and allow that money to be repatriated at a lower rate. BUt until then, Apple and other global companies are right to take this advantage.


    edited September 2016
Sign In or Register to comment.