Are we going to pay less in taxes now that G7 is collecting more taxes and closed the loopholes?
Also in the end, all companies will just tag on any extra taxes to to the consumer. Taxes are always paid by the buyer!
Agreed - The G7 have agreed to increase taxes (hopefully) to all their people whilst labelling it as taxing the greedy multination companies - a win - win
The point is to level the playing field between multinational corporations with clever accountants and smaller, more local or regional companies who don't have the infrastructure to avoid tax in the same way, but therefore aren't able to compete on price. It was never about what consumers pay.
Do the taxes go to help smaller corporations build a competing infrastructure?
I wonder how many of those that insisted "Apple never did anything wrong" and that "politicians should focus on closing loopholes rather than going after Apple" are going to be singing the same tune now that politicians have worked together to close loopholes.
Wonder no more.
I’ve always said that the way to fix this was to close the loopholes, rather than going after Apple. They’ve closed the loopholes.
Unfortunately, you got it into your head that the problem was going after Apple.
Nope.
The problem was going after JUST Apple when everyone is doing it. That’s why we said “fix the law”.
Now that they’ve fixed the law, the playing field has been levelled for everyone, especially the smaller outfits who can’t afford expensive tax barristers.
Maybe I will, maybe I won't. But some people definitely won't, they'll go somewhere else, or put off that upgrade another year; Apple aren't immune to price sensitivity. Price rises will mean Apple loses sales, especially if competitors don't raise prices.
So while Apple may raise prices, I'd be very surprised if they accommodate the complete tax increase, rather than absorbing some of it into a reduced markup.
They're not that stupid.
Apparently you and others here have been waiting for the ‘overpriced’ rebellion to take hold with people walking away with their wallets. It hasn’t and there’s not much chance it ever will, especially after 45 years of overpriced Apple gear selling in droves.
Well, "apparently" it has. iPhone sales are largely flat since 2016, excepting 2020 as that's an anomaly year with more tech purchases due to the pandemic. Also what do you think the arguably biggest reason 1990's Apple almost went bust if it wasn't prices? Macs were double the cost of equivalent spec PCs back then, which is nigh on where they are again now, albeit without the crap OS.
The reason iPhone sales are flat is because no one needs an iPhone to do more than it does, and hasn’t for years. Apple recognised this years ago, which is why the brought in the services model, which seems to be doing quite well.
You’d think our leaders would stand up for our corporations. But you’d think wrong I suppose.
He's standing up for our country and its people. It's a concept that hasn't been in favor here for a couple decades -- while the rich got richer, the poor got poorer and the country's infrastructure (you know the stuff those corporations depend on) slowly fell apart and / or became obsolete. He is investing in both human and physical resources
Instead of whining that other countries were over taking us he is pushing us forward and building competitiveness.
Every CEO knows that he has to invest in his company for it to survive and thrive . Every president should know the same is true for his country. We finally have one that understands that. Time to move forward.
Do politicians ever produce anything beside new taxes?
Yes, the country's infrastructure and defense.
The difference between the U.S. and some banana republic is infrastructure: an educated work force, stable society and resources like roads, bridges, energy distribution, communications, etc., etc., etc., etc., that make it possible for people and corporations to survive, thrive and innovate.
Unfortunately, as the west slowly degrades, Asian countries are racing ahead and not looking back. It's time to catch up.
You’d think our leaders would stand up for our corporations. But you’d think wrong I suppose.
He's standing up for our country and its people. It's a concept that hasn't been in favor here for a couple decades -- while the rich got richer, the poor got poorer and the country's infrastructure (you know the stuff those corporations depend on) slowly fell apart and / or became obsolete. He is investing in both human and physical resources
Instead of whining that other countries were over taking us he is pushing us forward and building competitiveness.
Every CEO knows that he has to invest in his company for it to survive and thrive . Every president should know the same is true for his country. We finally have one that understands that. Time to move forward.
——————————————
Is it just me, or did they actually complain, and quite a lot at that, about the previous administration waging trade wars with China? Now, these guys are about to do the same. Nothing new under the sun.
Also, we may all end up paying more for new products and services because of this. Or do you think the tech giants are going to kindly absorb the increase?
Do politicians ever produce anything beside new taxes?
Yes, the country's infrastructure and defense.
The difference between the U.S. and some banana republic is infrastructure: an educated work force, stable society and resources like roads, bridges, energy distribution, communications, etc., etc., etc., etc., that make it possible for people and corporations to survive, thrive and innovate.
Unfortunately, as the west slowly degrades, Asian countries are racing ahead and not looking back. It's time to catch up.
Maybe I will, maybe I won't. But some people definitely won't, they'll go somewhere else, or put off that upgrade another year; Apple aren't immune to price sensitivity. Price rises will mean Apple loses sales, especially if competitors don't raise prices.
So while Apple may raise prices, I'd be very surprised if they accommodate the complete tax increase, rather than absorbing some of it into a reduced markup.
They're not that stupid.
Apparently you and others here have been waiting for the ‘overpriced’ rebellion to take hold with people walking away with their wallets. It hasn’t and there’s not much chance it ever will, especially after 45 years of overpriced Apple gear selling in droves.
Well, "apparently" it has. iPhone sales are largely flat since 2016, excepting 2020 as that's an anomaly year with more tech purchases due to the pandemic. Also what do you think the arguably biggest reason 1990's Apple almost went bust if it wasn't prices? Macs were double the cost of equivalent spec PCs back then, which is nigh on where they are again now, albeit without the crap OS.
The reason iPhone sales are flat is because no one needs an iPhone to do more than it does, and hasn’t for years. Apple recognised this years ago, which is why the brought in the services model, which seems to be doing quite well.
Very true. The phone market began to mature several years ago -- just as the PC market did.
What sets iPhones apart is their software and Apple's ecosystem that supports them and the users. Without that, it's a race to the bottom: "What's the least I can pay for one of these contraptions?" And, increasingly that ecosystem is feeding itself: now, for one example, if you have an Apple Watch you can unlock your phone while wearing a mask. Or, if you have an Apple Watch, you can leave your iPhone at home while you listen to great music on your AirPods....
I wonder how many of those that insisted "Apple never did anything wrong" and that "politicians should focus on closing loopholes rather than going after Apple" are going to be singing the same tune now that politicians have worked together to close loopholes.
Wonder no more.
I’ve always said that the way to fix this was to close the loopholes, rather than going after Apple. They’ve closed the loopholes.
Unfortunately, you got it into your head that the problem was going after Apple.
Nope.
The problem was going after JUST Apple when everyone is doing it. That’s why we said “fix the law”.
Now that they’ve fixed the law, the playing field has been levelled for everyone, especially the smaller outfits who can’t afford expensive tax barristers.
Care to point out where I “got it into (my) head that the problem was going after Apple”?
Are we going to pay less in taxes now that G7 is collecting more taxes and closed the loopholes?
Also in the end, all companies will just tag on any extra taxes to to the consumer. Taxes are always paid by the buyer!
Agreed - The G7 have agreed to increase taxes (hopefully) to all their people whilst labelling it as taxing the greedy multination companies - a win - win
The point is to level the playing field between multinational corporations with clever accountants and smaller, more local or regional companies who don't have the infrastructure to avoid tax in the same way, but therefore aren't able to compete on price. It was never about what consumers pay.
Do the taxes go to help smaller corporations build a competing infrastructure?
Where does the money go? No one will say.
It’s a minimum corporation tax rate throughout the G7. It works the same as corporation tax currently does, just with a floor rate. The money goes to the host country to use however they see fit.
You’d think our leaders would stand up for our corporations. But you’d think wrong I suppose.
He's standing up for our country and its people. It's a concept that hasn't been in favor here for a couple decades -- while the rich got richer, the poor got poorer and the country's infrastructure (you know the stuff those corporations depend on) slowly fell apart and / or became obsolete. He is investing in both human and physical resources
Instead of whining that other countries were over taking us he is pushing us forward and building competitiveness.
Every CEO knows that he has to invest in his company for it to survive and thrive . Every president should know the same is true for his country. We finally have one that understands that. Time to move forward.
——————————————
Is it just me, or did they actually complain, and quite a lot at that, about the previous administration waging trade wars with China? Now, these guys are about to do the same. Nothing new under the sun.
Also, we may all end up paying more for new products and services because of this. Or do you think the tech giants are going to kindly absorb the increase?
You asked: "Is it just me, or did they actually complain, and quite a lot at
that, about the previous administration waging trade wars with China?
Now, these guys are about to do the same. Nothing new under the sun.
Also,
we may all end up paying more for new products and services because of
this. Or do you think the tech giants are going to kindly absorb the
increase? "
Obviously those old policies not only failed to achieve their goal but ended up hurting the U.S. more than it did China (ask the farmers and Harley Davidson). And it was obvious that they would fail: we tried protective tariffs back in the 80's: they failed then just as they failed now.
INow, instead of trying to tear down a competitor we are investing in the future to make ourselves more competitive. We can debate the HOW to do that. But debating whether we need to do that is just foolish. No company or country can survive long without investing in itself.
And, yes, the tech giants will absorb it. Because they rely on the infrastructures (educated work force, stable society, physical resources, etc.) to do what they do. Without that infrastructure any G7 nation becomes just another third world country struggling to feed its people.
Are we going to pay less in taxes now that G7 is collecting more taxes and closed the loopholes?
Also in the end, all companies will just tag on any extra taxes to to the consumer. Taxes are always paid by the buyer!
Agreed - The G7 have agreed to increase taxes (hopefully) to all their people whilst labelling it as taxing the greedy multination companies - a win - win
The point is to level the playing field between multinational corporations with clever accountants and smaller, more local or regional companies who don't have the infrastructure to avoid tax in the same way, but therefore aren't able to compete on price. It was never about what consumers pay.
Do the taxes go to help smaller corporations build a competing infrastructure?
Where does the money go? No one will say.
It’s a minimum corporation tax rate throughout the G7. It works the same as corporation tax currently does, just with a floor rate. The money goes to the host country to use however they see fit.
No argument. But two points:
1) According to the BBC: "the charity Oxfam says an agreed 15% global minimum corporate tax rate is "far too low" to make a difference." And, yes, they may have a point: 15% is pretty low. But, perhaps, it is a case that with better uniformity and compliance it will be enough? That is: If one pays 30% and the other 0% -- then both paying 15% works out to be more fair to all.
2) What is a "host country"? It appears that this structure shifts the tax from where the multi-national declares its profits (often a tax haven country) to where it does its business. i haven't seen any detail on HOW it intends to do that. But that appears to be its intent. And, from that it replaces the digital tax being imposed on the likes of Google & Facebook which the U.S. claims is discriminatory against U.S. corporations.
I wonder how many of those that insisted "Apple never did anything wrong" and that "politicians should focus on closing loopholes rather than going after Apple" are going to be singing the same tune now that politicians have worked together to close loopholes.
Wonder no more.
I’ve always said that the way to fix this was to close the loopholes, rather than going after Apple. They’ve closed the loopholes.
Unfortunately, you got it into your head that the problem was going after Apple.
Nope.
The problem was going after JUST Apple when everyone is doing it. That’s why we said “fix the law”.
Now that they’ve fixed the law, the playing field has been levelled for everyone, especially the smaller outfits who can’t afford expensive tax barristers.
In truth the G7 coming to agreement is just a good start. There's a 140-country conference coming up in just a few months where we'll see how much influence this has on all the rest when it comes time to vote on the same worldwide proposal in front of them.
Can't believe some of you are complaining about a minimum of 15% tax? Seems almost low for one of the most profitable companies in the world.
It’s a shame we’ve gotten to the point where 15% tax is seen by anyone as ‘low’. Low relatively, perhaps, but a government that needs even 15% is already failing with bloat and inefficiency.
Not one to burst the bubble here, but a headline corporate tax rate of 15% does not equate to a 15% effective corporate tax rate. Taxable profits before tax are not the same as accounting profits before tax and never have been, so there is still plenty of scope for incentives.
Maybe I will, maybe I won't. But some people definitely won't, they'll go somewhere else, or put off that upgrade another year;
Which is exactly what I have done since Cook ballooned iPhone prices. I had a new iPhone every other year since the original, until the 6S. Since then I have only bought one: the X - and that was second hand. Cook's absurd pricing has caused them to lose a number of iPhone sales from a historically avid fan, and thus average revenue from me has nosedived in the latter 5 years compared to the 5 before. ASP is up, but that is meaningless. Many of my friends have switched away from iOS or are still rocking an ancient iPhone 6, and they all say it's down to the crazy prices.
When I started my law practice back in the early '80s, I bought two printers. The fast dot-matrix printer cost me $1200. I needed a computer so purchased the Osbourne luggable computer for $1800, Z80 CPU with 64KB of memory and two floppy disks and 5" screen, all running under the CPM OS. My first large brief was 100 pages of Constitutional Law, printed on the second of my printers. The printer could print 10 characters a second max. It took 2 days to print the brief. I typed the brief on the Osbourne using the CPM equivalent of nroff and troff.
My first "smart" phone, circa 1995, was $1200 from Radio Shack, flip-phone from Verizon. I had no connection from my home.
When I was working my first job, circa 1970, at a UW-Madison lab, we needed a hard disk to run a real-time OS I had written for a PDP-8, which controlled lab equipment. It cost us $8000 for a 32K hard disk. Before that I had to write my software on a Classic Linc computer in the basement of the UW Hospital. Then dump the compiled code onto a paper-tape, walk the paper-tape back over to the lab and feed the paper-tape into the ASR-33 teletype and debug it, walking back and forth between the hospital and lab fixing coding errors. Of course, I had to work at night from 10p.m. to 6 a.m in the morning, because we were running experiments during the day.
Apple should close shop in all those money grabbing countries. That’ll teach them!
Hahahahahahaha I hope they was sarcasm? Considering it would effectively mean Apple closing it's entire business.
This is a great move, you can have a single store in London pay the same tax as Amazon does on its entire global earning due to their tax dodging... Hardly fair in the slightest. But I also fear these companies will just pass the costs directly onto the consumer.
Comments
You’d think our leaders would stand up for our corporations. But you’d think wrong I suppose.
The problem was going after JUST Apple when everyone is doing it. That’s why we said “fix the law”.
Stop making stuff up please.
"Is it just me, or did they actually complain, and quite a lot at that, about the previous administration waging trade wars with China? Now, these guys are about to do the same. Nothing new under the sun.
My first "smart" phone, circa 1995, was $1200 from Radio Shack, flip-phone from Verizon. I had no connection from my home.
When I was working my first job, circa 1970, at a UW-Madison lab, we needed a hard disk to run a real-time OS I had written for a PDP-8, which controlled lab equipment. It cost us $8000 for a 32K hard disk. Before that I had to write my software on a Classic Linc computer in the basement of the UW Hospital. Then dump the compiled code onto a paper-tape, walk the paper-tape back over to the lab and feed the paper-tape into the ASR-33 teletype and debug it, walking back and forth between the hospital and lab fixing coding errors. Of course, I had to work at night from 10p.m. to 6 a.m in the morning, because we were running experiments during the day.
You really have no idea how good you have it.
Hardly fair in the slightest. But I also fear these companies will just pass the costs directly onto the consumer.