singularity
About
- Username
- singularity
- Joined
- Visits
- 117
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 516
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 1,328
Reactions
-
Apple's Tim Cook meets with EU antitrust chief ahead of decision on Irish taxes
latifbp said:singularity said:sorry for any misunderstanding, its trying to reply to multiple comments via mobile and it's very hard to link multiple comments. Previous commenter said about moving sales out of the EU.
There is nothing wrong legally about minimising tax liability but it has to be within the rules. You can have production or headquarters where ever you like. But in an apocalyptic scenario, someone else mentioned Apple would be liable in each and every member state in the EU which would increase massively its liability because of the countries that almost certainly have the biggest sales. Apple chose Ireland because it has one of the lowest corporation taxes, other measures then reduced the tax burden even more. The one in question is the deal Apple had with Ireland which is questioned by the EU commission.
I am not going to comment on Samsung as at the moment this is about Apples POTENTIAL liability.
This is all about having a standard rule on what constitutes allowable state aid and what doesn't.
Each country is allowed to set its own corporation rate and is the reason why Ireland has one of the lowest rates, to attract inward investment.
Apple and other companies have taken avatars of this and this. -
Apple's Tim Cook meets with EU antitrust chief ahead of decision on Irish taxes
latifbp said:singularity said:They can take production, they can take staff out of the EU but they would be insane to take sales egg not sell in the EU.
As for self agrandizing point of view it's because it's a very simple concept that is at the centre of this and other threads.
IF Apple is found to have recieved illegal state aid they have to pay it back. End of. It is not allowed in the EU.
It doesn't matter what can be done elsewhere. It is not allowed.
Those are the facts.
There is nothing wrong legally about minimising tax liability but it has to be within the rules. You can have production or headquarters where ever you like. But in an apocalyptic scenario, someone else mentioned Apple would be liable in each and every member state in the EU which would increase massively its liability because of the countries that almost certainly have the biggest sales. Apple chose Ireland because it has one of the lowest corporation taxes, other measures then reduced the tax burden even more. The one in question is the deal Apple had with Ireland which is questioned by the EU commission.
I am not going to comment on Samsung as at the moment this is about Apples POTENTIAL liability.
This is all about having a standard rule on what constitutes allowable state aid and what doesn't. -
Another new kernel flaw that Google won't fix for Android users prompts more switching to Apple's i
bobschlob said:staticx57 said:Just disagreeing with DED's style of writing is enough to get you down-voted. I thoroughly enjoy all the Apple products I own and recommend them to others, but I do not need DED to constantly justify my purchases by bashing other companies in the style he does.
I think its a shame as there is a great journalist in there if he could hold back a bit. -
Apple's Tim Cook meets with EU antitrust chief ahead of decision on Irish taxes
latifbp said:gwydion said:
You clearly don't know about EU laws but you don't stop to post things like this that are totally wrong.
And no, a state aid is not only unilateral, and no, it is not a contract, and no EU is not taking anything were there is a loss. -
Apple's Tim Cook meets with EU antitrust chief ahead of decision on Irish taxes
gwydion said:boltsfan17 said:
I don't see how Ireland is doing anything wrong. What Apple is doing is the so called structure called Double Irish. Double Irish can't be considered illegal state aid because it's available to all companies.