singularity

About

Username
singularity
Joined
Visits
117
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
516
Badges
1
Posts
1,328
  • Apple's Tim Cook meets with EU antitrust chief ahead of decision on Irish taxes

    latifbp 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.
    That sounds more reasonable. I'm sure that a lot of clowns are positing apocalyptic scenarios like no longer selling in the EU. That would be ridiculous. But where I disagree with the EU is that these US companies have invested billions of dollars in the Irish economy to set up operations and production and other aspects of their businesses there- Chamber of Commerce estimates $190bn. To now drive up taxes risking other Irish locals losing out on income and investments they've come to depend on, as these companies along with Apple could easily move operations elsewhere. $190bn is a large sum of money. If the EU really would impose tariffs of these companies move out of the EU it sounds Donald Trumpish. In a global economy corporations need to be nimble and ready to move whether it's securing sales or reducing tax liability. For the EU not to recognize this reality seems short-sighted at best, and worse potentially risks other local businesses working with Apple, supplying Apple with goods and resources... Apple and the other 700 US corporations in Ireland alone.
    True and the EU does recognised this.
    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.
    latifbp
  • Apple's Tim Cook meets with EU antitrust chief ahead of decision on Irish taxes

    latifbp 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.
    I never said sales. But you never supported your argument that taking production and staff out of the EU would increase Apple's tax liability- despite what I stated about Samsung having sales there yet having lower tax liability. From what you're claiming it sounds like the EU is taking exactly the same position as Donald Trump, steep tariffs if production and headquarters are outside the EU. Brilliant!
    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.
    latifbp
  • 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. 
    Ah. so it's just "style" you have a problem with. Not the content.
    DED's style is to hide good salient points within emotional vitriol and in the majority of cases cite himself to back up his opinion. Then add in an extra thousand words just for good measure.
    I think its a shame as there is a great journalist in there if he could hold back a bit.
    staticx57
  • 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.

    How about Apple evacuates Ireland, taking all of their production and European sales operations to another continent. Let's see how flourishing the Irish economy will be then.

    How can Apple take its European sales to another continent? Staff maybe? But would still be liable for taxes in each country which would increase their liability.
    gwydion
  • 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. 
    No, the case is not about Double Irish
    Are you getting the feeling that your head is hurting from hitting the brick wall when trying to explain something that is so basic in its concept as this issue?

    crowley