singularity

tenly said:
It's true.  I'm completely ignorant of EU law except for what has been explained in this thread.  I'm not arguing about what is and isn't law.  I'm arguing about what is and isn't right (meaning fair).  I understand (from comments in this thread) that as per EU law - the agreement can be found to be illegal and therefore retroactively cancelled and the taxes owing recalculated.  I haven't heard anyone say how far back they go, but I presume that it's similar to Canada and the US and is at least 7 years.

10 years I believe, It's ok to be ignorant of laws that don't affect you (as in you don't live in that area). I'm ignorant of a lot of US and US state law for example and I learn a lot from the comment people make here and sometime I go WTF? 

tenly said:
It *should* be incumbent on the EU to review these agreements on a timely basis and rule on the legality of them shortly after they have been entered into.  If they had done so - Apple might only be on the hook for a single years worth of arrears because they would have restructured their operations to take advantage of the next-most favorable tax strategy.  By delaying their investigation/ruling, the EU has ensured that they, and Ireland have continued to enjoy the benefits of Apples presence.  This allows Ireland to profit from an illegal agreement it was responsible for creating in the first place.

I also believe the big problem is that these sweetheart deals have been kept secret. So until they are brought to the correct authorities knowledge nothing can be done.
If you are also asking for a bureaucracy to be also efficient and speedy then you will always be disappointed, (The company I work for is still waiting for a tax determination from the early 80's which if it goes our way could mean we get a rebate in range of 1-2 billion pounds!!) and if you are asking for an EU bureaucracy to be speedy then you sir are totally insane 

tenly said:
My point is that Apples presence in Ireland resulted in significant $ stimulus into the Irish economy.  If the agreement is declared illegal - why shouldn't Ireland be on the hook to return the $ that was obtained illegally?  Is it okay to profit from criminal activities in the EU?  If the deal had never been offered, and Apple had set up shoe elsewhere, Ireland would not have had ANY of those cash injections listed above.  So - a "fair" thing to do would be to calculate the $ value of all of that - and then deduct it from whatever the EU determines Apple owes!  Right?  

The law has never about being fair, it just is. As the saying goes Justice is blind.

IF and I keep on saying this IF Ireland's deal with Apple is found to be "illegal state aid" and any appeal doesn't succeed then that agreement is considered void. It is as if that deal never happened. 

Ireland would be forced to collect all the unclaimed tax. 

There wouldn't be a criminal act per se as long as the amount is paid. 

If it isn't paid then potentially fines could be imposed by the EU commission on Apple as Ireland then wouldn't have any choice but to demand repayment. 

Non payment of the back tax could then be up-to 10% of global revenue.. OUCH!!!!!

As a publicly owned company, it is Apples responsibility to their shareholders to (legally) minimize expenses wherever possible.  This includes their tax burden.  If a legal tax strategy existed - and Apple chose not to employ that strategy because "corporations should pay more", shareholders would be screaming for Tim Cooks head on a platter.

absolutely

tenly said:
Ensuring that corporations pay their fair share is the responsibility of the governments who write the tax laws.  The discounts and deductions that people refer to as loopholes are there for a reason.  If they weren't, they would be closed as soon as soon as they were discovered.  The tax breaks that are given to corporations are carefully considered by the countries that offer them.  The value in having a corporation select your country can't always be measured in the number of dollars a corporation hands over as tax revenue.  Some countries recognize that having a corporation select them for their HQ or factory provides other benefits to that country - and these benefits are valuable enough that your elected officials have determined that it's worth giving that company a tax break to entice it to settle there instead of taking their operations to another country.

agreed but if there is a supranational law that governs the limit of that tax break then you cant offer beyond what is allowed.

tenly said:
Apple - and the other corporations that are being targeted for back taxes are the victims yet there are posters on this thread that act like they are the villains.  Ireland offered incentives to the corporations so that they would establish a presence in Ireland.  In good faith, the companies all agreed to the terms and honored their commitments.  If the deal was illegal, Ireland is at fault and should be responsible for the shortfall.  By entering into the agreement, Ireland should be responsible for making up the difference.q

EU law in this respect doesn't work like that.
You are just showing your ignorance of the EU law in this respect.
It boils down to whether the deals they have are classed as "illegal state aid". IF and only IF  it is classed as that and the appeals do not go their way, Apple or any of the others that may be in the firing line as the beneficiary of that aid have to pay it back.

tenly said:
Given the way this is playing out, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Ireland and the EU have actually colluded to extort these foreign companies.

Ireland are fighting this and keeps on stating they have done nothing wrong, to say they are in conclusion is getting into conspiracy theory territory that just isn't supported by what is going on.
 

tenly said:
There so much more that I could say to convince a rational, objective person of the injustice that is being perpetrated here - but there don't seem to be many on this thread who are rational and objective however there is an abundance of hate and prejudice - and they have always convicted the corporations while giving the Irish a pass and siding with the EU whom are clearly persecuting these companies.  
I do hope that all of the affected companies band together and exit the Ireland and the EU en masse after this is all over.

There are many on this thread that just don't understand the EU laws and believe that the deal must be ok because it would be ok in their country, therefore its wrong and thus this case must stop and the defendants must be exonerated.

SpamSandwich said:

singularity said:

Ireland are accused of offering a deal to Apple that is against EU law. 
Ireland is not an "authorised representative" of the EU
Thus any agreement IF found to be against EU laws will be null.
IF found to be null Apple will be forced to pay back any tax that was unpaid.
Currently the time period covered by the potential pay back period is the maximum period covered by EU law, there's no retroactive part. If there was then they could go back even further.
 

The problem with your theory:  Ireland isn't on the hook for anything. THEY don't owe the EU billions in back taxes. Apple does! That's fraud on the part of Ireland committed against Apple and extortion of Apple by the EU! For their part, Apple legally took advantage of the tangle of Inconsustently applied, BUT STILL LEGAL, EU laws. Everyone knew about it.

Ireland are potentially "on the hook" for not adhering to EU law. The oddity of them being found to be breaching EU law is that they will get billions from Apple. So you have the bizarre situation that  they will have got a double whammy in benefits. Having Apple and its jobs in Ireland and then getting a massive boost in its finances from the back taxes.

The charges are that Ireland offered a rate of tax that breaches EU law on fair competition and amounts to illegal state aid. Thus IF this is proved then Apple have to pay back all that taxes that constituted that "state aid".

Apple may have taken advantage of the deal but potentially if the ruling goes against them then the deal was never legal to start with.


I don't think I've  mentioned anywhere Ireland having to pay anything to anyone.

Also all those other multinationals that have there EU HQ's in Ireland will be very nervous because they will all have the same potentially "illegal" agreements.

SpamSandwich said:

gwydion said:

No, EU is not changing the law. Another case of not understanding what the case is about

The EU is forcing Ireland to comply.

To the law! How dare they!

gwydion said:

gadgetcanadav2 said:

Apple: We followed the law for our HQ in Ireland.

EU: We realize you have followed the law between 2004 and 2012 but we want to retroactively change the law so that you can pay us more taxes. Ireland did not have the authority to give you that tax deal.

Apple: Then sue Ireland for that amount of money. Not the corporations who follow its laws.

Imagine the governments of North America doing this to it's citizens and corporations. There would be civil war 2.

No, EU is not changing the law. Another case of not understanding what the case is about

There is a lot of misunderstanding in this thread.