4 ms·
For the record, I said your assertion that Apple's cash position was due to Double Irish tax maneuvers on US income is wrong, and that net cash (once you accoun
by HSO 11y ago
For the record, I said your assertion that Apple's cash position was due to Double Irish tax maneuvers on US income is wrong, and that net cash (once you account for debt issued to pay dividends) is significantly lower, both in absolute terms and in the disparity between overseas and onshore holdings. Before the initiation of the 140bn capital return program, relative balances were less skewed and more reflective of where profits were generated.
I won't respond to you again in this thread because I can't deal with people who lack basic reading comprehension, logic, and fact-checking skills.
- gozur88 11y agoYou have a talent for seeing the trees and missing the forest. Apple isn't changing anything by borrowing against its foreign cash horde. That just gives it access to the money without having to pay taxes.
- zepto 11y agoNo. They are still liable for taxes on the cash horde. It is simply deferred.
- gozur88 11y agoThat was the point.
- zepto 11y agoWell you misstated it then. You said they 'without having to pay taxes'. This is false. They do have to pay the taxes. And the cash hoard might technically be 'growing' but there is a corresponding liability that is growing too - so it's no longer Apple's money to do what they want with - it's owed to creditors. So the 'film-flam' as you call it avoids no taxes with regard to the cash-horde.