3 ms·

Then fine Ireland.

kartan 10y ago
Ireland though that it was legal. It was not. If Ireland now fails to get that money, then it will be fined (like Greece http://www.dw.com/en/fine-frenzy-in-greece-over-illegal-state-aid/a-19421437 http://www.dw.com/en/fine-frenzy-in-greece-over-illegal-stat...) The down side of this approach is that some times big corporations don't pay taxes and then citizens have to put money for the fines. So the final result depends on how corrupt is the government, how much it wants to protect the corporations and how much hate it will accept from their citizens.
- anonymousDan 10y ago
  There is no way it wasn't legal. It's complete politically motivated bullshit that will be thrown out on appeal to the European courts, mark my words. The EU commission is not supposed to have any say over tax issues, they are overstepping the mark here.
  - Oletros 10y ago
    Can you source how many illegal state aids rulings have been overturned on appeal?
    - anonymousDan 10y ago
      There are some relevant examples given in this article based on a case involving Spain: http://m.rte.ie/news/2016/0902/813591-santander-apple/ http://m.rte.ie/news/2016/0902/813591-santander-apple/
  - toyg 10y ago
    > There is no way it wasn't legal. Well, that's like, your opinion, man. The EU Commission usually doesn't put the hammer down because of trivialities, especially when they are as politically hot as this is. If they push, it's because they're pretty certain that they have grounds (and political support across the Union) for it. In addition, EU directives are often relatively generic, giving grounds for 1) different national approaches and 2) flexible interpretation by the courts. When courts are called to have their say, they usually follow the political climate pretty faithfully. I can tell you the appetite for a tax shakedown of multinationals is huge in Europe at the moment. Should Ireland weasel out of this ruling they will face ostracism elsewhere, at a time when they can ill afford it (being one of the countries that will suffer the most if Brexit is not resolved in an amicable manner). They will try (they have to, to save face), but it's unlikely that they will succeed. The party is over. > The EU commission is not supposed to have any say over tax issues Au contraire: rules against industrial state-sponsoring have been on the books since Maastricht, I believe. One of the main critiques of the EU is exactly that this straight-jacked national governments, which found themselves without powerful levers to manage their economies. In practice, these rules have been selectively applied, depending on the political climate. Such climate is now very unfavourable towards "onshore tax havens".
    - sverige 10y ago
      > When courts are called to have their say, they usually follow the political climate pretty faithfully. > In practice, these rules have been selectively applied, depending on the political climate. What a really bad practice. I think it's true, too, and not just in the EU (though it may be more obvious in that case.) I can't understand why people wonder how Brexit passed.
      - toyg 10y ago
        > What a really bad practice. It's not really that different from Common Law (aka "this is the law, until enough judges say it's not"). Besides, the alternative would have seen even more people crying the "EU Soviet" had taken sovereignty away.
    - anonymousDan 10y ago
      They're not going to 'weasel' out of anything, but you can bet your bottom dollar they will appeal it. A competitive business tax rate has been one of the cornerstones of Irish industrial policy for decades, and as you've just alluded to this is a politically motivated ruling, and stands on shaky legal ground. I think any appeal has a good chance of being successful: http://m.independent.ie/business/irish/irelands-appeal-has-strong-chance-of-success-official-35006029.html http://m.independent.ie/business/irish/irelands-appeal-has-s...
      - toyg 10y ago
        One anonymous (Irish?) official does not Spring make. As I said, Commissioners don't like to take unnecessary flak, and if they act it's because they have enough evidence and political muscle to take home a victory. 2017 is an election year in France and Germany; and both elites have an interest in tightening EU policy against external forces (US, Brexit etc). All indicators are against Ireland and Apple.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - peteretep 10y ago
    > that will be thrown out on > appeal to the European > courts, mark my words And if it's not, you'll accept it's not bullshit, or?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
Oletros 10y ago
The process is against Ireland, not Apple
- adrenalinelol 10y ago
  If it were to be successful, Apple would inevitably find itself paying the majority of the fine, even if it's after the fact.
  - toyg 10y ago
    That's a political choice for Ireland to make. They put Apple in this position in order to (illegally) bolster their economy; they might want to absorb some (or all) of the blow, to avoid a reputation hit. TBH, it's about damn time Ireland gets the bill for 25 years of thinly-veiled dumping. Luxembourg and Netherlands should be next on the list.
  - Oletros 10y ago
    It is not a fine, is paying the taxes not payed

Then fine Ireland.

Ireland though that it was legal. It was not. If Ireland now fails to get that money, then it will be fined (like Greece http://www.dw.com/en/fine-frenzy-in-greece-over-illegal-state-aid/a-19421437 http://www.dw.com/en/fine-frenzy-in-greece-over-illegal-stat...) The down side of this approach is that some times big corporations don't pay taxes and then citizens have to put money for the fines. So the final result depends on how corrupt is the government, how much it wants to protect the corporations and how much hate it will accept from their citizens.

anonymousDan 10y ago
There is no way it wasn't legal. It's complete politically motivated bullshit that will be thrown out on appeal to the European courts, mark my words. The EU commission is not supposed to have any say over tax issues, they are overstepping the mark here.
- Oletros 10y ago
  Can you source how many illegal state aids rulings have been overturned on appeal?
  - anonymousDan 10y ago
    There are some relevant examples given in this article based on a case involving Spain: http://m.rte.ie/news/2016/0902/813591-santander-apple/ http://m.rte.ie/news/2016/0902/813591-santander-apple/
- toyg 10y ago
  > There is no way it wasn't legal. Well, that's like, your opinion, man. The EU Commission usually doesn't put the hammer down because of trivialities, especially when they are as politically hot as this is. If they push, it's because they're pretty certain that they have grounds (and political support across the Union) for it. In addition, EU directives are often relatively generic, giving grounds for 1) different national approaches and 2) flexible interpretation by the courts. When courts are called to have their say, they usually follow the political climate pretty faithfully. I can tell you the appetite for a tax shakedown of multinationals is huge in Europe at the moment. Should Ireland weasel out of this ruling they will face ostracism elsewhere, at a time when they can ill afford it (being one of the countries that will suffer the most if Brexit is not resolved in an amicable manner). They will try (they have to, to save face), but it's unlikely that they will succeed. The party is over. > The EU commission is not supposed to have any say over tax issues Au contraire: rules against industrial state-sponsoring have been on the books since Maastricht, I believe. One of the main critiques of the EU is exactly that this straight-jacked national governments, which found themselves without powerful levers to manage their economies. In practice, these rules have been selectively applied, depending on the political climate. Such climate is now very unfavourable towards "onshore tax havens".
  - sverige 10y ago
    > When courts are called to have their say, they usually follow the political climate pretty faithfully. > In practice, these rules have been selectively applied, depending on the political climate. What a really bad practice. I think it's true, too, and not just in the EU (though it may be more obvious in that case.) I can't understand why people wonder how Brexit passed.
    - toyg 10y ago
      > What a really bad practice. It's not really that different from Common Law (aka "this is the law, until enough judges say it's not"). Besides, the alternative would have seen even more people crying the "EU Soviet" had taken sovereignty away.
  - anonymousDan 10y ago
    They're not going to 'weasel' out of anything, but you can bet your bottom dollar they will appeal it. A competitive business tax rate has been one of the cornerstones of Irish industrial policy for decades, and as you've just alluded to this is a politically motivated ruling, and stands on shaky legal ground. I think any appeal has a good chance of being successful: http://m.independent.ie/business/irish/irelands-appeal-has-strong-chance-of-success-official-35006029.html http://m.independent.ie/business/irish/irelands-appeal-has-s...
    - toyg 10y ago
      One anonymous (Irish?) official does not Spring make. As I said, Commissioners don't like to take unnecessary flak, and if they act it's because they have enough evidence and political muscle to take home a victory. 2017 is an election year in France and Germany; and both elites have an interest in tightening EU policy against external forces (US, Brexit etc). All indicators are against Ireland and Apple.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- peteretep 10y ago
  > that will be thrown out on > appeal to the European > courts, mark my words And if it's not, you'll accept it's not bullshit, or?
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

Oletros 10y ago

The process is against Ireland, not Apple

adrenalinelol 10y ago
If it were to be successful, Apple would inevitably find itself paying the majority of the fine, even if it's after the fact.
- toyg 10y ago
  That's a political choice for Ireland to make. They put Apple in this position in order to (illegally) bolster their economy; they might want to absorb some (or all) of the blow, to avoid a reputation hit. TBH, it's about damn time Ireland gets the bill for 25 years of thinly-veiled dumping. Luxembourg and Netherlands should be next on the list.
- Oletros 10y ago
  It is not a fine, is paying the taxes not payed