7 ms·

I am Irish and work in tech BUT I do not know how to feel about this fiasco. On one hand: * Personal taxes and various hidden charges (and no we do not have f

by throwaway1974 10y ago

I am Irish and work in tech BUT I do not know how to feel about this fiasco. On one hand: * Personal taxes and various hidden charges (and no we do not have free healthcare like the NHS, unless you are unemployed) are massive * Small companies such as mine do not get any special treatment and have to pay corporate tax at 12.5%, its unfair Apple get preferential treatment * 13 billion would go a long way to solving all sorts of issues this country faces (tho it seems other countries want some of this money...) On the other hand: * The EU seems to be overstepping its bounds and trying a powergrab, last two times I voted YES on EU referendums we had clear promises that EU will not involve themselves in a members tax policy, i feel I was lied to. * Apple (and pretty much any large company you can think of) are here in Ireland and do hire boatloads of people, who in turn spend the money in the economy * Without our low corporate rates Ireland would be yet another impoverished peripheral EU state (as it was for long time) like Greece, minus the sun and with loads of rain :( So yeh I can see the moral and the pragmatist arguments being made on both sides of the debate, but can not decide yet where I fall. tl.dr: Its complicated...

rjsw 10y ago
The 12.5% corporate tax rate is still one of the lowest in the EU, why would the jobs go elsewhere ?
- neximo64 10y ago
  The EU is after EU level tax harmonisation. The fact they went after Apple is kind of a precedent for others. How would other firms be confident their taxes wont retroactively change? The Irish government is in no position to provide guarantees.
  - 59nadir 10y ago
    They're after every company paying the same tax in Ireland.
  - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
    Could you please substantiate your claim that the EU is going after tax harmonisation? For starters, all the facts point to non-intervention, including the topic discussed here. Also, it wouldn't make sense. A normalisation maybe, but harmonisation is stupid and a sure way of creating poverty, turmoil and destroying the EU market by removing jobs hence consumers.
- robmcm 10y ago
  Something I didn't realize until talking about this yesterday, is that the tax rate is often used to reflect the infrastructure in a given location. So whilst the Irish tax rate may be the lowest, the cost of operating a business there may, in total, be higher than somewhere with a higher tax rate. Obviously I am not suggesting they will go elsewhere (given they cost of moving is probably very high) but something worth considering.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
Svip 10y ago
> The EU seems to be overstepping its bounds and trying a powergrab, last two times I voted YES on EU referendums we had clear promises that EU will not involve themselves in a members tax policy, i feel I was lied to. The EU sees the beneficial tax rebates for Apple to be an unfair state subsidy under EU competition laws. In the eyes of the EU, this is not about tax policy, this is about competition policy, something the EU very much has an interest in having a say in (sort of the whole purpose of the EU, if you think about it).
- neximo64 10y ago
  However way you look at it, Ireland is being weaselled into collecting this against its will using a legal route the EU should not have the right to walk on in any fashion. It was agreed on the EU would not interfere with tax affairs a long time ago, this does exactly that. The exact way it was done is irrelevant, it is the result that is the issue. In the UK it was said when legislation from the EU was rejected or sent for revision, it would be sent back in another chapter of an irrelevant part of a policy document on another issue. This is what used to anger lawmakers. The way of getting things done is never through the front door (going at taxes directly), it's always using a backhand trick to get around to managing policy (competition policy), which is quite underhanded. While it is wonderful that Apple will now be paying taxes, who's to say this power will not be abused by the commission in future?
  - Svip 10y ago
    But how is that going to work out if Ireland can simply use its tax policy to circumvent EU competition laws? I am sure part of the deal that the EU would stay out of Irish tax policy was that Ireland would not use tax policy to circumvent other EU laws/regulations/treaties.
    - neximo64 10y ago
      The basis of the agreement that the EU would not interfere with tax policy was precisely so that states could compete against each other. This means the basis the commission is using, unfair competitive advantage, goes against the basis of this tax treaty. If Ireland was to circumvent other treaties that is an issue, but on the basis of competition it is most definitely unfair to the Irish state. This isn't the first time the EU has intervened with taxes in Ireland, the other is the water levy. It's getting ridiculous now. Its a country gradually being micromanaged.
riffraff 10y ago
> * Without our low corporate rates Ireland would be yet another impoverished peripheral EU state (as it was for long time) like Greece, minus the sun and with loads of rain :( low corporate tax rates aren't the question here, it's not even a matter of using the Double Irish. The EU is not questioning what Cisco, Facebook, Microsoft or Google do in Ireland. In this case _only Apple_ got a deal with the government, and that deal was "let's make up a number for the taxes you'll pay cause you're special". The EU complaint is that this conditions are not available for other EU companies, not that they are too lenient. You might find some extracts of the talks between Apple and Irish Revenue interesting to read[0]. [0] https://www.ft.com/content/233744b6-4886-11e4-ad19-00144feab7de https://www.ft.com/content/233744b6-4886-11e4-ad19-00144feab... (paywall but googling "Interview extracts between Apple tax advisers and Irish Revenue" will works)
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dagw 10y ago
  The EU is not questioning what Cisco, Facebook, Microsoft or Google do in Ireland. Yet. This is not the end of this line of inquiry for the EU. Microsoft is very much in line as are probably a handful of other companies, like Mc Donalds and Coca Cola.
  - riffraff 10y ago
    funny, I wrote a long reply to a similarly worded comment that was later deleted, so I couldn't post it. What is this line of inquiry? If it is "illicit state aid" then sure, it will not end here. In fact the EU has sanctioned Starbucks in NL and IIRC is investigating {FCA, Amazon] in LU. If the line of inquiry is "big companies that earn money and pay little taxes", why would you expect something new to happen considering that corps like Coca Cola have operated in europe for a century? The EU has no voice on local taxation, only on competition issues. Coca Cola, for example, would not have been able to get the same tax deal that Apple did, which means it was anti-competitive.
scandox 10y ago
As I understood it (when I also voted yes) was that we were promised there would be no tax harmonization. There were already strong rules in place relating to state subsidies - this is a subsidy issue rather than a tax issue. We are accused of giving Apple a subsidy via an artificial tax break tailored specifically to Apple. If true then we interfered with our own taxation system.
jernfrost 10y ago
The EU isn't treating you any different from any other EU country. I live in Norway and we are not even EU members but we still have to abide by EU laws. It is a very frequent occurrence that something can't be done because it means preferential treatment to a specific party. We must often buy things abroad because we can't give preferential treatment to Norwegian companies who would most likely do the job better for Norwegian conditions. I don't know how many times we have bought stuff from Spain or Italy or some other southern European country that simple broke down and didn't work in Norwegian climate and conditions. They won because they undercut out companies in price but they can't deliver quality. But these are EU rules. I get why they have to be there. I don't think it would be fair if Ireland would skip on the rules. I already think it is grossly unfair how Ireland is operating. Irish tax policies is hurting everybody else. We are also a small country and are under severe pressure to lower corporate taxes to stay in the game. Ireland is creating a race to the bottom. If everybody did like Ireland, everybody would be big losers. Everybody can't be a tax heaven. Tax heavens benefit at the expense of everybody else. I've worked with a lot of people who got laid off in Norwegian games industry because Canada offered special tax incentives so they moved everything there. Countries should compete on talent, infrastructure, salaries, regulation etc not on a race to the bottom on taxes.
- Tomte 10y ago
  That usually happens because the call for bids was sloppy. Of course you can evaluate offers for suitability to your climate. It's just a bit late to try and do that when you have never put it down in the requirements. Happens all the time, in every country. Usually municipalities are more affected because they don't have as much experience and tend to learn only from their first big disaster.

rjsw 10y ago

The 12.5% corporate tax rate is still one of the lowest in the EU, why would the jobs go elsewhere ?

neximo64 10y ago
The EU is after EU level tax harmonisation. The fact they went after Apple is kind of a precedent for others. How would other firms be confident their taxes wont retroactively change? The Irish government is in no position to provide guarantees.
- 59nadir 10y ago
  They're after every company paying the same tax in Ireland.
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  Could you please substantiate your claim that the EU is going after tax harmonisation? For starters, all the facts point to non-intervention, including the topic discussed here. Also, it wouldn't make sense. A normalisation maybe, but harmonisation is stupid and a sure way of creating poverty, turmoil and destroying the EU market by removing jobs hence consumers.
robmcm 10y ago
Something I didn't realize until talking about this yesterday, is that the tax rate is often used to reflect the infrastructure in a given location. So whilst the Irish tax rate may be the lowest, the cost of operating a business there may, in total, be higher than somewhere with a higher tax rate. Obviously I am not suggesting they will go elsewhere (given they cost of moving is probably very high) but something worth considering.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

Svip 10y ago

> The EU seems to be overstepping its bounds and trying a powergrab, last two times I voted YES on EU referendums we had clear promises that EU will not involve themselves in a members tax policy, i feel I was lied to. The EU sees the beneficial tax rebates for Apple to be an unfair state subsidy under EU competition laws. In the eyes of the EU, this is not about tax policy, this is about competition policy, something the EU very much has an interest in having a say in (sort of the whole purpose of the EU, if you think about it).

neximo64 10y ago
However way you look at it, Ireland is being weaselled into collecting this against its will using a legal route the EU should not have the right to walk on in any fashion. It was agreed on the EU would not interfere with tax affairs a long time ago, this does exactly that. The exact way it was done is irrelevant, it is the result that is the issue. In the UK it was said when legislation from the EU was rejected or sent for revision, it would be sent back in another chapter of an irrelevant part of a policy document on another issue. This is what used to anger lawmakers. The way of getting things done is never through the front door (going at taxes directly), it's always using a backhand trick to get around to managing policy (competition policy), which is quite underhanded. While it is wonderful that Apple will now be paying taxes, who's to say this power will not be abused by the commission in future?
- Svip 10y ago
  But how is that going to work out if Ireland can simply use its tax policy to circumvent EU competition laws? I am sure part of the deal that the EU would stay out of Irish tax policy was that Ireland would not use tax policy to circumvent other EU laws/regulations/treaties.
  - neximo64 10y ago
    The basis of the agreement that the EU would not interfere with tax policy was precisely so that states could compete against each other. This means the basis the commission is using, unfair competitive advantage, goes against the basis of this tax treaty. If Ireland was to circumvent other treaties that is an issue, but on the basis of competition it is most definitely unfair to the Irish state. This isn't the first time the EU has intervened with taxes in Ireland, the other is the water levy. It's getting ridiculous now. Its a country gradually being micromanaged.

riffraff 10y ago

> * Without our low corporate rates Ireland would be yet another impoverished peripheral EU state (as it was for long time) like Greece, minus the sun and with loads of rain :( low corporate tax rates aren't the question here, it's not even a matter of using the Double Irish. The EU is not questioning what Cisco, Facebook, Microsoft or Google do in Ireland. In this case _only Apple_ got a deal with the government, and that deal was "let's make up a number for the taxes you'll pay cause you're special". The EU complaint is that this conditions are not available for other EU companies, not that they are too lenient. You might find some extracts of the talks between Apple and Irish Revenue interesting to read[0]. [0] https://www.ft.com/content/233744b6-4886-11e4-ad19-00144feab7de https://www.ft.com/content/233744b6-4886-11e4-ad19-00144feab... (paywall but googling "Interview extracts between Apple tax advisers and Irish Revenue" will works)

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dagw 10y ago
The EU is not questioning what Cisco, Facebook, Microsoft or Google do in Ireland. Yet. This is not the end of this line of inquiry for the EU. Microsoft is very much in line as are probably a handful of other companies, like Mc Donalds and Coca Cola.
- riffraff 10y ago
  funny, I wrote a long reply to a similarly worded comment that was later deleted, so I couldn't post it. What is this line of inquiry? If it is "illicit state aid" then sure, it will not end here. In fact the EU has sanctioned Starbucks in NL and IIRC is investigating {FCA, Amazon] in LU. If the line of inquiry is "big companies that earn money and pay little taxes", why would you expect something new to happen considering that corps like Coca Cola have operated in europe for a century? The EU has no voice on local taxation, only on competition issues. Coca Cola, for example, would not have been able to get the same tax deal that Apple did, which means it was anti-competitive.

scandox 10y ago

As I understood it (when I also voted yes) was that we were promised there would be no tax harmonization. There were already strong rules in place relating to state subsidies - this is a subsidy issue rather than a tax issue. We are accused of giving Apple a subsidy via an artificial tax break tailored specifically to Apple. If true then we interfered with our own taxation system.

jernfrost 10y ago

The EU isn't treating you any different from any other EU country. I live in Norway and we are not even EU members but we still have to abide by EU laws. It is a very frequent occurrence that something can't be done because it means preferential treatment to a specific party. We must often buy things abroad because we can't give preferential treatment to Norwegian companies who would most likely do the job better for Norwegian conditions. I don't know how many times we have bought stuff from Spain or Italy or some other southern European country that simple broke down and didn't work in Norwegian climate and conditions. They won because they undercut out companies in price but they can't deliver quality. But these are EU rules. I get why they have to be there. I don't think it would be fair if Ireland would skip on the rules. I already think it is grossly unfair how Ireland is operating. Irish tax policies is hurting everybody else. We are also a small country and are under severe pressure to lower corporate taxes to stay in the game. Ireland is creating a race to the bottom. If everybody did like Ireland, everybody would be big losers. Everybody can't be a tax heaven. Tax heavens benefit at the expense of everybody else. I've worked with a lot of people who got laid off in Norwegian games industry because Canada offered special tax incentives so they moved everything there. Countries should compete on talent, infrastructure, salaries, regulation etc not on a race to the bottom on taxes.

Tomte 10y ago
That usually happens because the call for bids was sloppy. Of course you can evaluate offers for suitability to your climate. It's just a bit late to try and do that when you have never put it down in the requirements. Happens all the time, in every country. Usually municipalities are more affected because they don't have as much experience and tend to learn only from their first big disaster.