4 ms·

Nope, they're not. This is the result of an investigation. Now Apple can appeal and it can be taken to an European Court. Where's the overstepping again?

neximo64 10y ago
The EU isn't a federation. It's not the United States of Europe. If you're from the US you misunderstand the system. The EU court and EC has no authority to do what its doing now.
- NetStrikeForce 10y ago
  So who judges if Ireland is failing to comply with EU law? Who sanctions it? If you think this is overstepping, I'm sure you've got reasons like "there's no EU law against it"; but turns out there is EU law against these subsidies. That's why I don't see it as overstepping, as long as the process guarantees the right of the parts to defend themselves in court.
  - neximo64 10y ago
    You still misunderstand, Ireland hasn't broken any EU law, simply because the EU has no jurisdiction over Irelands tax policy. The question of who is to judge whether Ireland 'broke the law' is mute. Ireland is a sovereign state & with international affairs there is no bilateral treaty obligating Ireland's tax affairs to be delegated by a third country or organisation such as the EU. You're looking at the EU from a very Amerocentric point of view, the EU is not the US, the EU does not have a federal court with jurisdiction over EU countries on tax affairs. On the question on who judges this, it's Ireland. When a country disagrees with another country its a foreign affairs problem. If China has a trade dispute with the US there is no court that can easily solve it. The equivalent of what you're saying is China ruling US companies to pony up tax with the American countries having no presence in China. There is the WTO, but this isn't that sort of case either. What do China's courts have to do with the USA you ask? The same as the EU's courts have a say over Ireland's tax policy.
    - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
      I am sorry, but I believe you are misinformed. This is not about taxes (I can't believe I wrote this sentence at least three times already!). Ireland broke an EU law about about fair competition between companies. They unfairly subsidised Apple in a way not available for other companies. Ireland and all the EU countries agreed to not do that by creating laws against it. Also, I'm not sure why you think I've got a US-centric view. I'm an EU citizen :-)
      - neximo64 10y ago
        I know you have mentioned this, and you do not hear what I'm mentioning. This isn't an EU issue. Apple was given an unfair advantage, which is true. I whole-hearedly agree with you there, I don't think anyone doubts that. When they gave Apple an advantage, they gave it an advantage over Irish firms too - which is unfair. It should not be the EU's role to judge this, it should be something done in Irish courts, to make sure everyone else is treated fairly. The EU is doing a job it should not be doing. This is my point, as I hear yours and I agree with it. After all it is a foreign company given an advantage to local Irish businesses - in Ireland. Other Irish businesses suffer. One day the thing the EU will do will be something very drastic and there will be no recourse.
        NetStrikeForce 10y ago
        The thing is, giving Apple an unfair advantage over other firms operating in Ireland is the same as giving Apple an unfair advantage over firms operating in the EU. Damn, there's a law against it, which has been signed by all EU members - that's hardly overstepping. I guess you would prefer that law didn't exist and I hear you, but whether we like or not, reality is that Ireland broke the law and Apple colluded with them, hence they have to pay back what they owe (and hopefully a fine to not try again).
- Oletros 10y ago
  > The EU court and EC has no authority to do what its doing now. The EC doesn't have authority in cases of illegal state aid? Then we should throw away the cases since decades
  - neximo64 10y ago
    You could say the same thing about Chinese steel being subsidised by the Chinese state. A US court cannot change that. It is the same with the EC on tax issues. A country can offer something better than an another EU country can, without it being interfered with. It isn't about what was right or wrong, it is who gets to decide that. What is witnessed here is the loss of Ireland's sovereignty. If there was any reason there was a Brexit and it wasn't to do with racism or bigotry it was for reasons that would prevent such a scenario as the one in Ireland.
    - Oletros 10y ago
      > You could say the same thing about Chinese steel being subsidised by the Chinese state. China doesn't pertain to the EU > A US court cannot change that. It is the same with the EC on tax issues. EC authority about state aids has been there for decades > A US court cannot change that. It is the same with the EC on tax issues. This is not about tax issues > A country can offer something better than an another EU country can, without it being interfered with. Oh, yes, this is legal, but this is not what the case is about > It isn't about what was right or wrong, it is who gets to decide that. And in the case of state aids, the one that can decide is the EC
      - neximo64 10y ago
        A subsidy is as good as state aid. Is subsidy a form of tax, no. It is an issue of tax, not even as blurry as a subsidy. China and the EU pertain the exact same way as Ireland and the EU. The EU has no say over Ireland's tax affairs. Taxes are not state aids, Any form of say on tax in any way at all needs all member states to agree, - as from the Treaty of Lisbon on Tax Affairs. It's a shame really that this is brought up, because one of two things will happen 1) It will be said the EU has control over the state of Ireland's tax policy, through the guise of 'state aid'. What fun that'll be 2) The ruling will be overturned and the EC will not be able to easily govern on its rulings. Legislation will be brought about to seek more control over EU member states. Either way, each spell trouble for the EU. You can see the Brexiteers laughing.

neximo64 10y ago

The EU isn't a federation. It's not the United States of Europe. If you're from the US you misunderstand the system. The EU court and EC has no authority to do what its doing now.

NetStrikeForce 10y ago
So who judges if Ireland is failing to comply with EU law? Who sanctions it? If you think this is overstepping, I'm sure you've got reasons like "there's no EU law against it"; but turns out there is EU law against these subsidies. That's why I don't see it as overstepping, as long as the process guarantees the right of the parts to defend themselves in court.
- neximo64 10y ago
  You still misunderstand, Ireland hasn't broken any EU law, simply because the EU has no jurisdiction over Irelands tax policy. The question of who is to judge whether Ireland 'broke the law' is mute. Ireland is a sovereign state & with international affairs there is no bilateral treaty obligating Ireland's tax affairs to be delegated by a third country or organisation such as the EU. You're looking at the EU from a very Amerocentric point of view, the EU is not the US, the EU does not have a federal court with jurisdiction over EU countries on tax affairs. On the question on who judges this, it's Ireland. When a country disagrees with another country its a foreign affairs problem. If China has a trade dispute with the US there is no court that can easily solve it. The equivalent of what you're saying is China ruling US companies to pony up tax with the American countries having no presence in China. There is the WTO, but this isn't that sort of case either. What do China's courts have to do with the USA you ask? The same as the EU's courts have a say over Ireland's tax policy.
  - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
    I am sorry, but I believe you are misinformed. This is not about taxes (I can't believe I wrote this sentence at least three times already!). Ireland broke an EU law about about fair competition between companies. They unfairly subsidised Apple in a way not available for other companies. Ireland and all the EU countries agreed to not do that by creating laws against it. Also, I'm not sure why you think I've got a US-centric view. I'm an EU citizen :-)
    - neximo64 10y ago
      I know you have mentioned this, and you do not hear what I'm mentioning. This isn't an EU issue. Apple was given an unfair advantage, which is true. I whole-hearedly agree with you there, I don't think anyone doubts that. When they gave Apple an advantage, they gave it an advantage over Irish firms too - which is unfair. It should not be the EU's role to judge this, it should be something done in Irish courts, to make sure everyone else is treated fairly. The EU is doing a job it should not be doing. This is my point, as I hear yours and I agree with it. After all it is a foreign company given an advantage to local Irish businesses - in Ireland. Other Irish businesses suffer. One day the thing the EU will do will be something very drastic and there will be no recourse.
      - NetStrikeForce 10y ago
        The thing is, giving Apple an unfair advantage over other firms operating in Ireland is the same as giving Apple an unfair advantage over firms operating in the EU. Damn, there's a law against it, which has been signed by all EU members - that's hardly overstepping. I guess you would prefer that law didn't exist and I hear you, but whether we like or not, reality is that Ireland broke the law and Apple colluded with them, hence they have to pay back what they owe (and hopefully a fine to not try again).
Oletros 10y ago
> The EU court and EC has no authority to do what its doing now. The EC doesn't have authority in cases of illegal state aid? Then we should throw away the cases since decades
- neximo64 10y ago
  You could say the same thing about Chinese steel being subsidised by the Chinese state. A US court cannot change that. It is the same with the EC on tax issues. A country can offer something better than an another EU country can, without it being interfered with. It isn't about what was right or wrong, it is who gets to decide that. What is witnessed here is the loss of Ireland's sovereignty. If there was any reason there was a Brexit and it wasn't to do with racism or bigotry it was for reasons that would prevent such a scenario as the one in Ireland.
  - Oletros 10y ago
    > You could say the same thing about Chinese steel being subsidised by the Chinese state. China doesn't pertain to the EU > A US court cannot change that. It is the same with the EC on tax issues. EC authority about state aids has been there for decades > A US court cannot change that. It is the same with the EC on tax issues. This is not about tax issues > A country can offer something better than an another EU country can, without it being interfered with. Oh, yes, this is legal, but this is not what the case is about > It isn't about what was right or wrong, it is who gets to decide that. And in the case of state aids, the one that can decide is the EC
    - neximo64 10y ago
      A subsidy is as good as state aid. Is subsidy a form of tax, no. It is an issue of tax, not even as blurry as a subsidy. China and the EU pertain the exact same way as Ireland and the EU. The EU has no say over Ireland's tax affairs. Taxes are not state aids, Any form of say on tax in any way at all needs all member states to agree, - as from the Treaty of Lisbon on Tax Affairs. It's a shame really that this is brought up, because one of two things will happen 1) It will be said the EU has control over the state of Ireland's tax policy, through the guise of 'state aid'. What fun that'll be 2) The ruling will be overturned and the EC will not be able to easily govern on its rulings. Legislation will be brought about to seek more control over EU member states. Either way, each spell trouble for the EU. You can see the Brexiteers laughing.