7 ms·
"It’s clear as day—and this was one of the findings of the 2013 Senate subcommittee—that there was no sensible business reason to set up those subsidiaries exce
by zacharytelschow 10y ago
"It’s clear as day—and this was one of the findings of the 2013 Senate subcommittee—that there was no sensible business reason to set up those subsidiaries except to avoid paying taxes."
The avoidance of paying taxes, the lowering of costs, does not qualify as a "sensible business reason" to take an action?
- NetStrikeForce 10y agoNo one's core business is "avoid taxes". Apple's business is to sell computers and entertainment. Opening an office for the sole purpose of avoiding taxes is not a core business, it's tax evasion, legal or not.
- alphadevx 10y agoApple's business is to make profit, same as anyone else. Revenue - Costs = Profit, still holds true.
- pjc50 10y agoTax is computed after the profit is made. What we're discussing is the question of where the profit was made and which country's tax system it falls under. If any.
- alphadevx 10y agoYes I am aware that profits are taxed and not revenue. Parent mentioned reduction of costs as a compelling reason of locating in Ireland, as well as low taxes. Corporations are legally obligated to maximize profit for share holders.
- pjc50 10y agoWell .. firstly, that's an over-reaching reading of Ford v. Dodge, and secondly, the specific company that's located in Ireland (Apple Sales International) doesn't actually have any costs if I've understood correctly - it's a shell with no premises and no employees. (In a corporate structure, which company do you think is legally obligated to maximise profit? The one at the top of the pyramid, or every individual registered company?)