3 ms·

> translation: I choose to accept the court that agrees with me and bluntly question the higher ones that don't > I just leave this here for your amusement: ht

> translation: I choose to accept the court that agrees with me and bluntly question the higher ones that don't > I just leave this here for your amusement: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELE.. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELE.... Point #1 is my favorite: "1. Save as otherwise provided in the Treaties, any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favoring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market." What they're basically saying is that if I don't agree, it's wrong. Tax code is complex precisely because of statements from Article 107. #3.e "(e) such other categories of aid as may be specified by decision of the Council on a proposal from the Commission." In your assumption, you are correct: I am questioning a higher court that over rules a lower sovereign court based on an elastic clause without limits.

pawadu 10y ago
The "lower sovereign court" has absolutely no meaning when the whole operation was set up to make use of the EU joint market. Do you claim EU should shut up and accept one of its members is stealing everyones tax income? Does that sound logical to you?
- randallsquared 10y ago
  > stealing everyones tax income What an interesting turn of phrase. :)
- bardworx 10y ago
  > The "lower sovereign court" has absolutely no meaning when the whole operation was set up to make use of the EU joint market. So why not have a joint EU tax code to simplify life? That's the issue what all corporations face at the moment. Read the white paper that was linked in a previous comment, it's not too dense and makes the correct points. G20 have been working on a unified world accounting system but EU has t accepted it. Instead, they'll use arbitrary rules that only govern EU and apply to multi-national corporations. In my opinion the discussion is focused on Apple (clearly because of the articles the comments are on) with strong opinions rooted in some kind of thievery that they're participating in. However, the root analysis is that the tax system is just FUBAR and the 14B levy won't fix it. Once that ruling was filed, the money goes into escrow so Apple is already out. They're fighting for a regulatory change that all companies (regardless if they're in the EU/US or elsewhere) will benefit from. Setting emotions aside, the issue is a change in tax system is required. Otherwise, all they're doing is putting lipstick on a pig.
  - mpweiher 10y ago
    > So why not have a joint EU tax code to simplify life? Subsidiarity. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTU_1.2.2.pdf http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTU_1.2.2.pdf It's really bizarre: if the EU creates the rules directly, it is "overreach" that interferes with "sovereignty" (despite the fact that these powers were ceded willingly, never mind...), if, on the other hand, the EU leaves things to member states and just imposes principles for those rules, it's "too complicated".

pawadu 10y ago

The "lower sovereign court" has absolutely no meaning when the whole operation was set up to make use of the EU joint market. Do you claim EU should shut up and accept one of its members is stealing everyones tax income? Does that sound logical to you?

randallsquared 10y ago
> stealing everyones tax income What an interesting turn of phrase. :)
bardworx 10y ago
> The "lower sovereign court" has absolutely no meaning when the whole operation was set up to make use of the EU joint market. So why not have a joint EU tax code to simplify life? That's the issue what all corporations face at the moment. Read the white paper that was linked in a previous comment, it's not too dense and makes the correct points. G20 have been working on a unified world accounting system but EU has t accepted it. Instead, they'll use arbitrary rules that only govern EU and apply to multi-national corporations. In my opinion the discussion is focused on Apple (clearly because of the articles the comments are on) with strong opinions rooted in some kind of thievery that they're participating in. However, the root analysis is that the tax system is just FUBAR and the 14B levy won't fix it. Once that ruling was filed, the money goes into escrow so Apple is already out. They're fighting for a regulatory change that all companies (regardless if they're in the EU/US or elsewhere) will benefit from. Setting emotions aside, the issue is a change in tax system is required. Otherwise, all they're doing is putting lipstick on a pig.
- mpweiher 10y ago
  > So why not have a joint EU tax code to simplify life? Subsidiarity. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTU_1.2.2.pdf http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTU_1.2.2.pdf It's really bizarre: if the EU creates the rules directly, it is "overreach" that interferes with "sovereignty" (despite the fact that these powers were ceded willingly, never mind...), if, on the other hand, the EU leaves things to member states and just imposes principles for those rules, it's "too complicated".