3 ms·
Apple pioneered [1] the 'deal'[2] and were one of the worst offendersl [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-state
by canuckintime 10y ago
Apple pioneered [1] the 'deal'[2] and were one of the worst offendersl
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strategy-aims-at-low-tax-states-and-nations.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strate...
[2] http://www.businessinsider.de/how-apple-managed-to-get-its-tax-deal-in-ireland-in-1991-2016-8 http://www.businessinsider.de/how-apple-managed-to-get-its-t...
- acqq 10y agoThanks. From the second link: "It's illegal for a government in the EU to strike a so-called "sweetheart deal" with a company. The European Commission classes those deals as illegal state aid, and it has decided that Ireland's deal with Apple is exactly that." So it seems it's not typical "double Irish" or does the EU simply go after the biggest offender?
- canuckintime 10y agoThe EU Comission seems to be tackling the issue with test trials. Netherlands was already chastised last year with refrence to Starbucks[1]. With respect to EU law it's the country that's the problem (although technically the corporation could also be pursued if there's undue influence cough lobbying cough) so the EU seems to be using the most high profile cases to close the loophole and then countries themselves will properly enforce the law for the other offenders. [1] http://fortune.com/2016/03/11/apple-google-taxes-eu/ http://fortune.com/2016/03/11/apple-google-taxes-eu/
- summarite 10y agoEssentially the commission points out how governments favour big corporations when it suits them, eg to claim "i brought jobs".