4 ms·

Could you explain how Apples cash abroad makes them "winners" in a practical sense for the country In an alternative universe, Apples profit would have been ta

by rtpg 9y ago

Could you explain how Apples cash abroad makes them "winners" in a practical sense for the country In an alternative universe, Apples profit would have been taxed, and everything would have been the same, except that they would have 2/3rd of the amount in bank than they do now. But the US govt would have a bit more resources to help build the infra/research to build more companies like Apple.

nihonde 9y ago
Apple pays lots of taxes in the US. It doesn't pay US taxes on money earned elsewhere. Can you articulate a sound policy for why any global company should be required to pay taxes in the US on revenues earned elsewhere? Why shouldn't the U.K., Germany, France, Japan, Korea, and China do the same?
- rtpg 9y ago
  One of the core arguments for comprehensive corporate tax reform is that multinationals play accounting games in order to reduce it's taxable income, in ways completely detached from reality. For example, I (a Dropbox user in Japan) am somehow paying Dropbox Ireland for my services. Apple Ireland did not make Macbook Pros, so why should they be the one cashing in the revenue, when the "real" sellers are Apple US? I realize that laws are complicated, so you might want national entities or something... but in that case, given there's Apple branches in many countries, shouldn't the respective national branches collect? Part of a complication about this is that EU has a common market but far from a unified fiscal approach... but the EU paradox is not the source of all tax manipulation.
  - nihonde 9y ago
    If Japan wanted to tax Dropbox for sales to Irish businesses that are transacted in Japan, it can do so. The classic Double Irish with Dutch Sandwich is about avoiding taxes on non-US revenue in jurisdictions outside the US. That's an issue between Ireland, Holland, and the rest of the world. In no way is it able to shield a multinational from paying taxes to the IRS on revenue generated in the US. You have a similar dynamic within the US between one state's tax code and another's. I've yet to hear anyone articulate a sound case for "repatriation" (doublespeak alert) of overseas profits to the US that didn't amount to US exceptionalism.

by rtpg 9y ago

nihonde 9y ago

Apple pays lots of taxes in the US. It doesn't pay US taxes on money earned elsewhere. Can you articulate a sound policy for why any global company should be required to pay taxes in the US on revenues earned elsewhere? Why shouldn't the U.K., Germany, France, Japan, Korea, and China do the same?

rtpg 9y ago
One of the core arguments for comprehensive corporate tax reform is that multinationals play accounting games in order to reduce it's taxable income, in ways completely detached from reality. For example, I (a Dropbox user in Japan) am somehow paying Dropbox Ireland for my services. Apple Ireland did not make Macbook Pros, so why should they be the one cashing in the revenue, when the "real" sellers are Apple US? I realize that laws are complicated, so you might want national entities or something... but in that case, given there's Apple branches in many countries, shouldn't the respective national branches collect? Part of a complication about this is that EU has a common market but far from a unified fiscal approach... but the EU paradox is not the source of all tax manipulation.
- nihonde 9y ago
  If Japan wanted to tax Dropbox for sales to Irish businesses that are transacted in Japan, it can do so. The classic Double Irish with Dutch Sandwich is about avoiding taxes on non-US revenue in jurisdictions outside the US. That's an issue between Ireland, Holland, and the rest of the world. In no way is it able to shield a multinational from paying taxes to the IRS on revenue generated in the US. You have a similar dynamic within the US between one state's tax code and another's. I've yet to hear anyone articulate a sound case for "repatriation" (doublespeak alert) of overseas profits to the US that didn't amount to US exceptionalism.