6 ms·

What should the corporate tax rate, currently at 35%, drop to, for Apple to repatriate foreign cash? It seems like a no brainier to drop the rate when the alte

What should the corporate tax rate, currently at 35%, drop to, for Apple to repatriate foreign cash? It seems like a no brainier to drop the rate when the alternative is financial skullduggery by the Apple capitals of the world. All while the local mom & pops pay the 35% and bear the financial burden of the nation

MoBattah 9y ago
> It seems like a no brainier to drop the rate when the alternative is financial skullduggery by the Apple capitals of the world. Absolutely not. Just because an entity will try to work around your well-intentioned and globally standard laws does not mean you should give up on those laws. In addition, it's quite an elitist and anti-democratic statement -- Apple is by far the world's most profitable public company, to give them a 'tax break' is to add icing onto their cake. Apple is doing what it thinks is best -- taking on debt with the assurance of foreign assets, no matter if those assets are readily available or not. The current US president has tossed around the idea of taxation amnesty for corporate asset repatriation -- if I was Apple, I'd lobby for that while continuing on their current practice. Lastly, there's no real fear Apple won't be able to borrow at a handsome rate. Interest rates are still incredibly low (historically) and the Fed doesn't raise rates by full percentage points, they do it slowly and incrementally.
- mankash666 9y ago
  Disagree. Apple is one among thousands of companies avoiding tax, while Mom-and-pop companies pay exorbitant rates. No one's working around laws - they're following it diligently while maintaining their fiduciary duty to investors. US corporate tax rates are among the highest in the world - even Canada - having a reputation for being socialist - has a lower rate. You're forcing companies to pay 0% tax in the US if they can get away paying only 5% in Ireland. And Ireland is benefiting disproportionately from American innovation - because of onerous tax rates
  - pjc50 9y ago
    The US is the only country to apply a global income tax to its non-resident nationals. It should apply a global tax to its businesses as well.
    - valuearb 9y ago
      That would drive US corporations to reincorporate overseas and cost the US most of its corporate tax revenue.
      - toomuchtodo 9y ago
        You install tariffs on the products and services of those corporations attempting to subvert the taxing authority, utilizing payment networks if necessary to capture the tariff.
        matt_wulfeck 9y ago
        So person A sells an iPhone to person B in China. The phone was manufactured there and never left the country. Can you tell me the reasoning that our federal government owns 35% of that sale? There’s a reason other (more “progressive”) countries don’t tax overseas business. It’s stupid and anticompetitive.
        toomuchtodo 9y ago
        The same reason I owe the government taxes when a non US company pays me directly when I work outside of the US. That’s what I owe the US government for their services I receive as a US citizen regardless of where my business activity took place. You think it’s stupid and anti competitive. I think that it’s a race to the bottom otherwise and fully support the current model (although 35% is a tad too high; 20-25% is more reasonable IMHO).
        wbl 9y ago
        There is only one other country that agrees with you: Eritria. Almost all other countries tax only residents.
charlesdm 9y ago
Foreign income should be exempt from US taxation, similar to the way any other properly developed nation handles things. Punishing businesses to repatriate their foreign earnings is ridiculous. All it does is incentivise them to keep their money offshore and not invest it in the US. How is that good? Second to that, Apple can pretty much borrow funds indefinitely to do buybacks and declare dividends. I don't know what their borrowing rate is, but say they pay between 2 to 4% on their bonds, then they shouldn't have a problem achieving a similar (or even higher) yield on their offshore cash, meaning it will cost them absolutely nothing to keep it all offshore.

MoBattah 9y ago

> It seems like a no brainier to drop the rate when the alternative is financial skullduggery by the Apple capitals of the world. Absolutely not. Just because an entity will try to work around your well-intentioned and globally standard laws does not mean you should give up on those laws. In addition, it's quite an elitist and anti-democratic statement -- Apple is by far the world's most profitable public company, to give them a 'tax break' is to add icing onto their cake. Apple is doing what it thinks is best -- taking on debt with the assurance of foreign assets, no matter if those assets are readily available or not. The current US president has tossed around the idea of taxation amnesty for corporate asset repatriation -- if I was Apple, I'd lobby for that while continuing on their current practice. Lastly, there's no real fear Apple won't be able to borrow at a handsome rate. Interest rates are still incredibly low (historically) and the Fed doesn't raise rates by full percentage points, they do it slowly and incrementally.

mankash666 9y ago
Disagree. Apple is one among thousands of companies avoiding tax, while Mom-and-pop companies pay exorbitant rates. No one's working around laws - they're following it diligently while maintaining their fiduciary duty to investors. US corporate tax rates are among the highest in the world - even Canada - having a reputation for being socialist - has a lower rate. You're forcing companies to pay 0% tax in the US if they can get away paying only 5% in Ireland. And Ireland is benefiting disproportionately from American innovation - because of onerous tax rates
- pjc50 9y ago
  The US is the only country to apply a global income tax to its non-resident nationals. It should apply a global tax to its businesses as well.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    That would drive US corporations to reincorporate overseas and cost the US most of its corporate tax revenue.
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      You install tariffs on the products and services of those corporations attempting to subvert the taxing authority, utilizing payment networks if necessary to capture the tariff.
      - matt_wulfeck 9y ago
        So person A sells an iPhone to person B in China. The phone was manufactured there and never left the country. Can you tell me the reasoning that our federal government owns 35% of that sale? There’s a reason other (more “progressive”) countries don’t tax overseas business. It’s stupid and anticompetitive.
        toomuchtodo 9y ago
        The same reason I owe the government taxes when a non US company pays me directly when I work outside of the US. That’s what I owe the US government for their services I receive as a US citizen regardless of where my business activity took place. You think it’s stupid and anti competitive. I think that it’s a race to the bottom otherwise and fully support the current model (although 35% is a tad too high; 20-25% is more reasonable IMHO).
        wbl 9y ago
        There is only one other country that agrees with you: Eritria. Almost all other countries tax only residents.

charlesdm 9y ago

Foreign income should be exempt from US taxation, similar to the way any other properly developed nation handles things. Punishing businesses to repatriate their foreign earnings is ridiculous. All it does is incentivise them to keep their money offshore and not invest it in the US. How is that good? Second to that, Apple can pretty much borrow funds indefinitely to do buybacks and declare dividends. I don't know what their borrowing rate is, but say they pay between 2 to 4% on their bonds, then they shouldn't have a problem achieving a similar (or even higher) yield on their offshore cash, meaning it will cost them absolutely nothing to keep it all offshore.