4 ms·

Pure foolishness. The law says “if you bring your foreign-earned profits abroad, you must pay taxes”. (I left it vague because I’m not an expert but my underst

Pure foolishness. The law says “if you bring your foreign-earned profits abroad, you must pay taxes”. (I left it vague because I’m not an expert but my understanding is Apple would be responsible for around a 30% or higher tax rate). Apple says, “okay we’re not going to bring the money back at that rate. Instead we’ll leave it invested in liquid assets abroad and take on cheap debt in the US to fund our share repurchases”. So what’s your proposal? Forced repatriation? I hope it’s clear why that isn’t a good approach. Our international tax code is completely fucked. Apple’s not the problem. Full disclosure: My portfolio is heavily weighted towards Apple at an average cost of $120/share

cmiles74 9y ago
I don't think it's at all that straightforward. Apple has assigned intellectual property to their subsidiaries in Ireland and has used that as a way to direct profits out of the US. Is that legal? I am not an expert, but surely it is not straightforward. Once profits collect in Ireland, Apple moves the profits to it's "head office", which not only is not in Ireland, it's not physical in any way. Thus they avoid the bulk of Irish taxes. The EU is suing Ireland and seem fairly serious, at least in this case it looks like Apple will pay some of the taxes, eventually. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-court/eu-takes-ireland-to-court-for-not-claiming-apple-tax-windfall-idUSKCN1C913I https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-cou... Is this the only way they are avoiding taxes? I strongly suspect it is not and that they are breaking the law in more than one case.
- __blockcipher__ 9y ago
  Which issue are we discussing? The age old double dutch irish or whatever it's called, or tax repatriation? I surmise that you're stating that the two are linked. That's fair. However isn't Apple already paying taxes on its US-sold goods? This thread seems to specifically be about the repatriation side of things, and the only way to force repatriation is to...force repatriation.
andrepd 9y ago
>Forced repatriation? I hope it’s clear why that isn’t a good approach. It isn't clear to me. Why is that?

cmiles74 9y ago

I don't think it's at all that straightforward. Apple has assigned intellectual property to their subsidiaries in Ireland and has used that as a way to direct profits out of the US. Is that legal? I am not an expert, but surely it is not straightforward. Once profits collect in Ireland, Apple moves the profits to it's "head office", which not only is not in Ireland, it's not physical in any way. Thus they avoid the bulk of Irish taxes. The EU is suing Ireland and seem fairly serious, at least in this case it looks like Apple will pay some of the taxes, eventually. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-court/eu-takes-ireland-to-court-for-not-claiming-apple-tax-windfall-idUSKCN1C913I https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-taxavoidance-cou... Is this the only way they are avoiding taxes? I strongly suspect it is not and that they are breaking the law in more than one case.

__blockcipher__ 9y ago
Which issue are we discussing? The age old double dutch irish or whatever it's called, or tax repatriation? I surmise that you're stating that the two are linked. That's fair. However isn't Apple already paying taxes on its US-sold goods? This thread seems to specifically be about the repatriation side of things, and the only way to force repatriation is to...force repatriation.

andrepd 9y ago

>Forced repatriation? I hope it’s clear why that isn’t a good approach. It isn't clear to me. Why is that?