6 ms·

The point about Apple hiring best graduates who got their education mostly free of charge cause of all the tax payers really shift my mind about the whole tax-a

The point about Apple hiring best graduates who got their education mostly free of charge cause of all the tax payers really shift my mind about the whole tax-avoidance thing.

nip 9y ago
It goes both ways, the hired graduates also benefit from this relationship: a salary used to live and buy goods, and incidentally pay taxes.
- mattmanser 9y ago
  To be clear, the taxes paid by employees are their taxes, that they'd be paying if they worked for another company or set up their own business. Obviously there is some effect from Apple being an employer in increasing the overall employment rate, but there's a reason Apple needs local employees to hawk it's products. If they weren't employing and selling locally, some other company would be employing those people and taking Apple's market share.
- eref 9y ago
  Are there any statistics about how much of the value produced by professionals abroad actually flows back to the country of origin? Intuitively, I would say it is very little because why would you return once you live in much more privileged circumstances.
greyman 9y ago
> The point about Apple hiring best graduates who got their education mostly free of charge cause of all the tax payers really shift my mind about the whole tax-avoidance thing. Yes, that's true, but another angle is, that when the corporation profits are very high, let's say $40B yearly, then at 20% profit tax they should pay $5B. And that looks like a too high, government didn't spend nearly that much on providing stuff to Apple, per year (it's like $500K per one employee per year, if the company has 10K employes, for example).
- dx034 9y ago
  You don't just pay taxes to get back the same amount. Taxes also include redistribution of wealth. In the US, a significant amount pays for social welfare and health insurance for the poor and elderly. That companies with healthy profit margins pay for this appears fairer than if it's just paid by small companies.
  - philliphaydon 9y ago
    Lol tax isn’t about redistribution it wealth.
    - zajd 9y ago
      We have a progressive income tax, at least here in the US. Hard to argue that's not redistributing wealth, although I'd argue it's not enough :)
      - philliphaydon 9y ago
        Education system is failing, protects Teachers and fails kids, and is protected by a board who doesn’t want to change because their pockets are being lined with lots of money. Doesn’t seem like redistribution to me.
fastball 9y ago
Yes but the moral burden is not on Apple, it's on those graduates. If you got your education for free and now you make a fat salary from Apple, it's your job to give back. Not Apple's.
- lordfoom 9y ago
  Bullshit.
- n4r9 9y ago
  Why is the burden not on both? Both Apple and the graduates are profiting from the subsidised education.
  - fastball 9y ago
    Because a corporation is not a person? It's a collection of individuals, and if you are taxing all of the individuals fairly why do you need to tax the collective as well?
    - n4r9 9y ago
      I feel like this is sliding towards a debate about the virtues of corporation tax full stop, which is a slightly different matter. I actually think the idea of a moral burden could reasonably be extended to entities such as corporations, but let's put that to the side for now. At some point in the process a decision was made - collectively, by people - to avoid paying the stipulated rate of tax in countries in which Apple had profited. These people benefit from the educational system in those countries, but they also reap rewards from tax avoidance. The moral burden lies somewhere. Tim Cook would have known about this decision if not played a role in it, in contrast to previous statements he has made. That is the hypocrisy highlighted in this article.
      - fastball 9y ago
        How is that hypocritical? Individuals try to minimize their taxes. So do companies. Except a company isn't actually benefitting because a country is just a collective. Do you have a child? Do you not deduct that child in your taxes? What about a mortgage? Donations to charity? Etc. etc.

The point about Apple hiring best graduates who got their education mostly free of charge cause of all the tax payers really shift my mind about the whole tax-avoidance thing.

nip 9y ago

It goes both ways, the hired graduates also benefit from this relationship: a salary used to live and buy goods, and incidentally pay taxes.

mattmanser 9y ago
To be clear, the taxes paid by employees are their taxes, that they'd be paying if they worked for another company or set up their own business. Obviously there is some effect from Apple being an employer in increasing the overall employment rate, but there's a reason Apple needs local employees to hawk it's products. If they weren't employing and selling locally, some other company would be employing those people and taking Apple's market share.
eref 9y ago
Are there any statistics about how much of the value produced by professionals abroad actually flows back to the country of origin? Intuitively, I would say it is very little because why would you return once you live in much more privileged circumstances.

greyman 9y ago

> The point about Apple hiring best graduates who got their education mostly free of charge cause of all the tax payers really shift my mind about the whole tax-avoidance thing. Yes, that's true, but another angle is, that when the corporation profits are very high, let's say $40B yearly, then at 20% profit tax they should pay $5B. And that looks like a too high, government didn't spend nearly that much on providing stuff to Apple, per year (it's like $500K per one employee per year, if the company has 10K employes, for example).

dx034 9y ago
You don't just pay taxes to get back the same amount. Taxes also include redistribution of wealth. In the US, a significant amount pays for social welfare and health insurance for the poor and elderly. That companies with healthy profit margins pay for this appears fairer than if it's just paid by small companies.
- philliphaydon 9y ago
  Lol tax isn’t about redistribution it wealth.
  - zajd 9y ago
    We have a progressive income tax, at least here in the US. Hard to argue that's not redistributing wealth, although I'd argue it's not enough :)
    - philliphaydon 9y ago
      Education system is failing, protects Teachers and fails kids, and is protected by a board who doesn’t want to change because their pockets are being lined with lots of money. Doesn’t seem like redistribution to me.

fastball 9y ago

Yes but the moral burden is not on Apple, it's on those graduates. If you got your education for free and now you make a fat salary from Apple, it's your job to give back. Not Apple's.

lordfoom 9y ago
Bullshit.
n4r9 9y ago
Why is the burden not on both? Both Apple and the graduates are profiting from the subsidised education.
- fastball 9y ago
  Because a corporation is not a person? It's a collection of individuals, and if you are taxing all of the individuals fairly why do you need to tax the collective as well?
  - n4r9 9y ago
    I feel like this is sliding towards a debate about the virtues of corporation tax full stop, which is a slightly different matter. I actually think the idea of a moral burden could reasonably be extended to entities such as corporations, but let's put that to the side for now. At some point in the process a decision was made - collectively, by people - to avoid paying the stipulated rate of tax in countries in which Apple had profited. These people benefit from the educational system in those countries, but they also reap rewards from tax avoidance. The moral burden lies somewhere. Tim Cook would have known about this decision if not played a role in it, in contrast to previous statements he has made. That is the hypocrisy highlighted in this article.
    - fastball 9y ago
      How is that hypocritical? Individuals try to minimize their taxes. So do companies. Except a company isn't actually benefitting because a country is just a collective. Do you have a child? Do you not deduct that child in your taxes? What about a mortgage? Donations to charity? Etc. etc.