6 ms·

These people are protesting against the wrong entity. Apple followed the tax laws at the time, so they should protest against their government for creating loo

These people are protesting against the wrong entity. Apple followed the tax laws at the time, so they should protest against their government for creating loopholes that can and always will be exploited by those with the resources to do so. Public companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profits, which includes taking advantage of any and all available strategies to reduce their tax burden.

cdancette 9y ago
While you're right, I think it's still a good thing, as apple is obviously on the border of legality (in fact, most of those tax evasion schemes are not proven legal). I read that they estimated that each technique they used had a 1/4 chance of being judged illegal in court. Moreover, it raises awareness, and it is a good thing to blame publicly those society to help governments change the rules. If no one complains, why do anything?
- visarga 9y ago
  You buy an iPhone in France, tax doesn't go to fund the French people, it goes into an offshore. You tell them to stop it, they find another loophole, even more protracted. That's quite upsetting. So, Apple exploits both China and Europe to make a buck.
nraynaud 9y ago
Nope, 1)they don’t have a fiduciary duty to anyone in Europe 2) European doctrine in accounting is not that you can do anything as long as you don’t break the rules, but that you should account in a way that reflect the truth as much as possible within the rules 3) the European doctrine of tax law is that you should tax your profit where they are made 4) your headquarter for European tax purpose is not the address in your letterhead, but where the orders tend to radiate from.
- prepend 9y ago
  They are a US company. Fiduciary duty is per parent company. The complaint isn’t about the French subsidiary not paying taxes, but for parent.
Thorncorona 9y ago
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Taking advantage of others (such as lobbying for loopholes) falls under the umbrella. Just because you can dump industrial waste into a river doesn't mean you should. Just because you can steal doesn't mean you should. Just because you can shortchange citizens doesn't mean you should. Yes laws should be passed, I agree, but that doesn't mean we can't also multilaterally also go after others at the same time. Do you hold the parent responsible for the kid stealing? Yes. But you also hold the kid responsible for stealing. Most of all, I want to get of this notion that public corporations have fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit. In the Supreme Court case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the supreme court stated that "modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not do so. For-profit corporations, with ownership approval, support a wide variety of charitable causes." There is a better option, we just aren't taking it. As citizens, we should be supporting multilateral action for a more ethical capitalist economy.
- golergka 9y ago
  If you can do something lawful (which the most emotional if your examples are not) to increase your profits, it is your duty to your shareholders to do so.
  - Thorncorona 9y ago
    Read my full comment please.
- nv-vn 9y ago
  Why shouldn't you avoid paying taxes? If it's legal and you get to make more money, I don't see the issue. Especially if you're using that money to make more positive change than the government could.
  - jinglebells 9y ago
    Fine if you don't use roads or the internet or anything else which was funded from tax payers money.
PeachPlum 9y ago
I'm note sure about this case, but the LuxLeaks suggest otherwise. e.g. Apple has been ordered to pay up to €13 billion ($19 billion) in back taxes, plus interest, to Ireland [1] [2] [1] http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/apples-headache-is-the-start-of-tax-revenue-wars--and-australia-may-join-the-fight-20160830-gr528m.html http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/apples-headache-i... [2] http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/appleeu-case-was-not-the-end-of-secret-tax-deals-20161208-gt6kh3.html http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/appleeu-case-was-...
andmarios 9y ago
It would seem to me that having activists occupy your stores doesn't work very well toward maximizing your profits.
- downandout 9y ago
  I don’t think that will matter for a day or two. Honestly, if it became a long-term problem, people would just order online and have their stuff delivered anyway. One way or another, iPhones will still be selling in France.
  - andmarios 9y ago
    Modern sales are driven by marketing: making you feel good about yourself by purchasing a certain good. If your brand is actively associated with a controversial practice, then your sales will fall. There will be people that won't want to be seen carrying an iPhone.
visarga 9y ago
> Apple followed the tax laws at the time, so they should protest against their government for creating loopholes Ok, say we protest the Irish government, and they close the loophole. Next, they do the same from another country. What should we do when Apple uses another loophole?
- strictnein 9y ago
  You've strangely already answered the question you asked.
sumedh 9y ago
> Public companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profits That does not automatically mean taking advantage of tax havens. Warren Buffett says Berkshire Hathway can save tax using such tax havens but he does not do it because its not the right thing to do.
- mschuster91 9y ago
  Warren Buffett is Warren Buffett. He's an icon, and Berkshire Hathaway has been making consistent profits over decades. Any enterprise which does not make consistent high profits eventually gets scooped up / controlled by "activist investor" scum which then demands profit extraction to shareholders at any level possible: tax evasion schemes, loading up the company with debt which then gets distributed to shareholders or other financial tricks that only benefits the shareholders, often at expense of the workers and society. The only other exceptions to this rule I know are Amazon, Google and the various companies of Elon Musk - which are exceptions only because of their extremely charismatic and successful leaders.
Panoramix 9y ago
It's near impossible to not have loopholes. To this day nobody has a proposal on how that would work. Huge companies like Apple are always going to find a way and behave like greedy sociopaths - unless people stop buying their products because of this. Hence the protests are not misplaced.
firstplacelast 9y ago
By that same vein, citizens have a civic duty to pressure their masters to do the right thing. Hell, I even believe citizens have a civic duty not to contribute to corporations that make the nation a worse place. You are as selfish as your most sociopathic executive. You both contribute to the same bottom line, it is only compensation that is different.
MarkMc 9y ago
Actually, protesting against their own (French) government would also be the wrong entity. The right entity is the US government, because almost all of the profit on iPhones sold in France is created in the US. For the same reason that Foxconn makes only $8 profit on each iPhone [1], the sales operations of Apple in France would generate very low profit per phone if it was an independent company. This is because almost all the value-added activity (eg. hardware design, writing software, designing ads, designing Apple stores, WWDC) is done in California, not France. [1] http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/25/foxconn_getting_by_on_8_per_iphone.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/25/foxconn_getti...

cdancette 9y ago

While you're right, I think it's still a good thing, as apple is obviously on the border of legality (in fact, most of those tax evasion schemes are not proven legal). I read that they estimated that each technique they used had a 1/4 chance of being judged illegal in court. Moreover, it raises awareness, and it is a good thing to blame publicly those society to help governments change the rules. If no one complains, why do anything?

visarga 9y ago
You buy an iPhone in France, tax doesn't go to fund the French people, it goes into an offshore. You tell them to stop it, they find another loophole, even more protracted. That's quite upsetting. So, Apple exploits both China and Europe to make a buck.

nraynaud 9y ago

Nope, 1)they don’t have a fiduciary duty to anyone in Europe 2) European doctrine in accounting is not that you can do anything as long as you don’t break the rules, but that you should account in a way that reflect the truth as much as possible within the rules 3) the European doctrine of tax law is that you should tax your profit where they are made 4) your headquarter for European tax purpose is not the address in your letterhead, but where the orders tend to radiate from.

prepend 9y ago
They are a US company. Fiduciary duty is per parent company. The complaint isn’t about the French subsidiary not paying taxes, but for parent.

Thorncorona 9y ago

Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Taking advantage of others (such as lobbying for loopholes) falls under the umbrella. Just because you can dump industrial waste into a river doesn't mean you should. Just because you can steal doesn't mean you should. Just because you can shortchange citizens doesn't mean you should. Yes laws should be passed, I agree, but that doesn't mean we can't also multilaterally also go after others at the same time. Do you hold the parent responsible for the kid stealing? Yes. But you also hold the kid responsible for stealing. Most of all, I want to get of this notion that public corporations have fiduciary responsibility to maximize profit. In the Supreme Court case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the supreme court stated that "modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not do so. For-profit corporations, with ownership approval, support a wide variety of charitable causes." There is a better option, we just aren't taking it. As citizens, we should be supporting multilateral action for a more ethical capitalist economy.

golergka 9y ago
If you can do something lawful (which the most emotional if your examples are not) to increase your profits, it is your duty to your shareholders to do so.
- Thorncorona 9y ago
  Read my full comment please.
nv-vn 9y ago
Why shouldn't you avoid paying taxes? If it's legal and you get to make more money, I don't see the issue. Especially if you're using that money to make more positive change than the government could.
- jinglebells 9y ago
  Fine if you don't use roads or the internet or anything else which was funded from tax payers money.

PeachPlum 9y ago

I'm note sure about this case, but the LuxLeaks suggest otherwise. e.g. Apple has been ordered to pay up to €13 billion ($19 billion) in back taxes, plus interest, to Ireland [1] [2] [1] http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/apples-headache-is-the-start-of-tax-revenue-wars--and-australia-may-join-the-fight-20160830-gr528m.html http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/apples-headache-i... [2] http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/appleeu-case-was-not-the-end-of-secret-tax-deals-20161208-gt6kh3.html http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/appleeu-case-was-...

andmarios 9y ago

It would seem to me that having activists occupy your stores doesn't work very well toward maximizing your profits.

downandout 9y ago
I don’t think that will matter for a day or two. Honestly, if it became a long-term problem, people would just order online and have their stuff delivered anyway. One way or another, iPhones will still be selling in France.
- andmarios 9y ago
  Modern sales are driven by marketing: making you feel good about yourself by purchasing a certain good. If your brand is actively associated with a controversial practice, then your sales will fall. There will be people that won't want to be seen carrying an iPhone.

visarga 9y ago

> Apple followed the tax laws at the time, so they should protest against their government for creating loopholes Ok, say we protest the Irish government, and they close the loophole. Next, they do the same from another country. What should we do when Apple uses another loophole?

strictnein 9y ago
You've strangely already answered the question you asked.

sumedh 9y ago

> Public companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profits That does not automatically mean taking advantage of tax havens. Warren Buffett says Berkshire Hathway can save tax using such tax havens but he does not do it because its not the right thing to do.

mschuster91 9y ago
Warren Buffett is Warren Buffett. He's an icon, and Berkshire Hathaway has been making consistent profits over decades. Any enterprise which does not make consistent high profits eventually gets scooped up / controlled by "activist investor" scum which then demands profit extraction to shareholders at any level possible: tax evasion schemes, loading up the company with debt which then gets distributed to shareholders or other financial tricks that only benefits the shareholders, often at expense of the workers and society. The only other exceptions to this rule I know are Amazon, Google and the various companies of Elon Musk - which are exceptions only because of their extremely charismatic and successful leaders.

Panoramix 9y ago

It's near impossible to not have loopholes. To this day nobody has a proposal on how that would work. Huge companies like Apple are always going to find a way and behave like greedy sociopaths - unless people stop buying their products because of this. Hence the protests are not misplaced.

firstplacelast 9y ago

By that same vein, citizens have a civic duty to pressure their masters to do the right thing. Hell, I even believe citizens have a civic duty not to contribute to corporations that make the nation a worse place. You are as selfish as your most sociopathic executive. You both contribute to the same bottom line, it is only compensation that is different.

MarkMc 9y ago

Actually, protesting against their own (French) government would also be the wrong entity. The right entity is the US government, because almost all of the profit on iPhones sold in France is created in the US. For the same reason that Foxconn makes only $8 profit on each iPhone [1], the sales operations of Apple in France would generate very low profit per phone if it was an independent company. This is because almost all the value-added activity (eg. hardware design, writing software, designing ads, designing Apple stores, WWDC) is done in California, not France. [1] http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/25/foxconn_getting_by_on_8_per_iphone.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/25/foxconn_getti...