8 ms·
If you or I decided we just didn't like the tax rate that applied to us and didn't pay our taxes for decades at a time on income we made overseas, what do you t
by onezerozeroone 9y ago
If you or I decided we just didn't like the tax rate that applied to us and didn't pay our taxes for decades at a time on income we made overseas, what do you think would happen?
Corporations are treated as people only when it's convenient.
You and I don't have high-powered lawyers, lobbyists, loopholes, offshore accounts, subsidiaries, etc to hide behind.
This is an insult to every U.S. citizen...Apple wouldn't exist if it weren't for the U.S. and its tax-payers providing the environment that allowed Steve Jobs to create his company and become successful.
The rate they're being charged on this money is even lower than the new lower rate that they'll be charged on future income. Must be nice. Yay for corporate oligarchy.
- airstrike 9y agoI get your point. Only caveat is corporations also create jobs and pay their workers, but you and I as individuals do not. I know lots of Apple workers (directly or indirectly) are in China, but I wanted to point out why it's inappropriate to compare personal and corporate taxes.
- Retric 9y agoI create jobs all the time. Companies employ people based on Demand not simply whimsy.
- croon 9y ago> I get your point. Only caveat is corporations also create jobs and pay their workers, but you and I as individuals do not. That's like saying the wheat creates work for the mill to make flour. You can't have one without the other. Can we just get rid of the ridiculous notion that corporations provide more than the workers doing the actual work?
- rmrfrmrf 9y ago> Can we just get rid of the ridiculous notion that corporations provide more than the workers DOING THE ACTUAL WORK? Why is this a ridiculous notion?
- rizzom5000 9y agoI don't think it is. If the > workers DOING THE ACTUAL WORK are able to provide more value than the corporation, then why are they working for the corporation instead of providing more value than the corporation by themselves; and paying themselves more than the corporation pays them? I think OP's argument could be an example of reductio ad absurdum.
- chii 9y agoThe balance of power remains at the management level of a corporation, despite the fact that management hardly "does the work" that workers hired would be doing. The same arguments applied to the peasantry of the feudal age. There are many more peasants than lords, but through an imbalance of power (military in the feudal age, and monetary in the modern age), the higher ups gets to claim the profits of the workers.
- jdc 9y agoIt seems to me that management is good at crafting the appearance that they hold power even in cases where they don't. See also: VUCA
- dang 9y agoWould you please not use uppercase for emphasis in HN comments? It's basically yelling, and the site guidelines ask you not to.
- jdc 9y agoIMHO, corporations don't create jobs any more than the workers and consumers do.
- downandout 9y agoWhile I agree with you to some degree, we have the system we have. It has somehow survived through both tax-and-spend Democratic and fiscally conservative Republican administrations. It had to be fixed. So what say what you will about the current administration, they managed to get something done that even some of the most tax-hungry politicians in the nation previously failed to do.
- jlmorton 9y ago> So what say what you will about the current administration, they managed to get something done that even some of the most tax-hungry politicians in the nation previously failed to do. This is not terribly unique. We had a very similar (slightly more generous) repatriation tax holiday during the Bush Administration, in 2004.
- downandout 9y agoIt's been 14 years, which included 8 years of tax-hungry Democratic rule. So it is at least somewhat unique.
- toyg 9y agoLol, only US Republicans can see US Democrats as "tax hungry". Both the Clinton and Obama administrations were extremely business-friendly.
- IncRnd 9y agoReally? Have you investigated how many countries on the planet tax their citizens and corporations making money in other countries? The US marginal corporate tax rate is 38.92% compared to the worldwide average 22.5%. Until this recent tax bill passed, the US has had the 3rd highest marginal corporate tax rate in the world, surpassed only by the UAE and Puerto Rico. The US federal government is greedy for cash not business friendly.
- 9y ago
- pishpash 9y ago"Corporations are people, too!" as in, the people who hold their wealth in the form of corporations and generate their income from capital. Realize that it's not just an inane phrase, they are talking about themselves. They want to escape being taxed and they always succeed. Everybody else can pay, please. What's incredible is that there are many more of regular people than these "people," yet regular people do not act cohesively to form a political bloc so they bicker amongst themselves.
- philwelch 9y agoRegular people own wealth in the form of corporations, too. Half of all Americans own stocks. Public and private sector pension funds own large amounts of stock. University endowments include stock investments and private equity. Sovereign wealth funds, such as the Alaska Permanent Fund, own large amounts of stock. If we want to tax the rich, let's tax the rich. Let's not tax straw men that intermediate wealth for everyone, because that's what corporations are.
- pishpash 9y agoHalf (46% in 2013) of all Americans owned some financial wealth, that's already counting indirect investments -- I believe this number came from a study by Ed Wolff. In the same year (2013), the bottom 80% together owned about 5% of the financial wealth in the US, under the same definition counting indirect investments (80%-99% owned about 50%, 99%-100% owned about 45%). So no, "everyone" does not benefit in the same way from corporate wealth and "regular people" (the bottom 80% seems like a pretty good proxy) have basically nothing to do with it, even in aggregate -- forget about per capita. As for not taxing corporations at all and instead fully taxing dividends and gains, that's a different discussion with its own merits.
- philwelch 9y agoThat’s kind of like saying that because I have a house on a tiny plot of land and my rich neighbor owns half the land in town, that property taxes don’t affect me. It doesn’t really follow.
- rdtsc 9y agoTrue it seems we are getting the crumbs here falling between the cracks. But what is another realistic scenario? Tax them even more? Wouldn't they move to another tax haven. Why didn't that work so far, these tax tricks are not new.
- sjg007 9y agoThe whole point is that earned income should not have to be repatriated to be taxed. If I as a citizen have a bank account in Switzerland that accepts my foreign income then I pay tax on that money in the year it was earned. The exact same rules should apply. Just because the bank account is outside of the US should not make a difference.
- yorby 9y agoIf I don't pay my taxes on time, I get fined... If Apple doesn't pay on time, they get a reduced rate.
- rdtsc 9y ago> The whole point is that earned income should not have to be repatriated to be taxed. Agree. They used the double Irish paying basically no income tax there. Then were trying to move to Jersey (the island). This isn't new though and other companies were doing it. Is there any realistic short term hope that we'll finally close all the loopholes and the Apples and Googles of this country will start paying their fair share of taxes? Probably not. But I don't see why not at least be happy with them paying some taxes and investing the money domestically? Yet everyone here is upset. It is not ideal, I'd rather have universal healthcare, basic income even, I'd rather these companies not be able to do these schemes and pay their fair share of taxes, but it is what it is, why not be happy for some positive thing happening.
- sjg007 9y agoMy guess is that the path outside of the legislature doing anything is through the courts. Since corporations are citizens there must be some kind of constitutional law since human citizens don’t get the same benefit.
- chrischen 9y agoIf they bring the money back then inevitably they'd spend it back into the US economy either through direct job creation or buying things. If they do create jobs, the US gets most of its money from income tax, which would increase from the more jobs/higher wages. It feels like double dipping if we expect them to pay taxes on repatriating the money and then also taxing the wages that the repatriated money allows them to pay.
- sjg007 9y agoMost likely they will buy back stock or issue dividends. They have to do what the majority of shareholders want with the money. If they don't they will be sued.
- fjsolwmv 9y agoBoy are you in for a shock when you find out the money that you spend, which you've paid income tax on it, goes to someone who pays income tax on it again!
- IncRnd 9y ago> It feels like double dipping if we expect them to pay taxes on repatriating the money and then also taxing the wages that the repatriated money allows them to pay. That is how our federal government constantly engages in double taxation. A corporation makes money + pays taxes, then pays employees who pay taxes. Those employees buy goods and services as well as have their own companies, all of which pay taxes on their incomes. After five layers of this double-dipping, an initial million dollars only has $327,000 left, with the other two thirds having been paid in taxes (at an average of only 20%). Many people pay far more than 20% in federal taxes. The federal government takes in taxes most of every dollar this way.
- pg314 9y ago> If they bring the money back then inevitably they'd spend it back into the US economy either through direct job creation or buying things. That is a misconception. It's not like they are storing dollar bills in warehouses on foreign soil. The bulk of the 'overseas' money is already invested, for a large part in the US. See page 49 in Apple's yearly report [1], to see how that money is currently invested: at the end of 2016 almost $42 billion dollars were invested in US treasuries, $131 billion in corporate securities. It doesn't say how much of those corporate securities are US companies, but it's probably the bulk. It's an accounting/tax fiction that it is currently 'overseas'. [1] http://investor.apple.com/secfiling.cfm?filingid=1628280-16-20309 http://investor.apple.com/secfiling.cfm?filingid=1628280-16-...
- sjsbsh 9y agoYou can do the same by buying stocks and not paying taxes on earnings (including dividend) until you sell.
- fjsolwmv 9y agoApple wasn't breaking the law. Lawmakers were split and the majority simply didn't want apple to pay taxes. You can also hide your income from taxes if you are a business owning capitalist and not a commie laborer.