3 ms·

I kind of felt the same about the Apple Tax / Irish Revenue Commissioners thing. On looking into the judgement however it appeared as though both parties activ

by rusk 8y ago

I kind of felt the same about the Apple Tax / Irish Revenue Commissioners thing. On looking into the judgement however it appeared as though both parties actively sought to subvert competition rules under a disingenuous "veil of ignorance". Warning shots had been fired earlier but the practices continued hence the fine. I haven't read into the details of this judgement yet but you may well find similar reasoning therein.

oliwarner 8y ago
That's not a fine against Apple, it's a demand that Ireland corrects past behaviour that has been deemed state aid. While it's certainly Apple's prerogative to play EU states off against each other to get the best deal, it should have been blindingly obvious that what it was getting from Ireland would be, and should be reversed.
- rusk 8y ago
  The demand was that Apple pay €13B in back taxes. > it should have been blindingly obvious and yet, it took a deep-dive investigation by the commission with a team of specialists to untangle it.
  - oliwarner 8y ago
    The EU's demand was that Ireland collect that tax from Apple. And blindingly obvious to Apple, the benefactor. When somebody says, "Hey come and do your stuff here, we'll only charge you 0.005% corp tax!" you should expect that their wider financial governing body (who is losing out severely because of a deal like that) might have something to say about it.
    - rusk 8y ago
      You think it was blindingly obvious to Apple that they would have had to pay this tax eventually? Seems to me and everyone else it was an attempt at a stroke. You're alleging that Apple were a passive actor. You saw that thing in the ICIJ Jersey papers leak where Apple went round the world actively seeking jurisdictions that would twist their tax rules to suit them? https://www.irishtimes.com/business/apple-s-cash-mountain-how-it-avoids-tax-and-the-irish-link-1.3281734 https://www.irishtimes.com/business/apple-s-cash-mountain-ho...
      - oliwarner 8y ago
        No, I'm not alleging Apple was passive here, at all I'm saying that when you get a deal this good —however you ended up there— you should not be surprised when it turns out that it was illegal. Of course Apple shopped around. But if somebody offered to sell you $20 bills for half a cent each, would you suspect something dodgy? That's the scale of the issue here.
        rusk 8y ago
        I'm getting where you're coming from now. This is just a drop in the ocean for the total amount of wealth that is protected with these schemes. In the $20 for ¢0.5 picture this probably amounts to ¢50. They're still making off with the other $19.49. Though arbitration would probably round that up. An acceptable loss.
        SparklingCotton 8y ago
        Apple should be forced to pay back 10x what they gained in this illegal deal. It's bleedingly obvious that it's illegal to be taxed differently than other companies. Paying back €13bn is nothing. Companies that "make deals" on tax anywhere in the world should be effectively banned from the EU market. It's pure evil. Or pay 10x of any gain they have made anywhere in the world by "making deals" on tax, thereby undercutting fair competition in a free market.
        rusk 8y ago
        It's bleedin' blindingly obvious that this is all a matter of corporate strategy. Yeah they should be fined for sure, but as many are keen to point out they keep to the letter of the law. That's not to say the EC couldn't enact some kind of retroactive legislation but that wouldn't be likely as they have their own "special interests" to look after too ...
        oliwarner 8y ago
        Playing states against each other is par for the course in the US. Each state can offer wildly different tax structures and incentives, and they all do, because each wants to be the state government that oversaw "6000 new jobs". They've seen similar issues with the collection of sales tax, when one company can "operate" over many state lines. But saying "hey, that's obviously corruption" isn't enough. We need a good way to restructure tax collection so that the right people get it. Multinationals paying Luxembourg (Paypal, eBay) or Ireland (Apple, Amazon) for all revenue and operations from the entire EU is wrong, no? How do you fix that?
- SparklingCotton 8y ago
  > While it's certainly Apple's prerogative to play EU states off against each other to get the best deal It certainly IS NOT. When Apple "get's a deal" it is by definition market manipulation. You're not supposed to "get a deal" regarding taxation! The same taxation rules must apply to every company or else there is illegal subsidy. The whole idea around "making a deal" on tax is horrendous anti-capitalist BS. It's exactly the same as "making a deal" wrt the law in a corrupt country. A corporation "making a deal" by having government look away when they do something illegal, or getting their competitors fined on dubious charges. Apple, Google, Microsoft, and basically all of those companies ARE THE SCUM OF THE EARTH for not refusing do to business with the market-corrupting Irish Republic.

by rusk 8y ago

oliwarner 8y ago

That's not a fine against Apple, it's a demand that Ireland corrects past behaviour that has been deemed state aid. While it's certainly Apple's prerogative to play EU states off against each other to get the best deal, it should have been blindingly obvious that what it was getting from Ireland would be, and should be reversed.

rusk 8y ago
The demand was that Apple pay €13B in back taxes. > it should have been blindingly obvious and yet, it took a deep-dive investigation by the commission with a team of specialists to untangle it.
- oliwarner 8y ago
  The EU's demand was that Ireland collect that tax from Apple. And blindingly obvious to Apple, the benefactor. When somebody says, "Hey come and do your stuff here, we'll only charge you 0.005% corp tax!" you should expect that their wider financial governing body (who is losing out severely because of a deal like that) might have something to say about it.
  - rusk 8y ago
    You think it was blindingly obvious to Apple that they would have had to pay this tax eventually? Seems to me and everyone else it was an attempt at a stroke. You're alleging that Apple were a passive actor. You saw that thing in the ICIJ Jersey papers leak where Apple went round the world actively seeking jurisdictions that would twist their tax rules to suit them? https://www.irishtimes.com/business/apple-s-cash-mountain-how-it-avoids-tax-and-the-irish-link-1.3281734 https://www.irishtimes.com/business/apple-s-cash-mountain-ho...
    - oliwarner 8y ago
      No, I'm not alleging Apple was passive here, at all I'm saying that when you get a deal this good —however you ended up there— you should not be surprised when it turns out that it was illegal. Of course Apple shopped around. But if somebody offered to sell you $20 bills for half a cent each, would you suspect something dodgy? That's the scale of the issue here.
      - rusk 8y ago
        I'm getting where you're coming from now. This is just a drop in the ocean for the total amount of wealth that is protected with these schemes. In the $20 for ¢0.5 picture this probably amounts to ¢50. They're still making off with the other $19.49. Though arbitration would probably round that up. An acceptable loss.
      - SparklingCotton 8y ago
        Apple should be forced to pay back 10x what they gained in this illegal deal. It's bleedingly obvious that it's illegal to be taxed differently than other companies. Paying back €13bn is nothing. Companies that "make deals" on tax anywhere in the world should be effectively banned from the EU market. It's pure evil. Or pay 10x of any gain they have made anywhere in the world by "making deals" on tax, thereby undercutting fair competition in a free market.
        rusk 8y ago
        It's bleedin' blindingly obvious that this is all a matter of corporate strategy. Yeah they should be fined for sure, but as many are keen to point out they keep to the letter of the law. That's not to say the EC couldn't enact some kind of retroactive legislation but that wouldn't be likely as they have their own "special interests" to look after too ...
        oliwarner 8y ago
        Playing states against each other is par for the course in the US. Each state can offer wildly different tax structures and incentives, and they all do, because each wants to be the state government that oversaw "6000 new jobs". They've seen similar issues with the collection of sales tax, when one company can "operate" over many state lines. But saying "hey, that's obviously corruption" isn't enough. We need a good way to restructure tax collection so that the right people get it. Multinationals paying Luxembourg (Paypal, eBay) or Ireland (Apple, Amazon) for all revenue and operations from the entire EU is wrong, no? How do you fix that?
SparklingCotton 8y ago
> While it's certainly Apple's prerogative to play EU states off against each other to get the best deal It certainly IS NOT. When Apple "get's a deal" it is by definition market manipulation. You're not supposed to "get a deal" regarding taxation! The same taxation rules must apply to every company or else there is illegal subsidy. The whole idea around "making a deal" on tax is horrendous anti-capitalist BS. It's exactly the same as "making a deal" wrt the law in a corrupt country. A corporation "making a deal" by having government look away when they do something illegal, or getting their competitors fined on dubious charges. Apple, Google, Microsoft, and basically all of those companies ARE THE SCUM OF THE EARTH for not refusing do to business with the market-corrupting Irish Republic.