4 ms·
Mentioned elsewhere, but also the first company that should have paid $1 Trillion in taxes by now.
by th0ma5 8y ago
Mentioned elsewhere, but also the first company that should have paid $1 Trillion in taxes by now.
- getsugablitz2 8y agoIf they made their current net annual income for the entirety of their existence (not even close), then they would've needed to be taxed ~50% to have reached $1 trillion in taxes. I get (or at least hope) that it's an exaggeration, but I'm not too keen on seemingly witty phrases without substance that get repeated everywhere.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- trophycase 8y agoSeems reasonable. "People" who make far less than that pay over 50%
- briandear 8y agoHow much has Apple paid? How about all the employees? Shareholders? How many millions of jobs has Apple created? I am pretty sure that the net economic value created by Apple has far outstripped any alleged deficiencies in they taxes. And if you did tax them at 50% would they have innovated and hired as many people as they have? As a thought experiment, would Apple have been as successful if it were started in Paris rather than in a Los Altos garage? Why doesn’t Europe have more companies valued in the hundreds or billions? Why is there little Silicon Valley-style garage-based entrepreneurship in France? Culture is one aspect, but taxes and regulations are the primary reason. If you tax something, you get less of it.
- lightbyte 8y ago>I am pretty sure that the net economic value created by Apple has far outstripped any alleged deficiencies in they taxes. That's not how taxes, or any law for that matter, work. You don't get to steal from the society that created you by screeching "but look at the JOBS I created!"