5 ms·

Isn't this more attributable to the high inflation rates currently? A roughly 10% increase corresponds to the 9.1% annual inflation (as of August 2022), with so

by sofixa 4y ago

Isn't this more attributable to the high inflation rates currently? A roughly 10% increase corresponds to the 9.1% annual inflation (as of August 2022), with some margin for some previous years. Not to mention the USD/EUR rate, which also probably impacts them a bit. Which tax are you talking about? Considering the amount of profits and cash reserves this company has, I don't see why some people are so opposed to taxing them. They're swimming in more money they can possibly use, what use is it? Close the loopholes and make them pay their fair share, they'll barely notice the difference anyway.

TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago
What loophole? The one where a business gets to decide what they charge? The free market loophole? The loophole where business pass costs on to customers? Do you propose governments should set prices?
- cycomanic 4y ago
  So here I thought the free market always finds the lowest price based on supply and demand and costs had very little to do with it.
  - qeternity 4y ago
    Cost is the largest factor of the supply curve…
- ReptileMan 4y ago
  Except app store is not free market but monopoly. So it should be treated like one. The moment sideloading/root or alternative appstores are allowed - then then can charge whatever they feel like. Vendor lock in is bad towards the customer so limiting it actually increases the free market. What you think of is Laissez-faire
  - qeternity 4y ago
    No, this is not even remotely close to a monopoly. Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. When Android has 75% market share and multiple competing stores, we’re not even close to monopoly.
    - yelskcol 4y ago
      >Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform and weren't forced into being locked into their ecosystem where you pay a 15% Apple tax on every purchase. Say what you like about mobile platforms but making ridiculous comparisons like this doesn't help your case.
      - Someone 4y ago
        > Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform I don’t see how that is an argument against ”Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can.”. You don’t have freedom of choice as to who to buy from at your local grocer, either. I think that, in principle, companies creating a market should be able to decide what gets sold there and demand any cut of sales they want. That also is what I think laws say in most countries. It’s fairly normal with game consoles, for example, and I expect you can’t sell merchandise from studios competing with Disney (if they still exist) in Disneyland or sell ice cream there without Disney taking a significant cut, or sell Shell products at an Exxon pump. The big question, though, is whether the market power of a few players in mobile apps is so undesirable that action is necessary, and if so, whether existing laws are sufficient to correct the issue, or whether the rules of the game should change and if so, how. I think law will be changed, but how, I’m not sure about. Any law saying “this applies only to companies Foo, Bar and Baz” will be shut down in courts, so arguments must be formulated as to what exactly is wrong with the current situation, and decisions will have to be made as to whether those rules also should apply to, for example, game consoles.
        4y ago
- madsbuch 4y ago
  I love that this comment is a response to a pricing scheme where developers are forced into pricing brackets. Apple are effectively hindering developers selling their apps on a free market.
  - WHATDOESIT 4y ago
    But they also, you know, made the platform. Are you sure the platform would be there without their fees? Let's have a look at the Linux phone market...
    - whywhywhywhy 4y ago
      Ok, why do they not force fees on apps that run on their MacOS platform then? Or what about their WebKit platform?
      - WHATDOESIT 4y ago
        Seems like they've chosen a different business model back then and since it didn't work out so well (compare Mac/macOS market penetration to iPhone/iOS) they changed it to something that allows them to capture more revenue and use the money to develop the platform much further. And they're not forcing it on Mac because that would cause outrage and people not upgrading the OS, and desktop/laptop computers are dying anyways. Also, App Store on Mac definitely has fees. Perfectly understandable IMHO. (Webkit might be a platform to Google but it's not from Apple's point of view, it's merely one part of their platform offerings)
        christophilus 4y ago
        TIL that producing MacBooks isn’t a good business.
        WHATDOESIT 4y ago
        Yes, it's much much smaller than the iPhone business. Of course, it'd be a huge company by itself, but Apple got to $1T thanks to iPhone, not Mac - by far.
- hoppyhoppy2 4y ago
  By "loopholes" I think they were referring to stuff like >Apple relied on a “complex web of offshore entities” and U.S. tax loopholes to avoid paying billions of dollars in U.S. taxes on $44 billion in offshore income over the past four years, according to excerpts from a Senate subcommittee report to be released tomorrow as Apple CEO Tim Cook testifies on the company’s overseas operations. >The maker of iPhones and iPads used at least three foreign subsidiaries that it claims are not “tax resident in any nation” to help it avoid paying billions in “otherwise taxable offshore income,” the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a statement today. https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/apple-used-loopholes-to-skip-paying-44-billion-in-u-s-taxes-senate-committee-claims/?sh=6143aa5a5075 https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/appl...
zx85wes 4y ago
I don't get why Apple should pay for the disastrous policies of the EU?
- vkou 4y ago
  Apple doesn't have to pay anything, nobody is holding a gun to it's head, or forcing it to participate in the European market.
  - zx85wes 4y ago
    I was replying to "Considering the amount of profits and cash reserves this company has, I don't see why some people are so opposed to taxing them..."
  - f1shy 4y ago
    The EU market will suffer this. Not apple. EU people will have to pay more for the apps. Apple will still make same many, just as before. If you say: "yeah, but now less people is going to buy" I say: I do not think so, the increment is small enough, that if you need or want the app or game, you still pay it. The theory behind this is, that the EU will give back that money for the EU people, invested in Internet infrastructure or whatever... The problem is that in the middle that money will have to pay for TONS of bureaucrats...
qeternity 4y ago
AppStore fees are percentage based, so they are index-linked by definition. If prices go up due to inflation, so do Apple’s fees.

by sofixa 4y ago

TheSpiceIsLife 4y ago

What loophole? The one where a business gets to decide what they charge? The free market loophole? The loophole where business pass costs on to customers? Do you propose governments should set prices?

cycomanic 4y ago
So here I thought the free market always finds the lowest price based on supply and demand and costs had very little to do with it.
- qeternity 4y ago
  Cost is the largest factor of the supply curve…
ReptileMan 4y ago
Except app store is not free market but monopoly. So it should be treated like one. The moment sideloading/root or alternative appstores are allowed - then then can charge whatever they feel like. Vendor lock in is bad towards the customer so limiting it actually increases the free market. What you think of is Laissez-faire
- qeternity 4y ago
  No, this is not even remotely close to a monopoly. Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. When Android has 75% market share and multiple competing stores, we’re not even close to monopoly.
  - yelskcol 4y ago
    >Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can. Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform and weren't forced into being locked into their ecosystem where you pay a 15% Apple tax on every purchase. Say what you like about mobile platforms but making ridiculous comparisons like this doesn't help your case.
    - Someone 4y ago
      > Would be all well and awesome if you had any freedom of choice on Apple's platform I don’t see how that is an argument against ”Yes, Apple can dictate terms in its own store the same way that your local grocer can.”. You don’t have freedom of choice as to who to buy from at your local grocer, either. I think that, in principle, companies creating a market should be able to decide what gets sold there and demand any cut of sales they want. That also is what I think laws say in most countries. It’s fairly normal with game consoles, for example, and I expect you can’t sell merchandise from studios competing with Disney (if they still exist) in Disneyland or sell ice cream there without Disney taking a significant cut, or sell Shell products at an Exxon pump. The big question, though, is whether the market power of a few players in mobile apps is so undesirable that action is necessary, and if so, whether existing laws are sufficient to correct the issue, or whether the rules of the game should change and if so, how. I think law will be changed, but how, I’m not sure about. Any law saying “this applies only to companies Foo, Bar and Baz” will be shut down in courts, so arguments must be formulated as to what exactly is wrong with the current situation, and decisions will have to be made as to whether those rules also should apply to, for example, game consoles.
      - 4y ago
madsbuch 4y ago
I love that this comment is a response to a pricing scheme where developers are forced into pricing brackets. Apple are effectively hindering developers selling their apps on a free market.
- WHATDOESIT 4y ago
  But they also, you know, made the platform. Are you sure the platform would be there without their fees? Let's have a look at the Linux phone market...
  - whywhywhywhy 4y ago
    Ok, why do they not force fees on apps that run on their MacOS platform then? Or what about their WebKit platform?
    - WHATDOESIT 4y ago
      Seems like they've chosen a different business model back then and since it didn't work out so well (compare Mac/macOS market penetration to iPhone/iOS) they changed it to something that allows them to capture more revenue and use the money to develop the platform much further. And they're not forcing it on Mac because that would cause outrage and people not upgrading the OS, and desktop/laptop computers are dying anyways. Also, App Store on Mac definitely has fees. Perfectly understandable IMHO. (Webkit might be a platform to Google but it's not from Apple's point of view, it's merely one part of their platform offerings)
      - christophilus 4y ago
        TIL that producing MacBooks isn’t a good business.
        WHATDOESIT 4y ago
        Yes, it's much much smaller than the iPhone business. Of course, it'd be a huge company by itself, but Apple got to $1T thanks to iPhone, not Mac - by far.
hoppyhoppy2 4y ago
By "loopholes" I think they were referring to stuff like >Apple relied on a “complex web of offshore entities” and U.S. tax loopholes to avoid paying billions of dollars in U.S. taxes on $44 billion in offshore income over the past four years, according to excerpts from a Senate subcommittee report to be released tomorrow as Apple CEO Tim Cook testifies on the company’s overseas operations. >The maker of iPhones and iPads used at least three foreign subsidiaries that it claims are not “tax resident in any nation” to help it avoid paying billions in “otherwise taxable offshore income,” the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a statement today. https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/apple-used-loopholes-to-skip-paying-44-billion-in-u-s-taxes-senate-committee-claims/?sh=6143aa5a5075 https://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/05/20/appl...

zx85wes 4y ago

I don't get why Apple should pay for the disastrous policies of the EU?

vkou 4y ago
Apple doesn't have to pay anything, nobody is holding a gun to it's head, or forcing it to participate in the European market.
- zx85wes 4y ago
  I was replying to "Considering the amount of profits and cash reserves this company has, I don't see why some people are so opposed to taxing them..."
- f1shy 4y ago
  The EU market will suffer this. Not apple. EU people will have to pay more for the apps. Apple will still make same many, just as before. If you say: "yeah, but now less people is going to buy" I say: I do not think so, the increment is small enough, that if you need or want the app or game, you still pay it. The theory behind this is, that the EU will give back that money for the EU people, invested in Internet infrastructure or whatever... The problem is that in the middle that money will have to pay for TONS of bureaucrats...

qeternity 4y ago

AppStore fees are percentage based, so they are index-linked by definition. If prices go up due to inflation, so do Apple’s fees.