3 ms·

Thanks. I have updated the post with a quotation and link to your comment here. I think the central point of my article stands because the tax burden associate

by dcurtis 15y ago

Thanks. I have updated the post with a quotation and link to your comment here. I think the central point of my article stands because the tax burden associated with bringing Apple's significant foreign investments (about 60% of their cash, reportedly) back into the United States would be prohibitive and restrict any kind of heroic or crazy deals from being announced tomorrow. And Apple's investments are not in cash. If anyone would like more information about the structure of Apple's investments, see page 7 of the most recent 10-Q: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/1738322915x0x536523/381559d7-04a1-40d5-8e2a-236e3f867158/AAPL%20Q1FY12%2010Q%2001.25.12.pdf http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/1738322915x0x536... The parent commenter is correct that the vast majority of holdings are in things like us treasuries and corporate bonds, which can be liquidated immediately.

rdl 15y ago
Couldn't Apple keep those assets offshore and either do the investment through the foreign entities, or borrow money in the us on the basis of that offshore cash (or issue more shares, kinda the same thing) to do it? If Apple had a productive use of $50b in the USA, I think they could raise it.
latch 15y ago
There are non-US companies they can buy. I've heard that was a main driver in MS' purchase of Skype. They didn't want to repatriotize assets, so they just bought a foreign company.