5 ms·

The amount they do pay is fairly irrelevant, it's the equivilent to a single person saying "I know I owe taxes, but hey I've already paid a lot, so..." The mor

by corin_ 15y ago

The amount they do pay is fairly irrelevant, it's the equivilent to a single person saying "I know I owe taxes, but hey I've already paid a lot, so..." The more relevant part of their statement is "Apple has conducted all of its business with the highest of ethical standards, complying with applicable laws and accounting rules." That's their actual response, the rest is just decoration. I also like the irony (though to be fair you can see why they said it) of saying "We have contributed to many charitable causes but have never sought publicity for doing so"... in a press release.

orangecat 15y ago
The amount they do pay is fairly irrelevant, it's the equivilent to a single person saying "I know I owe taxes, but hey I've already paid a lot, so..." "So I'm not going to pay more than I'm legally required to". I have no problem with that.
- eagsalazar 15y ago
  I'll add: "...because we're super rich and can hire ultra clever accountants to abuse loopholes in your tax laws that were put in place by politicians paid by other super rich corporations specifically to get away with paying less taxes thereby grossly violating the trust of the American public and the spirit of taxation in general." Are you still ok with that?
  - jimmyvanhalen 15y ago
    if you're the CEO/CFO and you're not looking for every legal way to maximize shareholder value, then you're not doing your job.
    - eagsalazar 15y ago
      What a bizarre and unfortunate opinion. Too bad so many people actually believe that is the way it should be.
      - zethraeus 15y ago
        It's not an opinion, it's a fact. The opinion question is whether or not that's a moral job. Either way, it's still the job.
      - eagsalazar 15y ago
        Why do you say that? The CEO and CFO work for and are judged by the board and whatever standards they care to use. The board in turn is free to make decisions independent of shareholder financial interests. There is nothing intrisically true about your statement about CEO/CFO only optimizing for maximum financial gain. The real issue is that most people think they are legally bound to always make the optimal financial move even if that means being immoral or unethical. Even worse is that many people think that doing so has a certain morality of its own, which IMO is completely, bizarro, nuts. http://www.directorship.com/stout-shareholders-as-owners/ http://www.directorship.com/stout-shareholders-as-owners/ http://hbr.org/2010/04/the-myth-of-shareholder-capitalism/ar/1 http://hbr.org/2010/04/the-myth-of-shareholder-capitalism/ar...
        jimmyvanhalen 15y ago
        what is immoral or unethical in paying less taxes? The corporate and personal tax rates in Germany and Belgium are higher than the US. Are Germans or Belgians more moral or ethical than Americans? Apple pays billions in taxes, will pay billions in dividends to shareholders (which goes to retirement/pension funds, universities, charities, etc.), employs thousands (the employees pay taxes), donates to charity, etc. They created an Apple ecosystem that spurred thousands of developers and start-ups to build apps, etc. which in turn created more jobs, taxes, etc. Are those not ethical or moral to you?
        AlisdairO 15y ago
        I'd absolutely argue that it's immoral to take advantage of loopholes that break the clear intended amount of taxation that society asks of you. If a society decides it wants to levy less tax, that's rather different (and fair enough). Equally, I think it's fairly naive to expect corporations to be moral, since there's very little incentive for them to be so - I merely respect those that are more.
    - mun2mun 15y ago
      By the same logic Ballmer is doing right thing by collecting tax from every Android devices out there.
      - gaius 15y ago
        If the money is due, then it must be paid. Presumably Google is getting some value too?
        mun2mun 15y ago
        So all Microsoft bashing happened here for this tax collection news is irrelevant. And those who bashed Microsoft there are some narrow minded people who doesn't get the Big Picture?
        jimmyvanhalen 15y ago
        your favorite ad company is also doing the same thing. Google 2.4% Rate Shows How $60 Billion Lost to Tax Loopholes Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-sho...
        gaius 15y ago
        They dodge taxes here in the UK too. While benefiting from our infrastructure and educated workforce.
  - fleitz 15y ago
    The spirit of taxation? This isn't a spiritual matter we're not tithing, the government sets rules for tax, and Apple chooses to follow them. No one wants to pay extra tax, not even those people who want higher taxes. Case in point, how much extra tax did you pay last year? They pay what they are required by law. Higher tax advocates end up wanting to see insane basic rates and those that want lower taxes propose exemptions. This is the fundamental negotiation that occurs when politicians from both sides of the table sit down. The idea is to satisfy those that want to see high marginal rates and those that don't want to pay that much tax. Hightax Hilda gets to go back to her constituents and say "Look we have a 35% tax on corporations". Lowtax Lenny gets to go back to his constituents and say "Look you're not going to pay very much tax as long as you hire some lawyers and accountants." If Apple got to set the tax code it would probably be a lower rate that was simpler to administer so they didn't have to hire so many lawyers and accountants.
  - taligent 15y ago
    Have you EVER taken a tax deduction in your life ? If so. Then you are exploiting a "loophole" and are a hypocrite.
- w1ntermute 15y ago
  The question was never a legal one (other than wrt changing the law), it was a moral one.
AllenKids 15y ago
The PR says nothing of importance or relevance. But to be fair, Apple didn't name drop any charitable orgs still.
- duskwuff 15y ago
  Probably just because there's no single charity that they focus on. From what I understand, Apple just matches any donation by an employee to a qualified charity; as such, the list would be large, and would just amount to a list of a bunch of popular / large charities. If you're curious, I'm sure the list is available in their filings somewhere.
mjwalshe 15y ago
And compared to really big employers like ATT 47k FTE isn't that big I have worked for a big company whose main IT division have over 60k employees and more developers/engineers than Google has emploees just in that division.

by corin_ 15y ago

orangecat 15y ago

The amount they do pay is fairly irrelevant, it's the equivilent to a single person saying "I know I owe taxes, but hey I've already paid a lot, so..." "So I'm not going to pay more than I'm legally required to". I have no problem with that.

eagsalazar 15y ago
I'll add: "...because we're super rich and can hire ultra clever accountants to abuse loopholes in your tax laws that were put in place by politicians paid by other super rich corporations specifically to get away with paying less taxes thereby grossly violating the trust of the American public and the spirit of taxation in general." Are you still ok with that?
- jimmyvanhalen 15y ago
  if you're the CEO/CFO and you're not looking for every legal way to maximize shareholder value, then you're not doing your job.
  - eagsalazar 15y ago
    What a bizarre and unfortunate opinion. Too bad so many people actually believe that is the way it should be.
    - zethraeus 15y ago
      It's not an opinion, it's a fact. The opinion question is whether or not that's a moral job. Either way, it's still the job.
    - eagsalazar 15y ago
      Why do you say that? The CEO and CFO work for and are judged by the board and whatever standards they care to use. The board in turn is free to make decisions independent of shareholder financial interests. There is nothing intrisically true about your statement about CEO/CFO only optimizing for maximum financial gain. The real issue is that most people think they are legally bound to always make the optimal financial move even if that means being immoral or unethical. Even worse is that many people think that doing so has a certain morality of its own, which IMO is completely, bizarro, nuts. http://www.directorship.com/stout-shareholders-as-owners/ http://www.directorship.com/stout-shareholders-as-owners/ http://hbr.org/2010/04/the-myth-of-shareholder-capitalism/ar/1 http://hbr.org/2010/04/the-myth-of-shareholder-capitalism/ar...
      - jimmyvanhalen 15y ago
        what is immoral or unethical in paying less taxes? The corporate and personal tax rates in Germany and Belgium are higher than the US. Are Germans or Belgians more moral or ethical than Americans? Apple pays billions in taxes, will pay billions in dividends to shareholders (which goes to retirement/pension funds, universities, charities, etc.), employs thousands (the employees pay taxes), donates to charity, etc. They created an Apple ecosystem that spurred thousands of developers and start-ups to build apps, etc. which in turn created more jobs, taxes, etc. Are those not ethical or moral to you?
        AlisdairO 15y ago
        I'd absolutely argue that it's immoral to take advantage of loopholes that break the clear intended amount of taxation that society asks of you. If a society decides it wants to levy less tax, that's rather different (and fair enough). Equally, I think it's fairly naive to expect corporations to be moral, since there's very little incentive for them to be so - I merely respect those that are more.
  - mun2mun 15y ago
    By the same logic Ballmer is doing right thing by collecting tax from every Android devices out there.
    - gaius 15y ago
      If the money is due, then it must be paid. Presumably Google is getting some value too?
      - mun2mun 15y ago
        So all Microsoft bashing happened here for this tax collection news is irrelevant. And those who bashed Microsoft there are some narrow minded people who doesn't get the Big Picture?
        jimmyvanhalen 15y ago
        your favorite ad company is also doing the same thing. Google 2.4% Rate Shows How $60 Billion Lost to Tax Loopholes Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-sho...
        gaius 15y ago
        They dodge taxes here in the UK too. While benefiting from our infrastructure and educated workforce.
- fleitz 15y ago
  The spirit of taxation? This isn't a spiritual matter we're not tithing, the government sets rules for tax, and Apple chooses to follow them. No one wants to pay extra tax, not even those people who want higher taxes. Case in point, how much extra tax did you pay last year? They pay what they are required by law. Higher tax advocates end up wanting to see insane basic rates and those that want lower taxes propose exemptions. This is the fundamental negotiation that occurs when politicians from both sides of the table sit down. The idea is to satisfy those that want to see high marginal rates and those that don't want to pay that much tax. Hightax Hilda gets to go back to her constituents and say "Look we have a 35% tax on corporations". Lowtax Lenny gets to go back to his constituents and say "Look you're not going to pay very much tax as long as you hire some lawyers and accountants." If Apple got to set the tax code it would probably be a lower rate that was simpler to administer so they didn't have to hire so many lawyers and accountants.
- taligent 15y ago
  Have you EVER taken a tax deduction in your life ? If so. Then you are exploiting a "loophole" and are a hypocrite.
w1ntermute 15y ago
The question was never a legal one (other than wrt changing the law), it was a moral one.

AllenKids 15y ago

The PR says nothing of importance or relevance. But to be fair, Apple didn't name drop any charitable orgs still.

duskwuff 15y ago
Probably just because there's no single charity that they focus on. From what I understand, Apple just matches any donation by an employee to a qualified charity; as such, the list would be large, and would just amount to a list of a bunch of popular / large charities. If you're curious, I'm sure the list is available in their filings somewhere.

mjwalshe 15y ago

And compared to really big employers like ATT 47k FTE isn't that big I have worked for a big company whose main IT division have over 60k employees and more developers/engineers than Google has emploees just in that division.