5 ms·

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understand it, it's not really like Ireland is demanding Apple pay suddenly, the EU is saying that Apple owes Ireland the

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understand it, it's not really like Ireland is demanding Apple pay suddenly, the EU is saying that Apple owes Ireland the 13B and has to make up the losses due to Ireland & Apple colluding to strike an tax deal that is unfair (for all other EU members) for Apple. Ireland itself probably doesn't want to do this, since those deals exist for a reason.

guappa 2y ago
> since those deals exist for a reason. Scam the rest of the EU countries?
orwin 2y ago
To be exact, the ruling is that Ireland gave unfair advantage to Apple, compared to other companies. If Ireland want to set corporate taxes at 1%, it can, but it should be for all companies. Amazon notably didn't get the same deal Apple did, which is anti-competitive.
- throw310822 2y ago
  Shouldn't Ireland be fined 13 billion from the EU then?
  - SirMittens 2y ago
    This is not a fine, tho. It's just the amount that Apple would have paid in taxes, if the special deal didn't exist. The EU is not imposing any fines on Apple. They're just ordering Ireland to collect the taxes owed to them (Ireland), since the tax deal was found to be unfair/illegal.
    - throw310822 2y ago
      Yes. Which if you think about it, is doubly unfair. First Ireland reaped the benefits of keeping Apple in the country; then it gets paid Apple's taxes anyway. Sure, this puts a stop to the practice and makes it much harder to sell such deals in the future, but for the moment Ireland had its apple cake and ate it, too.
      - hirako2000 2y ago
        It would be unfair if the term was fair to begin with, but it wasn't, according to that court. What would be interesting is to see Apple revealing the cost of its lobbying, to claim a claw back. It won't. It turned out great for Ireland yes, it is odd the court didn't fine that country for offering illegal tax terms.
        throw310822 2y ago
        I think that the court ruled that it was unfair to other countries, not to Ireland. Ireland gained from the deal, didn't lose anything.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        orwin 2y ago
        No, it's unfair to other _companies_. The issue like I said was that Apple was taxed ~1%, when others were taxed ~12%, which impact fair competition.
        throw310822 2y ago
        True. In any case, not unfair to Ireland.
- Macha 2y ago
  > If Ireland want to set corporate taxes at 1%, it can, but it should be for all companies. Amazon notably didn't get the same deal Apple did, which is anti-competitive. This was formerly the case, but actually now they no longer can set them that low, due to a deal by many countries to effectively force a 15% minimum. This was also largely aimed at Ireland's low 12.5% tax rate, which is being phased out as a result.
petesergeant 2y ago
Sure, but here Ireland has gotten both the benefit of the illegal agreement _and_ will get the tax revenue. Those deals existed to attract large tech companies to Ireland, and create an ecosystem there, and I don't think that'll go away just because Ireland can't offer any new ones. Not suggesting that Ireland did this expecting to get both sets of benefits, but seems a little counter-productive that they are in fact receiving those.

guappa 2y ago

> since those deals exist for a reason. Scam the rest of the EU countries?

orwin 2y ago

To be exact, the ruling is that Ireland gave unfair advantage to Apple, compared to other companies. If Ireland want to set corporate taxes at 1%, it can, but it should be for all companies. Amazon notably didn't get the same deal Apple did, which is anti-competitive.

throw310822 2y ago
Shouldn't Ireland be fined 13 billion from the EU then?
- SirMittens 2y ago
  This is not a fine, tho. It's just the amount that Apple would have paid in taxes, if the special deal didn't exist. The EU is not imposing any fines on Apple. They're just ordering Ireland to collect the taxes owed to them (Ireland), since the tax deal was found to be unfair/illegal.
  - throw310822 2y ago
    Yes. Which if you think about it, is doubly unfair. First Ireland reaped the benefits of keeping Apple in the country; then it gets paid Apple's taxes anyway. Sure, this puts a stop to the practice and makes it much harder to sell such deals in the future, but for the moment Ireland had its apple cake and ate it, too.
    - hirako2000 2y ago
      It would be unfair if the term was fair to begin with, but it wasn't, according to that court. What would be interesting is to see Apple revealing the cost of its lobbying, to claim a claw back. It won't. It turned out great for Ireland yes, it is odd the court didn't fine that country for offering illegal tax terms.
      - throw310822 2y ago
        I think that the court ruled that it was unfair to other countries, not to Ireland. Ireland gained from the deal, didn't lose anything.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
        orwin 2y ago
        No, it's unfair to other _companies_. The issue like I said was that Apple was taxed ~1%, when others were taxed ~12%, which impact fair competition.
        throw310822 2y ago
        True. In any case, not unfair to Ireland.
Macha 2y ago
> If Ireland want to set corporate taxes at 1%, it can, but it should be for all companies. Amazon notably didn't get the same deal Apple did, which is anti-competitive. This was formerly the case, but actually now they no longer can set them that low, due to a deal by many countries to effectively force a 15% minimum. This was also largely aimed at Ireland's low 12.5% tax rate, which is being phased out as a result.

petesergeant 2y ago

Sure, but here Ireland has gotten both the benefit of the illegal agreement _and_ will get the tax revenue. Those deals existed to attract large tech companies to Ireland, and create an ecosystem there, and I don't think that'll go away just because Ireland can't offer any new ones. Not suggesting that Ireland did this expecting to get both sets of benefits, but seems a little counter-productive that they are in fact receiving those.