4 ms·
The EU should just tax Apple at a higher rate. It’d be more transparent that way what they’re doing.
by linotype 2y ago
The EU should just tax Apple at a higher rate. It’d be more transparent that way what they’re doing.
- avtolik 2y agoTaxing monopolies at a higher rate. Not a bad idea actually.
- wbl 2y agoWhat market does Apple monopolize?
- ReptileMan 2y ago"Software that runs on iphone" market.
- linotype 2y agoI thought they opened that up in the EU.
- fhdsgbbcaA 2y agoIn the most bad faith way possible. They are going to get absolutely gutted on this. They think they’re above the fray, but there’s a reason Google and Meta are taking DMA way more seriously than GDPR - it’s basically a speedboat loaded with explosives in regulatory terms. It’s designed to move fast and take out targets with extreme prejudice. It is crafted to explicitly overcome the barriers that prevent GDPR being enforced (eg Ireland). Apple is fucking around with the EU, and will very shortly find out why the DMA is written the way it is.
- gostsamo 2y agothe door is wide closed in the EU.
- wbl 2y agoWhy on earth is that a relevant market. We don't look at cars as separate software from the hardware. Apples competition is Android and if better apps come out on Android it will win whatever small share the luxury option has.
- lxgr 2y agoMaybe we would, if there were only two car manufacturers that also happen to run their own private roads, bridges, mechanics etc. that are also mutually not compatible.
- hightrix 2y agoIt shouldn’t be. There is no monopoly. There are people that are mad you can’t get blue iMessages from an android and you can’t side load “easily”. That’s it.
- okanat 2y agoNobody cares about iMessage in the EU. That level of classist discrimination is a US phenomenon.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- caseyy 2y agoA tax they wouldn’t need to pay if they didn’t blatantly break our laws.
- caekislove 2y agoThese "You broke our arbitrary rules, therefore we fine you x% of your income" schemes are just a roundabout way for the EU to put an income tax on foreign corporations. It's going to blow up in their faces when companies start deciding that access to a shrinking European market just isn't worth the cost and hassle.
- surgical_fire 2y agoOoh please let this be true. When Apple stops selling their shitty hardware here, can they take home Google and Facebook too?
- sieabahlpark 2y ago[dead]
- pertymcpert 2y agoI've never accidentally bought an Apple product so I don't really know what you're complaining about. Do you find it an issue?
- colechristensen 2y agoThey're not arbitrary. If they were overly precise, a trillion dollar company would find every loophole for years and years. There are 450 million people in the EU, nobody thinks Apple is just going to casually walk away.
- pyrale 2y ago> when companies start deciding that access to a shrinking European market just isn't worth the cost and hassle. Aka never. First off because they would get shredded by their investors, and second because the competitors emerging in that void would end up being threats in the future.
- dmitrygr 2y agoIf you think that something comparable to a modern phone operating system and hardware will “just spring up” you’re delusional. If somebody was capable of producing more powerful phones than the iPhone, they’d be doing it already.
- surgical_fire 2y agoApple should just follow the regulations. It would be more transparent than breaking the law and being fined for it.
- threeseed 2y agoCan you please point out specifically which regulation Apple is infringing. Because DMA was designed not to be explicit so relies on interpretation.
- chgs 2y agoLaws are not designed to be explicit, they aren’t code.
- thfuran 2y agoThat is hardly unique to DMA. Law is rife with things requiring interpretation. See, for example, the reasonable person standard: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person
- threeseed 2y agoNot arguing it is unique to DMA. But my point is that you can't say "just comply with the law" when compliance has been a much more interactive process.
- joe_the_user 2y agoYes, and laws involve intent. A lot of laws "when you do a thing that has a result and you intend that result to happen, you're guilty of creating the result". It doesn't matter the thing you do. If you invent some new way of killing someone, and kill someone with it, you're guilty of murder even if the never heard of this particular way of killing someone, etc. In Apple's case, the edict was to create competition by opening up the app stores. Apple "opened" its app store in a way that failed to actually allow competition and so it is subject to the fine. This is exactly why laws work this way - to prevent what is now called "gaming" the system.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- drexlspivey 2y agoThe EU is not a country and it doesnt set tax rates
- cma 2y agoApp store developers and app store participants don't have a good way to collectively organize, whereas Apple shareholders get all kinds of support to organize together.