3 ms·

It's not a dilemma at all, it's a simple trade off. Either pay the tax to repatriate or pay interest on debt. If the former becomes more attractive than the lat

It's not a dilemma at all, it's a simple trade off. Either pay the tax to repatriate or pay interest on debt. If the former becomes more attractive than the latter, they'll do it. They can borrow at extremely low rates today so it boosts their earnings to borrow. I was hoping for a little more information on the reason Apple's foreign subsidiaries can't buy Apple stock without repatriation of funds (and whether or not this would require Apple shares to be tradeable on a foreign exchange), or what it would take for Apple to reincorporate where the money is as a way to eliminate the need to repatriate at all. EDIT: For everyone who thinks Apple is somehow in the wrong for this, your energy would better be directed at getting the tax laws changed. Apple's board and management have a fiduciary responsibility to pay only the tax they actually owe.

rtpg 11y ago
>Apple's board and management have a fiduciary responsibility to pay only the tax they actually owe. This does not mean they have responsibilities to build as many legal (last I checked, my iPod was not designed by Apple in Ireland) fictions as possible to lower their tax burden. Apple's corporate status does _not_ absolve them of the ethics of their decision. That said, getting the laws changed would be more useful.
dba7dba 11y ago
your energy would better be directed at getting the tax laws changed How? Who among us can outspend lobbyists from the corporations?
- clarky07 11y ago
  He's suggesting the lobbyists are in the right in this case, and the tax rates for repatriation should be lowered to something more reasonable. Then companies would be paying more tax than they are currently giving the govt getting more revenue, as well as bringing more money into the U.S. for investment in local economies. Everyone wins if they lower taxes. At the current rates, it's simply irresponsible to bring the money back instead of leaving it where it is.

rtpg 11y ago

>Apple's board and management have a fiduciary responsibility to pay only the tax they actually owe. This does not mean they have responsibilities to build as many legal (last I checked, my iPod was not designed by Apple in Ireland) fictions as possible to lower their tax burden. Apple's corporate status does _not_ absolve them of the ethics of their decision. That said, getting the laws changed would be more useful.

dba7dba 11y ago

your energy would better be directed at getting the tax laws changed How? Who among us can outspend lobbyists from the corporations?

clarky07 11y ago
He's suggesting the lobbyists are in the right in this case, and the tax rates for repatriation should be lowered to something more reasonable. Then companies would be paying more tax than they are currently giving the govt getting more revenue, as well as bringing more money into the U.S. for investment in local economies. Everyone wins if they lower taxes. At the current rates, it's simply irresponsible to bring the money back instead of leaving it where it is.