3 ms·

Do they not pay tax in the US at all? You make it sound as if they just don't pay tax. As it stands, they've paid tax in any country where they've earned money.

by delinka 11y ago

Do they not pay tax in the US at all? You make it sound as if they just don't pay tax. As it stands, they've paid tax in any country where they've earned money. That pays for the court systems and IP laws in those countries. Any revenue in the US has been taxed in the US and the funds used similarly by the government. Now, you want to take money that's already been taxed elsewhere and return it to the US, subjecting it to further tax. Why? As I said, they've already paid taxes here in the good ol' USA.

karpodiem 11y ago
Because having a military that can project force in all those countries you mentioned is expensive; beyond what's paid for by Apple in taxes for revenue generated within the U.S.
- delinka 11y ago
  The sounds like an argument for the US Government to get a better grip on spending.
alex_young 11y ago
First of all this double taxation thing is hogwash. US corporations (and people for that matter) only pay the difference between any foreign tax collected and our own federal tax when they move it to domestic books. Probably more importantly, the foreign profits are disproportionately gains baised on research and development conducted in the US which the foreign subsidiaries pay no royalty for at all. If, for instance, 50% of the value of an iPhone sold in China represents the value of the engineering of the device, we have a tax loss which adds up to half of the nearly $200 Billion held as foreign profits by Apple. Apple should be forced to pay these taxes. This represents a real and tangible loss to the people in the US and an unnecessary subsidy handed to the most valuable public company on earth.
- delinka 11y ago
  I've known individuals pay the difference between foreign tax and US federal tax, but I'm not so sure that also applies to corporations. I'll need to research that. You really can't start dictating the terms of contract agreements between domestic and foreign entities with regard to "royalties" or other such payments. It would adversely affect any other companies as well that are not subsidiaries. And before you attempt to limit the rules to "subsidiaries" consider that although "Apple Ireland" is somehow affiliated with "Apple, Inc" in the US, they are wholly separate companies with a contract to behave in certain ways. Should Apple Ireland, being a separate company, decide to 'go rogue' breaking the contract and doing whatever they will with all 'their' money, they just get cut off from the Apple, Inc ecosystem and a new entity is created that will play the game correctly. So how do you force "Apple, Inc" which is a separate company from all the other "Apple $PLACE" around the world to pay tax on money that, legally, it doesn't have ... without also adversely affecting any number of smaller companies that couldn't possibly bear such a tax burden?

by delinka 11y ago

karpodiem 11y ago

Because having a military that can project force in all those countries you mentioned is expensive; beyond what's paid for by Apple in taxes for revenue generated within the U.S.

delinka 11y ago
The sounds like an argument for the US Government to get a better grip on spending.

alex_young 11y ago

First of all this double taxation thing is hogwash. US corporations (and people for that matter) only pay the difference between any foreign tax collected and our own federal tax when they move it to domestic books. Probably more importantly, the foreign profits are disproportionately gains baised on research and development conducted in the US which the foreign subsidiaries pay no royalty for at all. If, for instance, 50% of the value of an iPhone sold in China represents the value of the engineering of the device, we have a tax loss which adds up to half of the nearly $200 Billion held as foreign profits by Apple. Apple should be forced to pay these taxes. This represents a real and tangible loss to the people in the US and an unnecessary subsidy handed to the most valuable public company on earth.

delinka 11y ago
I've known individuals pay the difference between foreign tax and US federal tax, but I'm not so sure that also applies to corporations. I'll need to research that. You really can't start dictating the terms of contract agreements between domestic and foreign entities with regard to "royalties" or other such payments. It would adversely affect any other companies as well that are not subsidiaries. And before you attempt to limit the rules to "subsidiaries" consider that although "Apple Ireland" is somehow affiliated with "Apple, Inc" in the US, they are wholly separate companies with a contract to behave in certain ways. Should Apple Ireland, being a separate company, decide to 'go rogue' breaking the contract and doing whatever they will with all 'their' money, they just get cut off from the Apple, Inc ecosystem and a new entity is created that will play the game correctly. So how do you force "Apple, Inc" which is a separate company from all the other "Apple $PLACE" around the world to pay tax on money that, legally, it doesn't have ... without also adversely affecting any number of smaller companies that couldn't possibly bear such a tax burden?