|
||||||||
Apple 'among largest tax avoiders in US' |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
Quote:
Part red herring. Apple are supposedly only declaring a very small revenue to Ireland.
Most of the cash is in 'no fixed abode'. Whether this is in acquiescence with Ireland is open to argument. I heard one quote that 'below 2% corporation tax' actually means as little as 0.1% tax. Although I'm not quite sure how this is of benefit to Ireland, if the whole idea was to attract foreign companies, charge them a lower rate of tax than other countries, in the theory that the boost to the economy by virtue of their presence in Ireland would outweigh the reduced rate of tax. Maybe it just works that although they are not liable, they negotiate a ludicrously low rate on a company by company basis. In short, it seems that most of the UK issues are to do with the Irish system being a bit bonkers. And the US issue is to do with the US system being so punitive. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
they negotiate a ludicrously low rate on a company by company basis...And the US issue is to do with the US system being so punitive.
Seems everything is punitive until you get to zero percent. A prime occupation in zero percent countries is begging. That belongs to the likes of Sudan where taxes are not 'punitive'. Elsewhere you simply get Islands of convenience. |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
From what I'd read I had the impression that Ireland were open to negotiation, depending on the company. Right or wrong, it makes some practical sense insomuch as the larger the company, the greater the boost to the economy, so the lower the tax rate.
We know the US is complaining that Apple isn't paying enough US tax. (Almost certainly grandstanding). We know the UK would have a case that Apple isn't paying enough UK tax. But is there anything to suggest that Ireland have any complaints with Apple for paying less than that 12.5%? Not that I'm aware of. The US tax system is overly punitive in that (unlike other countries) it taxes money returning to the US that has already been subject to corporation tax in the country the money was generated. Same question I asked Stiggles: Do you think profit generated by Apple in the UK should be subject to taxation in: A. The UK? B. The US? C. The UK and the US? And further: Do you think any US company should be under obligation to repatriate money generated outside the US, and has been subject to foreign corporation tax, just to have it taxed again in the US? |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 53,398
|
Funny how as soon as Apple are questioned over tax a thread appears here.. yet there appears to be no thread at all discussing Google's tax setup.. even on a day when Ed Miliband was critical of their business practices at a Google PR event today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,693
|
Quote:
Funny how as soon as Apple are questioned over tax a thread appears here.. yet there appears to be no thread at all discussing Google's tax setup.. even on a day when Ed Miliband was critical of their business practices at a Google PR event today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
That's because most Apple haters are obsessive lunatics.
And so to debate is to only like or hate? |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
No-one is defending Apple either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,693
|
Quote:
Yet no one is defending Google. Nothing obsessive there then?
And so to debate is to only like or hate? ![]() One doesn't have to defend Google as a prerequisite to obsessively attacking Apple. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
s a prerequisite to obsessively attacking Apple.
And has anyone called for a boycott like with Starbucks? |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,058
|
Quote:
Funny how as soon as Apple are questioned over tax a thread appears here.. yet there appears to be no thread at all discussing Google's tax setup.. even on a day when Ed Miliband was critical of their business practices at a Google PR event today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
To me, those calling for lower taxes for the rich were actually encouraging tax dodging.
Google and Apple are as immoral as those same politicians half condoning it. Those sycophants claiming lower taxes mean more tax income are now shown as the most immoral. There is plenty to answer all round. |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
Quote:
Read the posts to see the most 'obsessive'. You might even see that Apple has been defended numerous times.
And has anyone called for a boycott like with Starbucks? Could you please say which post or posts are "defending Apple". |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,501
|
Quote:
To me, those calling for lower taxes for the rich were actually encouraging tax dodging.
Google and Apple are as immoral as those same politicians half condoning it. Those sycophants claiming lower taxes mean more tax income are now shown as the most immoral. There is plenty to answer all round. |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 9,293
|
Quote:
Funny how as soon as Apple are questioned over tax a thread appears here.. yet there appears to be no thread at all discussing Google's tax setup.. even on a day when Ed Miliband was critical of their business practices at a Google PR event today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
.. I also don't like politicians using it as some sort of diversion tactic to help remove the blame for bad decisions from themselves.
I for one am glad they are all finally being diverted into doing something about it. And on a google diversion, so far there have been 16 Politics forum threads started on 'Google' (one by me) and only the 1 on 'Apple'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,501
|
Quote:
Apple and Google pay zero UK tax, and it is called a 'diversion'.
I for one am glad they are all finally being diverted into doing something about it. And on a google diversion, so far there have been 16 Politics forum threads started on 'Google' (one by me) and only the 1 on 'Apple'. |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
Alan - what exactly is it you think the US Senate are wanting Apple to do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: South Wales/Gran Canaria
Posts: 8,298
|
If a company is based here, have centres of operations etc then they should pay tax on sales/profits generated from the UK operation, seems the right thing to do IMHO. Don't forget the government get 20% on the retail goods sold via VAT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
Alan - what exactly is it you think the US Senate are wanting Apple to do?
A major problem on this one might be the non spending which is quite recessionary in itself. |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
Quote:
Have you ever thought that corporation tax actually promotes investment?
A major problem on this one might be the non spending which is quite recessionary in itself. The issue isn't about whether or not Apple (or anyone) should pay corporation tax. In the case of the US Senate case, its about whether or not US companies generating revenue overseas should be obligated to repatriate overseas profit that they have already paid corporation tax in the country of origin and pay a second lot of corporation tax in the US. An arrangement that is unique to the US. What is it that you think I'm saying? Because it seems from your posts that you're a bit confused about what I'm saying. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 9,293
|
Quote:
Or is that just some daft thing to throw in there because, y'know, its about Apple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
Quote:
There have been threads about google, amazon, starbucks etc etc on this same situation, yet you seem think apple are immune to criticism and shouldn't be mentioned.....
![]() That comment was made with specific reference to the line about non spending. Which is odd as I'd be pretty certain Apple are spending a shedload of money in the US. |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
I'd be pretty certain Apple are spending a shedload of money in the US.
So was that the straw that broke the camel's back? It certainly raised more than a few eyebrows. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 9,428
|
Duo post
|
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,058
|
Quote:
Apple and Google pay zero UK tax, and it is called a 'diversion'.
I for one am glad they are all finally being diverted into doing something about it. And on a google diversion, so far there have been 16 Politics forum threads started on 'Google' (one by me) and only the 1 on 'Apple'. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:57.




