Apple 'among largest tax avoiders in US'

alanwarwic · 22-05-2013, 22:05

Quote:

I switched them round on purpose to highlight how absurd US tax law is..

It is surely there to prevent laundered money arriving in the US.

What on earth happened to this 'not defending them'.

Let's face it, both Google and Apple are laundering UK money away from us.
They ain't satisfied with massive UK profits. They want zero profit tax too. My word is laundering. Others can also call it tax avoidance and/or scamming.

calico_pie · 22-05-2013, 22:21

What is there?

The tax on repatriated tax?

Why that law exists is largely irrelevant.

The point is that US companies are under no obligation to repatriate that money.

I don't know why you keep ignoring that, or think that pointing it out is somehow defending anyone.

You never did answer these questions:

What exactly it is that US companies are required to do by US tax law?

What are Apple doing that the US Senate thinks they should not be doing?

As far as I can tell the answes are:

1. Pay corporation tax on repatriated money from outside the US.

2. Choosing not to repatriate money generated outside the US. As is entirely they're right.

What do you think?

calico_pie · 22-05-2013, 22:26

I'm sure about the money laundering.

Presumably anyone money laundering doesn't declare that money to the IRS.

Are you sure you're not just making this up as you go along?

alanwarwic · 22-05-2013, 22:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

I don't know why you keep ignoring that

I didn't. And as I said, they can do any crap they want. I can't quite see why you keep saying it.

It makes them no better for it. The emergency world agenda is now tax avoidance. There is no money to pay those trillions of debt. Near slavery or a world war probably awaits us all.
That is what comes with economic meltdown.

calico_pie · 22-05-2013, 22:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

I didn't. And as I said, they can do any crap they want. I can't quite see why you keep saying it.

It makes them no better for it. The emergency world agenda is now tax avoidance. There is no money to pay those trillions of debt. Near slavery or a world war probably awaits us all.
That is what comes with economic meltdown.

So why should they repatriate that money?

alanwarwic · 22-05-2013, 22:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

So why should they repatriate that money?

In a similar vein why should anyone ever buy Apple again?

calico_pie · 22-05-2013, 23:08

The trouble with debating anything with you is that whenever anyone tries to ask you a straight question, you reply with flippant nonsense like that to avoid the point or question.

I don't know if you genuinely aren't following this, or are just being a WUM.

Or...

No one needs to buy an Apple product again...

Just as Apple doesn't need to repatriate money back to the US.

But I don't suppose that's what you meant.

alanwarwic · 22-05-2013, 23:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by calico_pie

The trouble with debating anything with you is that whenever anyone tries to ask you a straight question

You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore.

All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you.
kidspud is sort of the same.

That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate.

Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown.
There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension.

Trsvis_Bickle · 23-05-2013, 01:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore.

All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you.
kidspud is sort of the same.

That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate.

Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown.
There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension.

They're not stupid or misleading questions at all; they strike at the heart of the matter. The sole reason why politicians convene committee hearings to shout at company executives is to fool the public into thinking they're doing something about the problem. The fact is that politicians created the tax laws that corporations are obeying. You seem to be falling for this clumsy diversion.

Countries compete with each other to entice companies to their shores; it means jobs for their voters and taxation revenue for their coffers. Governments have no interest in co-operating with each other on this score in order to maximise the global corporation tax take. There'll be a bit pf political grandstanding (see that idiot Margaret Hodge at the PAC last week) followed by sod all.

rosetech · 23-05-2013, 07:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore.

All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you.
kidspud is sort of the same.

That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate.

Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown.
There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension.

lol - cmon Its not quite the same thing. Google in the UK is paying the full amount of tax owed. They as a global company can choose where to place their money. Its like me telling you to put your money in a 0% interest account when you have been offered a 5% interest account

Apple pay a massive amount of tax in the US. Should they need to pay more, thats for the IRS to sort out and they are much more aggressive than HMRC potentially ending up with a prison term, can you imagine Tim Cook in prison, "hey Tim, can you hook me up with some iTunes vouchers"

Showboating infront of a parliamentary committee or senate commission does not prove or disprove anything. Clearly this has convinced you of some wrong doing - fair enough. I would say, if I came to you and said "you have not paid enough tax" and you reply "HMRC have said I have fully compliant accounts", I would need something more than hearsay to accuse you further. You have made some pretty serious accusations on this thread. Let me ask you this have you even looked at Google/Apples accounts? The newspapers have grabbed what is in essence a non-story, and more interestingly left out a certain MPs lack of transparency on her own company accounts which reveal the company has paid significantly less tax than it should based on her critique.

psionic · 23-05-2013, 08:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trsvis_Bickle

The sole reason why politicians convene committee hearings to shout at company executives is to fool the public into thinking they're doing something about the problem. The fact is that politicians created the tax laws that corporations are obeying.

That's the crux of the problem.

tdenson · 23-05-2013, 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trsvis_Bickle

The sole reason why politicians convene committee hearings to shout at company executives is to fool the public into thinking they're doing something about the problem.

And they've certainly fooled the likes of alanwarwic

calico_pie · 23-05-2013, 09:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore.

All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you.
kidspud is sort of the same.

That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate.

Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown.
There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension.

If the subject is "the US Senate's questioning of Apple about their tax", on exactly what planet are these questions twisted, leading or meaningless:

What exactly it is that US companies are required to do by US tax law?

What are Apple doing that the US Senate thinks they should not be doing?

As far as I can tell, they are the two most straightforward, direct and relevant questions that could possibly be asked.

Actually, I suppose they could be reworded as:

1. What should Apple be doing?

2. What are Apple doing?

Its hilarious that I've taken the time to post what I have, and in return you have posted some of the frankly nonsense in reply, and you're accusing me of twisting things and being meaningless!

You mention owing the UK money - I don't think anyone would disagree that large companies, including Apple, are paying less UK corporation tax than they should be.

But that's not what the US Senate investigation is about.

You're earlier post about US companies being required by US law to pay a total of 35% tax was, I'm pretty sure, wrong.

Could you clarify:

Are you saying that if Apple paid less to HMRC than they should have, that the IRS then becomes entitled to any shortfall?

If that was the case, I'd be interested to know why the IRS become entitled to that money rather than HMRC.

alanwarwic · 23-05-2013, 09:30

I suggest they simply set a rule in place that they can charge full tax on sales where it is deemed they are avoiding,
Thus Apple and Google declaring zero UK profit are deemed 'avoiding' and have to pay the full UK rate on sales totals.

There is no honour whatsoever in that 'obey'.

calico_pie · 23-05-2013, 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

I suggest they simply set a rule in place that they can charge full tax on sales where it is deemed they are avoiding,
Thus Apple and Google declaring zero UK profit are deemed 'avoiding' and have to pay the full UK rate on sales totals.

There is no honour whatsoever in that 'obey'.

Pay it to whom?

McTeagle · 23-05-2013, 10:14

Companies can't possibly be accused of avoiding tax simply on the basis that you want them to pay more than they're lawfully obliged to.

That's why we have tax laws - so there is a set of rules that companies have to abide by. If you think the law is wrong, then okay - but that doesn't mean there is the slightest onus on any company to pay more than they have to.

Oh, and there's no such thing as tax avoidance. If you mean tax evasion (which is against the law), that's not something Google or any of the other big companies have been accused of.

As has been stated, politicians make the tax laws. Companies (which are people, lest we forget that) employ accountants and lawyers to examine the laws and make sure that they pay what they are legally obliged to. If the laws are rubbish, then that's the politicians' fault. The fact that politicians are hand-wringing in public reflects badly only on them.

alanwarwic · 23-05-2013, 10:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by McTeagle

The fact that politicians are hand-wringing in public reflects badly only on them.

What I find quite fascinating is that Apple are religiously following their doctrine, or at least what I see as their doctrine.

Thus Apple declare they are actually 'following the spirit of the law' and 'not using gimmicks', whilst Google ignore the loaded question and call for world wide tax reform.

calico_pie · 23-05-2013, 11:01

What I find quite fascinating is that you waffle on vaguely about things like doctrines, and things being twisted, whilst ignoring any facts or straight questions.

And then having the gall accusing others of being difficult.

IvanIV · 23-05-2013, 11:06

Apple has their products manufactured in factories that have no problem to use child labour. Because the price of work is what matters most. They are not going to behave morally and pay taxes properly according to the spirit of the law, when they can behave legally although immorally and save the money. That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first.

alanwarwic · 23-05-2013, 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by IvanIV

That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first.

Nope, but most follow trickle down trends though.
Outsourcing everything avoids responsibility, unless you outsourse in the US that is, which, as we know with BP can be a form of Hari Kari.

In a way, the US has it right there. Expanding that to the whole world would maybe be the the solution to much famine and inequality. Thus Foxconn employees would have dual employers, and expensive trainers would still be expensive yet their the workers could also afford them.

calico_pie · 23-05-2013, 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by IvanIV

Apple has their products manufactured in factories that have no problem to use child labour. Because the price of work is what matters most. They are not going to behave morally and pay taxes properly according to the spirit of the law, when they can behave legally although immorally and save the money. That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first.

That's quote the allegation.

Do you have any source to assert the claim that they "have no problem to use child labour"?

Trsvis_Bickle · 23-05-2013, 16:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by IvanIV

Apple has their products manufactured in factories that have no problem to use child labour. Because the price of work is what matters most. They are not going to behave morally and pay taxes properly according to the spirit of the law, when they can behave legally although immorally and save the money. That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first.

Firstly, there's no evidence that Apple do indeed do use child labour and actually it's highly unlikely. Child labour is fine for simple, manual processes like garment manufacture; the work is easily learned and quality control is essentially done by straightforward visual inspection of stitching etc. The manufacture and assembly of consumer electronics is much more complicated and quality control is far more technical. Apple's physical products, like those of its competitors, are manufactured in huge purpose-built, state-of-the-art Chinese factories, not grubby sweatshops in downtown Dhakar.

In addition, for electronic products commanding a premium selling price, the 'price of the work' is almost certainly not what matters most. Reliability and quality are likely to be at the top of Apple's criteria list when subcontracting as the price of a failure of either will be huge.

ramzez · 23-05-2013, 21:37

Jon Steward on that topic
http://www.comedycentral.co.uk/shows...y-show-911559/

alanwarwic · 29-09-2014, 15:21

I think the case for more US tax was for monies tax dodged in Europe.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ngs-with-apple
Its a base headline there, but elsewhere the headline at the Inq is "Apple could be fined 'billions' over alleged dodgy Irish tax deals" http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...rish-tax-deals

Whilst Starbucks dodged 10s of millions in tax Apple's is in the 10s of billions, just in the EU(how many billion in the UK?) , so 1000 times more newsworthy.

Strangely the Guaridan states "which pays a tax rate of less than 2% in Ireland." is quite economical with the truth, the rate likely ending up at something less than 0.2%, the EU earning all accounted as 'of no fixed abode"

I think the likes of Google and Apple should get fined far more than what they strategically avoided as it brings the whole system down..

kidspud · 29-09-2014, 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by alanwarwic

I think the case for more US tax was for monies tax dodged in Europe.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ngs-with-apple
Its a base headline there, but elsewhere the headline at the Inq is "Apple could be fined 'billions' over alleged dodgy Irish tax deals" http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...rish-tax-deals

Whilst Starbucks dodged 10s of millions in tax Apple's is in the 10s of billions, just in the EU(how many billion in the UK?) , so 1000 times more newsworthy.

Strangely the Guaridan states "which pays a tax rate of less than 2% in Ireland." is quite economical with the truth, the rate likely ending up at something less than 0.2%, the EU earning all accounted as 'of no fixed abode"

I think the likes of Google and Apple should get fined far more than what they strategically avoided as it brings the whole system down..

How much do you think Ireland should be fined?

22-05-2013, 22:05	#76
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	Quote: Originally Posted by calico_pie I switched them round on purpose to highlight how absurd US tax law is.. It is surely there to prevent laundered money arriving in the US. What on earth happened to this 'not defending them'. Let's face it, both Google and Apple are laundering UK money away from us. They ain't satisfied with massive UK profits. They want zero profit tax too. My word is laundering. Others can also call it tax avoidance and/or scamming.

22-05-2013, 22:21	#77
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	What is there? The tax on repatriated tax? Why that law exists is largely irrelevant. The point is that US companies are under no obligation to repatriate that money. I don't know why you keep ignoring that, or think that pointing it out is somehow defending anyone. You never did answer these questions: What exactly it is that US companies are required to do by US tax law? What are Apple doing that the US Senate thinks they should not be doing? As far as I can tell the answes are: 1. Pay corporation tax on repatriated money from outside the US. 2. Choosing not to repatriate money generated outside the US. As is entirely they're right. What do you think?

22-05-2013, 22:26	#78
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	I'm sure about the money laundering. Presumably anyone money laundering doesn't declare that money to the IRS. Are you sure you're not just making this up as you go along?

22-05-2013, 22:27	#79
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	Quote: Originally Posted by calico_pie I don't know why you keep ignoring that I didn't. And as I said, they can do any crap they want. I can't quite see why you keep saying it. It makes them no better for it. The emergency world agenda is now tax avoidance. There is no money to pay those trillions of debt. Near slavery or a world war probably awaits us all. That is what comes with economic meltdown.

22-05-2013, 22:29	#80
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by alanwarwic I didn't. And as I said, they can do any crap they want. I can't quite see why you keep saying it. It makes them no better for it. The emergency world agenda is now tax avoidance. There is no money to pay those trillions of debt. Near slavery or a world war probably awaits us all. That is what comes with economic meltdown. So why should they repatriate that money?

22-05-2013, 22:30	#81
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	Quote: Originally Posted by calico_pie So why should they repatriate that money? In a similar vein why should anyone ever buy Apple again?

22-05-2013, 23:08	#82
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	The trouble with debating anything with you is that whenever anyone tries to ask you a straight question, you reply with flippant nonsense like that to avoid the point or question. I don't know if you genuinely aren't following this, or are just being a WUM. Or... No one needs to buy an Apple product again... Just as Apple doesn't need to repatriate money back to the US. But I don't suppose that's what you meant.

22-05-2013, 23:28	#83
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	Quote: Originally Posted by calico_pie The trouble with debating anything with you is that whenever anyone tries to ask you a straight question You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore. All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you. kidspud is sort of the same. That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate. Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown. There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension.

23-05-2013, 01:39	#84
Trsvis_Bickle Inactive Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 8,940	Quote: Originally Posted by alanwarwic You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore. All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you. kidspud is sort of the same. That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate. Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown. There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension. They're not stupid or misleading questions at all; they strike at the heart of the matter. The sole reason why politicians convene committee hearings to shout at company executives is to fool the public into thinking they're doing something about the problem. The fact is that politicians created the tax laws that corporations are obeying. You seem to be falling for this clumsy diversion. Countries compete with each other to entice companies to their shores; it means jobs for their voters and taxation revenue for their coffers. Governments have no interest in co-operating with each other on this score in order to maximise the global corporation tax take. There'll be a bit pf political grandstanding (see that idiot Margaret Hodge at the PAC last week) followed by sod all.

23-05-2013, 07:47	#85
rosetech Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 1,058	Quote: Originally Posted by alanwarwic You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore. All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you. kidspud is sort of the same. That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate. Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown. There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension. lol - cmon Its not quite the same thing. Google in the UK is paying the full amount of tax owed. They as a global company can choose where to place their money. Its like me telling you to put your money in a 0% interest account when you have been offered a 5% interest account Apple pay a massive amount of tax in the US. Should they need to pay more, thats for the IRS to sort out and they are much more aggressive than HMRC potentially ending up with a prison term, can you imagine Tim Cook in prison, "hey Tim, can you hook me up with some iTunes vouchers" Showboating infront of a parliamentary committee or senate commission does not prove or disprove anything. Clearly this has convinced you of some wrong doing - fair enough. I would say, if I came to you and said "you have not paid enough tax" and you reply "HMRC have said I have fully compliant accounts", I would need something more than hearsay to accuse you further. You have made some pretty serious accusations on this thread. Let me ask you this have you even looked at Google/Apples accounts? The newspapers have grabbed what is in essence a non-story, and more interestingly left out a certain MPs lack of transparency on her own company accounts which reveal the company has paid significantly less tax than it should based on her critique.

23-05-2013, 08:54	#86
psionic Forum Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Crystal Palace TX Posts: 19,702	Quote: Originally Posted by Trsvis_Bickle The sole reason why politicians convene committee hearings to shout at company executives is to fool the public into thinking they're doing something about the problem. The fact is that politicians created the tax laws that corporations are obeying. That's the crux of the problem.

23-05-2013, 09:16	#87
tdenson Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 4,214	Quote: Originally Posted by Trsvis_Bickle The sole reason why politicians convene committee hearings to shout at company executives is to fool the public into thinking they're doing something about the problem. And they've certainly fooled the likes of alanwarwic

23-05-2013, 09:26	#88
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by alanwarwic You are headstrung in talking about a portion that Apple pays the right US tax whilst saying they are right to leave the more dodgy money off-shore. All you do is try to force quite leading or stupid questions that no one has an interest in answering but you. kidspud is sort of the same. That is not debating and it solves nothing. I'm happy to have your opinion. Twisted questions for meaningless point scoring does little for debate. Apple and Google currently have their ill gotten gains offshore and are partly causing the economic meltdown. There is no easy solution but they morally owe the UK billions in tax. How we and other countries solve this without even further economic meltdown is certainly beyond my comprehension. If the subject is "the US Senate's questioning of Apple about their tax", on exactly what planet are these questions twisted, leading or meaningless: What exactly it is that US companies are required to do by US tax law? What are Apple doing that the US Senate thinks they should not be doing? As far as I can tell, they are the two most straightforward, direct and relevant questions that could possibly be asked. Actually, I suppose they could be reworded as: 1. What should Apple be doing? 2. What are Apple doing? Its hilarious that I've taken the time to post what I have, and in return you have posted some of the frankly nonsense in reply, and you're accusing me of twisting things and being meaningless! You mention owing the UK money - I don't think anyone would disagree that large companies, including Apple, are paying less UK corporation tax than they should be. But that's not what the US Senate investigation is about. You're earlier post about US companies being required by US law to pay a total of 35% tax was, I'm pretty sure, wrong. Could you clarify: Are you saying that if Apple paid less to HMRC than they should have, that the IRS then becomes entitled to any shortfall? If that was the case, I'd be interested to know why the IRS become entitled to that money rather than HMRC.

23-05-2013, 09:30	#89
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	I suggest they simply set a rule in place that they can charge full tax on sales where it is deemed they are avoiding, Thus Apple and Google declaring zero UK profit are deemed 'avoiding' and have to pay the full UK rate on sales totals. There is no honour whatsoever in that 'obey'.

23-05-2013, 09:31	#90
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by alanwarwic I suggest they simply set a rule in place that they can charge full tax on sales where it is deemed they are avoiding, Thus Apple and Google declaring zero UK profit are deemed 'avoiding' and have to pay the full UK rate on sales totals. There is no honour whatsoever in that 'obey'. Pay it to whom?

23-05-2013, 10:14	#91
McTeagle Forum Member Join Date: May 2013 Location: London Posts: 177	Companies can't possibly be accused of avoiding tax simply on the basis that you want them to pay more than they're lawfully obliged to. That's why we have tax laws - so there is a set of rules that companies have to abide by. If you think the law is wrong, then okay - but that doesn't mean there is the slightest onus on any company to pay more than they have to. Oh, and there's no such thing as tax avoidance. If you mean tax evasion (which is against the law), that's not something Google or any of the other big companies have been accused of. As has been stated, politicians make the tax laws. Companies (which are people, lest we forget that) employ accountants and lawyers to examine the laws and make sure that they pay what they are legally obliged to. If the laws are rubbish, then that's the politicians' fault. The fact that politicians are hand-wringing in public reflects badly only on them.

23-05-2013, 10:49	#92
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	Quote: Originally Posted by McTeagle The fact that politicians are hand-wringing in public reflects badly only on them. What I find quite fascinating is that Apple are religiously following their doctrine, or at least what I see as their doctrine. Thus Apple declare they are actually 'following the spirit of the law' and 'not using gimmicks', whilst Google ignore the loaded question and call for world wide tax reform.

23-05-2013, 11:01	#93
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	What I find quite fascinating is that you waffle on vaguely about things like doctrines, and things being twisted, whilst ignoring any facts or straight questions. And then having the gall accusing others of being difficult.

23-05-2013, 11:06	#94
IvanIV Forum Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 25,199	Apple has their products manufactured in factories that have no problem to use child labour. Because the price of work is what matters most. They are not going to behave morally and pay taxes properly according to the spirit of the law, when they can behave legally although immorally and save the money. That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first.

23-05-2013, 11:18	#95
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	Quote: Originally Posted by IvanIV That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first. Nope, but most follow trickle down trends though. Outsourcing everything avoids responsibility, unless you outsourse in the US that is, which, as we know with BP can be a form of Hari Kari. In a way, the US has it right there. Expanding that to the whole world would maybe be the the solution to much famine and inequality. Thus Foxconn employees would have dual employers, and expensive trainers would still be expensive yet their the workers could also afford them.

23-05-2013, 11:56	#96
calico_pie Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 9,428	Quote: Originally Posted by IvanIV Apple has their products manufactured in factories that have no problem to use child labour. Because the price of work is what matters most. They are not going to behave morally and pay taxes properly according to the spirit of the law, when they can behave legally although immorally and save the money. That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first. That's quote the allegation. Do you have any source to assert the claim that they "have no problem to use child labour"?

DS Forums

Apple 'among largest tax avoiders in US'

23-05-2013, 16:26	#97
Trsvis_Bickle Inactive Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 8,940	Quote: Originally Posted by IvanIV Apple has their products manufactured in factories that have no problem to use child labour. Because the price of work is what matters most. They are not going to behave morally and pay taxes properly according to the spirit of the law, when they can behave legally although immorally and save the money. That's a law of capitalism, all companies behave like that, profit first. Firstly, there's no evidence that Apple do indeed do use child labour and actually it's highly unlikely. Child labour is fine for simple, manual processes like garment manufacture; the work is easily learned and quality control is essentially done by straightforward visual inspection of stitching etc. The manufacture and assembly of consumer electronics is much more complicated and quality control is far more technical. Apple's physical products, like those of its competitors, are manufactured in huge purpose-built, state-of-the-art Chinese factories, not grubby sweatshops in downtown Dhakar. In addition, for electronic products commanding a premium selling price, the 'price of the work' is almost certainly not what matters most. Reliability and quality are likely to be at the top of Apple's criteria list when subcontracting as the price of a failure of either will be huge.

23-05-2013, 21:37	#98
ramzez Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 139	Jon Steward on that topic http://www.comedycentral.co.uk/shows...y-show-911559/

29-09-2014, 15:21	#99
alanwarwic Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: the wild world web Posts: 28,132	I think the case for more US tax was for monies tax dodged in Europe. http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ngs-with-apple Its a base headline there, but elsewhere the headline at the Inq is "Apple could be fined 'billions' over alleged dodgy Irish tax deals" http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...rish-tax-deals Whilst Starbucks dodged 10s of millions in tax Apple's is in the 10s of billions, just in the EU(how many billion in the UK?) , so 1000 times more newsworthy. Strangely the Guaridan states "which pays a tax rate of less than 2% in Ireland." is quite economical with the truth, the rate likely ending up at something less than 0.2%, the EU earning all accounted as 'of no fixed abode" I think the likes of Google and Apple should get fined far more than what they strategically avoided as it brings the whole system down..

29-09-2014, 18:54	#100
kidspud Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 11,501	Quote: Originally Posted by alanwarwic I think the case for more US tax was for monies tax dodged in Europe. http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ngs-with-apple Its a base headline there, but elsewhere the headline at the Inq is "Apple could be fined 'billions' over alleged dodgy Irish tax deals" http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...rish-tax-deals Whilst Starbucks dodged 10s of millions in tax Apple's is in the 10s of billions, just in the EU(how many billion in the UK?) , so 1000 times more newsworthy. Strangely the Guaridan states "which pays a tax rate of less than 2% in Ireland." is quite economical with the truth, the rate likely ending up at something less than 0.2%, the EU earning all accounted as 'of no fixed abode" I think the likes of Google and Apple should get fined far more than what they strategically avoided as it brings the whole system down.. How much do you think Ireland should be fined?