back to article US Congress blew the whistle on tax-dodging Apple, claims Europe

It was US Senators that tipped off the European Commission to unusual accounting practices at Apple which lead to its €13bn ($14.5bn) back-tax penalty. That's according to EC Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager who told the Copenhagen Business School her team was pointed to potential illegal tax breaks in Ireland by …

  1. Crazy Operations Guy

    Start taxing money whenever it moves across a border

    I keep hearing about all these tax shelters and schemes by companies to hide, things like the "Double Irish" and the "Dutch Sandwich" or not paying taxes because they are "licensing Intellectual Property" that happen to exactly equal their profits. It all involves moving the money between countries, so what I propose is some tax on the movement of any form of currency across borders just as goods are taxed upon import / export. Such a system would put a quick end to companies sending money overseas (It'd just be cheaper to keep it in the country in which the money was earned). It'll put a huge cut in international trade, but I feel that that might be justified until companies (and overly-wealthy douches) learn to pay their fair share.

    1. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: Start taxing money whenever it moves across a border

      My suggestion is to slap an Import Duty (say 35%) on these mythical 'imported' IP rights used to balance the export of untaxed profits.

      Governments can slap on such duties overnight if they wish. We've all seen them do exactly that during trade wars. Mere hours.

      The advantage is it catches the untaxed profits at the point of exit.

      Apple is walking the untaxed profits out by just 'walking backwards'. So pretend along with them.

      It's really this easy.

    2. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge

      Re: Start taxing money whenever it moves across a border

      That sort of undermines the whole EU market idea. Break Europe up into a bunch of borders with their associated protectionist tariffs and the whole thing falls apart.

      Some in the USA would love that. Reduce a potential competitor into a bunch of bickering foes and we are on top of the heap again.

      1. Crazy Operations Guy

        Re: Start taxing money whenever it moves across a border

        "That sort of undermines the whole EU market idea."

        Then just copy the model used by the VAT system. The EU economy seems to be able to handle it just fine.

    3. Sirius Lee

      Re: Start taxing money whenever it moves across a border

      Sure, but the devil is in the detail. Suppose your suggestion were implemented and one of your family members who is living abroad - at uni in France maybe - and needs to be sent some Euros. But now there's a law in place that taxes that transfer. Of course you didn't mean to affect people in that situation - just the douche-bags, right? So you put in an exception for sending to family members.

      However, you can't afford to send the money so you ask a friend to do you a favour and send some money - it's urgent!. Now the person is not sending to a family member so the money is taxed. Of course you didn't mean to affect people in that situation - just the douche-bags, right? So you put in an exception for sending to family members by friends.

      These and a thousand other reasons would require exceptions. The result would be a law that would be exploited by those douche-bags with money because they have the motivation and resources to find a way. Which is what Apple was able to do.

      No one likes what Apple has done, but hopefully there will be no knee-jerk reactions by politicians that make a bad situation worse.

      1. Crazy Operations Guy

        Re: Start taxing money whenever it moves across a border

        I would propose that the tax would be applied to Business Income Taxes / Personal Income taxes at the end of the fiscal year, not on the transaction itself. On the tax form, you'd take the amount of money transferred out of the country, subtract the amount brought into the country to get a taxable amount, values below a certain threshold would be tax exempt. Money coming in would be exempt from the tax, as it would end up being taxed as part of total income.

        This is already how Personal Income in the US works; if you make $25,000 in a year, but spent $20,000 to do so, it falls below the $10,000 threshold and that amount is tax-exempt. If you were to make $25,000, but only spend $5,000, you pay taxes on the $20,000 in profits (Well, $10,000 since the first $10,000 is exempt).

  2. Herby

    If the USA...

    Had a more favorable tax structure for corporate taxes, it wouldn't be necessary to play musical chairs with money and "IP" that moves from place to place. If you have the highest taxes for corporations, expect some of this mischief to happen. It is human nature to pay AS LITTLE taxes as possible. Everyone will use the nicest tax havens to do this. Expect no less.

    1. David Webb

      Re: If the USA...

      This has nothing to do with the US though (unless Apple get a $13b reduction on the tax they pay in the US..... yes, I laughed too), it's about Apple not paying tax anywhere outside the US as it goes through Ireland who didn't collect the $13b and will have to explain to their electorate why they think not getting $13b is good for the tax payer.

      1. a_yank_lurker

        Re: If the USA...

        "This has nothing to do with the US" is incorrect. US companies do all kinds of murky but legal means to avoid paying the US corporate taxes. The US income tax law is a complete disaster at 6,000+ pages of shyster so avoiding it is often the wisest plan.

        1. Jim Mitchell

          Re: If the USA...

          Any foreign tax paid is deducted from US tax paid. So as long as the US rate is > the foreign rate, the actual US rate is irrelevant. Apple pays no US tax on foreign earnings until those earning are brought back to the US as profits. With this Irish tax configuration, it pays no foreign taxes, either. Best of both worlds!

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: If the USA...

        >will have to explain to their electorate why they think not getting $13b is good for the tax payer.

        The Irish tax payer will never see a cent. The ruling requires the Irish to recoup the state aid (and interest - another 5 or 6) initially but other EU countries will then claim their missing taxation from it - also important to remember Irish debts from their banking collapse are very much larger.

    2. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: If the USA...

      It is not the tax structure, it is what is patentable.

      If you look at what various subsidiaries of Apple, Starbucks, Amazon, etc are paying a lot of it is IPR on business methods and/or software. The decision to make that patentable is the key enabler of the Leprechaun Jar building.

      Prior to that, the patent portfolio of most corporations did not have the right mix of IPR to create a scheme where subsidiaries are _USING_ something, have to license it and this will pass accounting and tax audit scrutiny. Today all it takes are a couple of business method patents (f.e. in Apple's case the way the Apple store, support, genius bar, etc is set up is patented as business methods), a few design patents, trademarks and voila - you have a portfolio that is licensable to a subsidiary.

      The real deal patents - the technical ones are not part of the mix because the subsidiaries are _NOT_ building anything, they are importing already built stuff from yet another party (the supplier). So, the best way to kill the current Leprechauning methodology is not to reform the tax code - it is to reform the patent system and ban software, business and design patents.

    3. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge

      Re: If the USA...

      The USA already has a very favorable corporate tax structure. In spite of that advertised 35% rate, there are enough deductions, credits and loopholes to easily cut that into the single digits. If your accountants can't figure out how to get tax down to a couple of percent, fire them.

      Also, the USA is one of the biggest tax havens in the world. Want to shelter some assets, bring them over here, set up a corporation in Delaware or Texas and they will be hidden from the rest of the world.

      I think what has the US Congress panties' in a bunch is the cash parked overseas. Bring it back under a tax amnesty and things can be arranged to pay little more than Ireland's take. But the fear was that this money would never come back. Instead, it would be used by Apple to finance ventures in the EU or other parts of the world. And that just won't do. The money is most probably going to be spent within the jurisdiction that it sat in. And politicians needed to get it back inside the USA.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        US "favorable corporate tax structure"

        Apple pays about a 30% rate on the money they make in the US. If they brought the overseas cash in, they'd pay 35% the amount, less whatever they've already paid on it overseas. They are and for the last several years have been the single largest taxpayer in the United States. Larger than any bank, oil company, or billionaire investor.

        A company like Apple doesn't have much room for deductions, credits and loopholes. Look at the effective tax rates for companies like Walmart, that pay pretty much the full whack, versus banks, which pay very low rates and sometimes get multi billion dollar refunds. GE is the master of working the US tax system, they make billions every year but pay almost nothing in taxes. Why? Because they've been around forever, lobbying congress forever, and got favorable loopholes inserted for them. Apple hasn't been lobbying congress for loopholes in the US code, so they don't have any aside from general stuff like the R&D tax credit.

        The reason for this whole mess is because the US taxes money made overseas, and hardly any other countries do the same. But because they don't make the tax due until you bring it home, it provides a perverse incentive for companies to leave the money overseas forever - hoping for another tax holiday like the one in 2004 where the money could be brought home at 5.5% or something like that.

        If taxes were due on money made overseas in the year it was earned, like it is for US income, companies wouldn't go to such great lengths to avoid taxes overseas, so long as the US tax rate was higher. What would be the point of complex structures to lower your overseas tax liability when you'd pay your savings to the IRS, dollar for dollar? That's what the other countries should lobby the US to change.

        1. cd

          Re: US "favorable corporate tax structure"

          "A company like Apple doesn't have much room for deductions, credits and loopholes. "

          They would if they paid their employees and didn't cheat every supplier.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            @cd

            Who are the employees they aren't paying? The people at Foxconn are not Apple employees. Who are the suppliers they "cheat"?

            You're just one of those morons who think "if a company makes more money it should pay more money". If Apple sold their phones for $250 and lost money on phones like every other company aside from Samsung, I guess you'd be OK with them not paying employees and cheating suppliers? Because you can be damn sure the Foxconn employees assembling iPhones are doing better than the people assembling all those Chinese brands sold at cutthroat margins.

        2. Naselus

          Re: US "favorable corporate tax structure"

          "Apple pays about a 30% rate on the money they make in the US."

          Apple's own income report says they pay 26%, which is below the median for S&P companies.

          "They are and for the last several years have been the single largest taxpayer in the United States. Larger than any bank, oil company, or billionaire investor."

          You've made this claim repeatedly, as has Tim Cook. It's not actually true, though.

          Apple allocated $19b in US taxes for 2015. Exxon Mobile paid out $27 billion in the same year, and has paid more than Apple every year that both companies have existed. This is partly due to oil companies having extra taxes that Apple don't have to contend with; if you want to just take certain individual taxes (corporate income tax, say) then Apple pays more. But no, it has never, ever been the US's largest overall tax payer; and 2015 was an unusual year - Apple's tax bill is usually much less than half that.

          It's also probably not Ireland's biggest tax payer, either - Cook stated that Apple paid $400 million in tax in 2014 (about 330 million euro) That would be less than Medtronic's 712 million euros, or even second-place AIB's 534 million. Cook just pulls these claims out of his arse, and then you regurgitate them in comments section after comments section.

          Even if it were true, however, it's utterly meaningless to say that the most profitable company in the world pays the most tax. It is supposed to. If I pay 10% tax on an income of 300 billion, I've paid more than a guy paying 80% tax on an income of $30,000 dollars. Does that mean it's somehow OK that I have a tax rate more appropriate for minimum-wage cleaning staff while the other dude is paying 80% of his income? No, of course it doesn't. It's imbecilic reasoning, being used to justify paying minuscule tax rates. Yeah, doesn't mean you're not cheating

          On average, over the last half a dozen years, Apple have paid about $8 billion a year in tax. That's about the same as Walmart paid on average, which has less than a third of Apple's income over the period.

          So yeah, all the bullshit about Apple being 'the world's biggest taxpayer' or 'the US's biggest taxpayer' or whatever is just that: bullshit. It's a lie, and even if it weren't a lie it would still mean nothing. Stop saying it.

          "If taxes were due on money made overseas in the year it was earned, like it is for US income, companies wouldn't go to such great lengths to avoid taxes overseas, so long as the US tax rate was higher. What would be the point of complex structures to lower your overseas tax liability when you'd pay your savings to the IRS, dollar for dollar? That's what the other countries should lobby the US to change."

          This, I agree with; the main problem is the screwed up US tax laws that permit you to hold a cash mountain offshore indefinitely. This is incredibly damaging the world economy, as it sits idle in tax havens rather than being redirected into productive investment. There's up to $32 trillion - worth roughly twice the US economy - in such deposits sitting doing nothing.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: US "favorable corporate tax structure"

            26% is "about 30%", especially since I believe Tim Cook was addressing overall income taxes paid, which included payments for state corporate income taxes which would put it right at the "about 30%" mark I believe he claimed.

            I can't find his exact quote, but I wouldn't be surprised if Cook didn't claim Apple was the biggest individual income tax payer in the US - he's not going to come into a setting like Congress and make statements that haven't been fact checked three times over by his team. You're correct that there are taxes that oil companies pay that other companies don't, but on the other hand, there are big tax breaks that oil companies receive that other companies don't. Not to mention the cost of all those wars (assuming you believe the US would not be nearly so entangled in the middle east if there was no oil there) which amount to a massive subsidy for the oil industry that isn't reflected in Exxon's books or our gas price at the pump.

            Averaging Apple's income over the past half dozen years is rather disingenuous, given how quickly their profits have grown during that time. In five years that might be a reasonable way to state things, as they've stopped growing and are probably going to be in more of a steady rate the rest of the decade. The other problem is that to the extent they have paid taxes overseas, those are a credit against US taxes. I think (but I'm not 100% certain) they can take the credit when the foreign taxes are paid, even if the money they paid the taxes on remains overseas. If they were paying more taxes overseas, their US tax bill might be zero because of all the credits...so don't be surprised to see their US tax payments drop if they start paying higher taxes in Ireland...

            As for $32 trillion tied up in tax havens, most of that is held by individuals or trusts/companies owned by them. US companies holding money overseas is a drop in the bucket compared to that, but it is all a part of the same problem (he who owns the gold makes the rules)

    4. Curious

      Re: If the USA...

      The US allows the big pile of cash from international sources to remain untaxed by US taxes if the money will be re-invested back into international projects.

      If the US puts a time limit on this cash-cache, then that might give the multinationals a kick to "use it or lose it". Otherwise they have unlimited time to lobby for the next tax holiday. As Cook put it at his Senate testimony, they're waiting for the US tax rate to drop into single digits. And all the investment return from the big pile of cash is paid to Apple Inc in the States after US tax.

      From the property pin (http://www.thepropertypin.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=66347)

      "

      Margrethe Vestager is telling Apple to choose between:

      (a) Irish Taxation (€13bn + €6bn fines) = Apple Ireland was always really in Ireland, and owes 12.5% Irish tax.

      (b) US Taxation (c €40bn + no fines) = forget Apple Ireland, it was always going back to the US and owes 35%+5% US tax.

      (c) EU taxation (c. €40bn + €20bn fines) = Apple Ireland is "stateless", used EU TP system illegally, owes range of EU tax.

      As we will see, Apple have already decided to lock in (a) (when they moved Apple Ireland "onshore" as part of the "Leprechaun Economics" moment a few weeks ago), and have also announced a commitment to (b) in paying more US taxes (against which they will get a credit for any Irish taxes paid in (a) - hence why (a) is an immediate no-brainier). Apple have also decided to invest in global data-centres in Ireland (allows you to permanently avoid (b), so another no-brainer). Apple are not going to spend the next 6 years appealing (a), they are going to accept (a) soon, to protect against (c) which they will be fighting for years.

      "

      c) is the 'stateless' option that Tim Cook told the Senate they were operating under in 2013, though he and Irish revenue object to the 'illegally' description.

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: If the USA...

        "As Cook put it at his Senate testimony, they're waiting for the US tax rate to drop into single digits."

        Based on what others have said about the US tax system all the allowances, deductions, loopholes etc mean that corps such as Apple would likely pay a lot less than 35% anyway, possibly even down to single digit %. So a "tax holiday" plus all of the above could potentially mean Apple pay very little to no tax on repatriation. I think when Bush did it, it wasn't so much to collect some rather than no taxes, it was the get the money back into the US so it would be invested in the US economy rather than elsewhere in the world. That could happen again, but as we are seeing, one tax holiday means there could be another so corps like Apple are far far less likely to repatriate money ever again unless they can do it tax free.

    5. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: If the USA...

      Herby "...[USA] have the highest taxes for corporations..."

      That's not true!!!

      USA is 35%. ...But Cameroon is 38%.

      So the USA does NOT have the highest taxes.

      They have the 2nd highest.

      See?

      ;-)

  3. Eddy Ito
    Trollface

    Target for scorn

    Apple has long been a target for scorn in Washington, DC

    But is it really due to the tax shenanigans they play or is because Google has such a cozy relationship with some of the local residents?

    1. M7S

      Re: Target for scorn

      Probably not helped by fighting the recent demand to create a backdoor in iOS.

    2. Mark 85
      Trollface

      Re: Target for scorn

      The funny thing is, Congress did the snitching. I wonder of Congress realizes they have the power to close the tax loopholes? But then, their corporate masters would be rather pissed, wouldn't they

  4. peasant

    Whatsb13Bn between friends

    when you are going to get 40% when it is repatriated to the US. 000.5% to the Irish government is going to be the best transfer rate you get. Western union is about 2.5%

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Not sure what these senators had to gain

    If Apple is ruled to owe Ireland $14.5 billion, they'll pay it. And as a result they'll have a $14.5 billion tax credit against US taxes. I'm not sure if that applies immediately, or only when they bring money into the US, but either way it is $14.5 billion that would have someday gone to the US treasury that will now go to Ireland's treasury instead.

    That's probably only fair, since US companies stiffing EU countries through these crazy Irish and Dutch sandwiches isn't fair to them, but why should US senators support Apple paying $14.5 billion less to the IRS?

    1. Mephistro

      Re: Not sure what these senators had to gain

      " ...but why should US senators support Apple paying $14.5 billion less to the IRS?"

      Though is not clear enough in the article (IMO), the speech the Competition Commissioner gave to the Copenhagen Business School says literally: "And it was their investigation into Apple - and US transparency rules - that tipped us off that the company might have received State aid."

      So it's not that US senators contacted the EU Competition Commission and told them about the scam, just that the EU read the Senate investigation reports and used them as a base for their own investigation.

      Regarding your first paragraph, I think the issue here is not those $14.5 billion not going to the US Treasury, but not a single $ reaching the US, unless the Government drops its pants and bends over by lowering the corporate tax to Third World levels, instead.

      Of course, any honest Senator* could/should have called The EU Competition Commission and told them about this, but the Occam's Razor suggests that it's far more probable that the EU Commissioner read the reports and acted accordingly, without any need to include unicorns, fairies and honest Senators.;-)

  6. DCFusor

    There's a little more to it.

    Not disagreeing generally. These laws are all fair in the sense that it's also illegal for the rich to steal bread or sleep under a bridge. It's just that they have no need. In my 63 years as a Yank, I've yet to see a law passed that doesn't favor big companies over little ones that are regulated out of business. Satisfying those regs, or pulling the dutch sandwich and so on - chump change for the big guys to hire one person and an address overseas, but far too much for my small business. That's one thing. It never seems to get mentioned in these discussions. Could it be deliberate bias on the "big corp media's" part - surely even a small media needs big corp advertising support - or just ignorance. I leave that to others to answer.

    Cash on a balance sheet. Get hip to high finance. There may have once been profits that contribute to that (obviously). but cash on a mark-to-fantasy balance sheet (FASB 157) is far from the entire story. For example, many companies (including this one which I don't have any products from and am an anti-fanoi) - use that cash as collateral to borrow money to do things like pay dividends and buy back their own stock. As is the case here...it's never that simple when that many lawyers, lawmakers, and MBA's are involved. Just so you know. Not defending this one bit, but if you were to grab X cash - it might actually be more than the existing net worth or a much larger fraction than you think due to loans taken; yet another slick way to move bucks. Borrow there, using cash "there" as collateral, then spend "here" for whatever definition of here and there works for the company. Since the borrowed money isn't profit - only the collateral is - it isn't taxed when moved....there's more than one trick involved most times.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: There's a little more to it.

      "Borrow there, using cash "there" as collateral, then spend "here" for whatever definition of here and there works for the company. Since the borrowed money isn't profit - only the collateral is - it isn't taxed when moved....there's more than one trick involved most times."

      And I can now see why Apple are upset at likely having to pay out this back tax. Suddenly the collateral for the loans to pay dividends is going to be reduced. That could affect how much they can borrow and at what rates.

      eg, Hi, I've got 20B in an Irish bank and I'd like to borrow 1B here in the US. I can pay it back easily because in the worst case I bring that 20B and pay 35% tax on it leaving plenty to pay that 1B+interest. But that turns into Hi I have 7B in an Irish bank and might have to bring it back, pay 35% tax and also need to pay dividends etc out of it when it comes back so and use some for other operating costs etc, so I can probably pay you back, but it's not as cut and dried as I first thought.

  7. ecofeco Silver badge

    Multi billion dollar profit comany has to pay taxes?

    Cry me a goddamn river.

    As for Senators being the ones to point out the fault, I do find this very surprising and unusual... that they are actually doing their jobs.

    Funny how it nonetheless doesn't benefit the American taxpayer who has to make up the difference that the big corporations don't pay.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    The U.S. needs to change its tax code.

    So we don't tax overseas profits. This would help prevent these tax inversion scams as well.

    However, reforming the tax code is a HUGE bear. It was briefly attempted and then dropped a few years back. The process of reforming the corporate income tax code started, but was quickly buried in lobbyists for this or that corporation or industry. So Congress decided to make the whole negotiation process secret, so the lobbyists wouldn't be on their doorstep complaining about the changes in the offing. Well, the lobbyists continued to deluge Congress anyway, and on top of that the move to secret negotiations alienated every tax reform/small business/government transparency group that had previously backed the attempt to reform the corporate code.

    The result--complete collapse of the effort, since no matter what Congress did they could now only alienate powerful and/or vocal constituencies.

  9. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    Somehow I don't see why this is sooo difficult

    Apple is a US company. As such, it declares profits, and the US government should just say : you made this much profit, you pay this much tax. Why is it such a problem ?

    The entire issue is based around where the profit is made. Wipe the table clean : if you're a US company, it shouldn't matter where the profit is made in order to pay US tax.

    As a friendly gesture, Apple could deduct taxes paid in other countries (yeah, that'll help them).

    Foreign companies, of course, would only pay tax on profit made on US soil, deducting that from the taxes to be paid in their own country.

    As always : KISS.

    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      Re: Somehow I don't see why this is sooo difficult

      it shouldn't matter where the profit is made in order to pay US tax.. Which is exactly the case. Apple Ireland is _NOT_ a USA company. End of story.

  10. Ilmarinen
    Mushroom

    So much bleating about "avoiding" taxes...

    ...so few bleats about why taxes are so high.

    1. I Like Heckling Silver badge

      Re: So much bleating about "avoiding" taxes...

      ".so few bleats about why taxes are so high."

      The only people paying 'High Taxes' are those least able to afford it.

      Anyone earning less than £12000 a year shouldn't be paying any income tax at all... the UK tax code is just as easily abused and it's Joe Public who suffers by the avoidance of those that can afford it.

      On top of no tax for less than £12k, under £20k should be taxed at 10% and then incremental rises based on earnings up to a max of 40-45% for very high earners. If you earn £20K your income tax for the year would be around £800 (you only pay tax on 12-20k and so forth... I'm deliberately avoiding NI contributions in this scenario for simplicity).

      If you earn £30k you pay say 15%, £40k @ 20%, £50k @ 25% and so forth... By the time you are earning £100k you're paying the top rate.

      Close the loopholes, make more avoidance schemes illegal... If there's one thing that might come out of the whole Brexit debacle.... it's that the UK may not have to follow EU tax laws and companies moving money offshore to Ireland/Netherlands may be easier to deal with.

      1. Ilmarinen

        Re: So much bleating about "avoiding" taxes...

        I think you missed the point: why is so much money being taken by government, local, national and suprEUnational?

        Quite a lot of tax seems to be spent on things that I don't think the victims of taxes would think worthwhile paying voluntarily: aircraft-less carriers, foreign wars, "Diversity Outreach Coordinators", High Speed Trains, MPs' expenses, etc.

        And let's get clear about "tax avoidance", whether "schemes" or individual choices (working fewer hours, buying cheaper petrol, not smoking tobacco): tax avoidance is entirely legal. And, if you are a company director, paying no more tax than the law demands is your duty to your shareholders (which includes working folks pension funds).

        Some level of taxes and public expenditure are necessary for civilisation, but more than that is not better. I think we need fewer government leaches and fewer SJWs complaining that not enough taxes are being paid (often while themselves sucking on the public teat).

      2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: So much bleating about "avoiding" taxes...

        If you earn £30k you pay say 15%, £40k @ 20%, £50k @ 25% and so forth... By the time you are earning £100k you're paying the top rate.

        And why is that fair? If the tax rate is a flat 20%, someone earning 100K is already paying twice the tax that someone only earning 50K pays. Why screw the 100K earner twice just because they are successful?

  11. Steve Todd

    Double taxation

    That's the reason that companies don't want to repatriate foreign earnings to the US is that they will first have to pay corporate tax on the profits (35% at the moment as I understand it), then any money paid as dividends is also taxed at another 15%. If Congress were to fix that then there would be more pressure from investors to bring money home.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Tax breaks?

    Tax broken.

  13. wilhelmreuch

    Still dont get it.

    Apple is paying a little more than 25% in tax. If they are a tax dodger they are not very good at it.

    Contrary to what the EU-commision states the irish-registered Apple Sales International revenue is being taxed in the US, the tax is just not being collected yet (as per the US tax rules that allows companies to keep the money putside the US until they use it in the US). In their balance-sheet Apple has set aside 25 billion dollars as taxes-owed for this purpose.

    So at around 26% Apple is paying a higher tax rate than companies in most EU-countries.

    This undermine the EU-commission extreme arguments about tax advantages for Apple - when Apple is actually paying more in taxes than most european companies.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like