I think you'll find that Trump's plans are only intended to apply to his companies and family. This is one of the reasons why the Koch brothers (the loathsome duo) aren't spending any money on his campaign.
4678 posts • joined 16 Apr 2007
Re: For my downvoters
Still anonymous we see. Could be any of the many clueless wankers out there.
By doing so, the commission risks undermining the important work carried out within the Organisation for Economic Co‑operation and Development (OECD) through its “Base Erosion and Profit Shifting” (BEPS) project.
This is probably the weakest argument of all that have been presented. Only by aggressively going after the various wheezes is the commission going to get the proper attention of the US and any kind meaningful deal with BEPS. The lobbyists, to which illustrious group Kroes returned after her time in the commission, have been busy watering down the proposals since they were first made.
This is similar to when the US decided to go after Switzerland, where coincidentally I think Apple did its amusing bond issue for share buybacks because to do so with cash would have required repatriation and paying tax, about money laundering that convinced the Swiss government that international banking licences were worth more that banking secrecy.
There is definitely scope for negotiation over the total amount to be paid and that's where Apple and the Irish government should be focussing their energies.
Re: It's not about fair, it's about the law
Going after sweetheart deals is the best way to get coherent and cooperative international tax policy.
Sweetheart deals are are a form of state aid. As such they are generally tolerated as long as they are open to all and have clear limitations. Are you seriously arguing that a deal cut between Apple and Ireland in 1991 for preferential treatment, in order to offset the costs of setting up business in Ireland, should still apply today?
In any case, the real bone of contention is that Apple setup a shell company in Ireland for handling international sales to its subsidiaries but thinks that this shell company should somehow be exempt from even Ireland's low corporate tax rate. So, apparently it's okay to pay corporate tax on business done in Ireland, but apparently not okay to pay corporate tax on business done elsewhere in the EU. In which case, the alternative is surely that Apple should pay the tax (presumably at much higher rates) in the relevant countries.
The single market exists precisely to avoid this kind of complex accounting and even allows them to play countries off against each other but they must pay tax on all the sales in the EU as a result.
Where is Tim Cook's PR team?
They really should not be letting this stay in the headlines in the run up to their next product launch. Agree to pay, though perhaps with some negotiations, promise to be a good corporate ciitzen and get out of the headlines. Otherwise, this will still be in people's minds when next week. And, when they're supposed to be thinking "must have shiny, shiny", they may still be thinking: so 0.0005 % of the $ 900 is all the tax Apple pays?
Trying to fight this is lose-lose for Apple: it's back tax on sales in the EU that have already happened through an Irish-based tax shelter so repatriation isn't an offer and all the precedents are against appealing. Apple has hundreds of billions in cash so even this massive bill will hardly effect them. Hell, if they're accountants get them to offset share buybacks against tax, then I'm sure they can come up with a suitable scheme to minimise the actual pain.
And get lobbying for tax reform in the US: not just the corporate rate, but on taxing only where sales are made. A simpler tax system will benefit Apple almost as much as wheezes like this.
Can you spell lawsuit?
This has restrictive practice written all over it and is likely to backfire in a completely unnecessary way on Microsoft and Intel and AMD.
When purchase an operating system you obtain it with statutory rights and not with just the bollocks they put in the (generally) invalid EULA. This includes being able to run the OS on any hardware that meets the minimum specification.
Now, it might be okay for MS to disable certain functionality if hardware support is required that wasn't available at the time (encryption springs to mind but there are other examples). However, fiddling around with synthetic limitations like this is about the best thing MS can do to annoy its enterprise customers. While some of them will play along, others will go with different hardware. Or, and this really ought to scare Microsoft, bring forward BYOD / other platform plans.
And class action lawsuits by individuals shouldn't be ruled out either and they could be big, not just financially but also in the amount of information they might have to turn over in the discovery phase.
There is an easy way out for Microsoft: concentrate on fixing Windows 10 so that people will really want to use it and keep the free "upgrade" open. Shitting on your customers' doorstep is not going to get them to love you.
Then just buy Sky Lake instead, there is nearly no performance difference.
How long do you think Intel we keep those processors available for?
Android devices outselling Windows devices by nearly four to one. But Windows 10 is clearly on the rise and more of us will soon be in the OS-as-a-service world, just where Redmond wants us to be.
This is a glaring example of a logical fallacy along the lines of: frogs are green; I am green therefore I am a frog.
An increase in relative terms (market share) does not mean an increase in absolute terms. Indeed, as the market share of mobile devices increases, the number of people using desktop machines decreases (absolutely and relatively). So as people switch from Windows to IOS or Android, and they are, the market share for Windows 10 might go up even if fewer people are using it. That said, 1 year in and even including the compulsory distribution on new machines (with the odd exception) and strong arm update tactics, the uptake of Windows 10 is far from impressive.
From my own numbers I'm watching a growth in mobile from around 15% in 2015 to over 20% in 2016. But don't believe me: have a look at Akamai's data, which El Reg persistently fails to refer to, along with its own data.
I have no idea why Mr Sharwood thinks data from US government websites is any more representative of global trends than data from El Reg. I suspect the answer is that he simply doesn't have access to El Reg's stats. This would be very poor for a tech website if it were true.
Re: A small crumb of comfort
Yes, but it will inevitably cast some doubt on that policy: no good having cheap launchers if expensive satellites get lost.
I really admire Musk's ambition, and I wish Space X all the best, but I'm not yet convinced that Silicon Valley's approach will transfer well to space.
The European Single Market is probably the most competitive, free trade bloc there is and the European Commission has for more teeth that something like the FTC in America.
Lots and lots of leftists dislike the Commission for enforcing things like unbundling of telecommunications and energy markets and backhanders from states to keep unprofitable businesses going. Hopefully at some point this is going to include stopping the Spanish government from subsidising coal-powered electricity with money it doesn't have,
Re: Just dumb
They would get €13bn now and probably have to hold the door open while the multinationals leave in an orderly fashion later.
Where else in the EU should the companies locate to?
It's not what you say but the way that you say it
Apple would collaborate with the Irish government if it launched an appeal against the ruling
I don't actually think that the ruling can be appealed, it has to be challenged in the court. And, as Apple is the benefactor of the subsidy, it's up to Apple to challenge it. But nice of Mr Cook to suggest that Ireland has somehow been punished by the ruling and that Apple is on their side.
As for the prospect of a challenge the ECJ has a history of confirming the Commission's rulings, especially when it comes to upholding the principles of the single market, of which unfair state aid is an obvious example. And companies invariably play along as the alternative could be reduced access to the market, or being forced to repatriate the earnings so that they can be taxed in the US.
Re: Luxembourg Any One?
No, no cover up. Juncker's successor at the head of the Luxembourg government is having to deal with it and Juncker has to resist the urge to meddle.
Illustrating the problem with one sentence paragraphs
He was also responsible for the decision
It is entirely unclear who "he" is: Lockheimer or Fadell. Sentences should be grouped into paragraphs by object of discussion.
Where the girlfriend is now fast asleep.
I think anyone could have guessed this. Still very noble of you instead of just "lagering up" and letting nature take its course. Maybe why you're still together!
You must also have cut a fine figure limping around at such high speed.
Re: Get out of my country corps
You forgot the Apple mode: the washing machine looks fantastic but destroys your clothes and orders more fashionable replacements!
With you on that. But with a little tweak: embedded NFC tags could allow you to walk round and compile a shopping list. I often write them down only to forget them when I go to the shops…
I pity the poor, fat buggers who try and get everything delivered by Amazon.
Imagine dutifully holding onto the boner and keeping foreplay going until delivery the next day… yeah, right. More like bukake or bust!
I do seem to remember reading something about a condom taxi here in Jormany that promises delivery within the hour.
Re: Only in Newsbytes?
We could have a competition for t-shirt designs for those soon to be paying for the premium with their jobs…
Not that Softbank would ever go back on its word! Actually, this has all the hallmarks of a leveraged buyout before being flipped to private equity for asset stripping. I sincerely hope I'm wrong on this, but Softbank's debt is eye-watering.
I know what was said, but it's irresponsible to think it won't happen. If they're not vetted then it allows it to happen, the chance of it occuring is increased because it's an easier route for them to get themselves in to that sort of situation.
I'm not that familiar with the pathology of sexual perverts but I don't think that is how the majority of them operate.
Sure, for some, opportunity will be everything, but for many preparing, grooming and stalking the prey are part of the deal. And there are plenty of opportunities for them do this without them being logged while doing so.
Personally, I'm against all these unlicensed OTT services. Higher yields can be achieved within the current frameworks which include compulsory vetting of drivers and some kind of minimum wage.
But for me, knowing that you were travelling somewhere would useful if I was planning to rob your place. As I say, the tabloids are conditioning to suspect the wrong people of committing the wrong crime. We're encouraged to believe that world is full of violent perverts and terrorists whereas violent crime is in decline and road traffic accidents are the real killers.
For fun we could apply Terry Pratchett's actuarial approach to crime to things like big business' tax avoidance schemes: how many people died in Ireland as a result of underfunded services because Apple, et al. didn't pay the going rate.
Re: Uber saved my ass last weekend
150 miles for $115? What's that about 2.5 hours each way, 5 hours in total. So just over $ 20 an hour including gas, maintenance, health insurance and pension provision? And you really think that this is a market.
There's a reason why taxi drivers are primarily immigrants: they're very poorly paid.
Then can I suggest you drink less coffee in the morning?
Contrary to what the tabloids would have us believe, there is not an army of rapists and child molesters desperate for opportunities to prey upon the innocent. If there is an army at all, then it is the one of organised crime and it won't want to get involved in anything that is traceable, but theft is probably the biggest risk.
Re: Guess they are trying to claim ignorance
That wouldn't let them out of liability, which is determined by the law and the courts, and not companies.
But let's not jump to conclusions. Best way to see what is actually on offer and as to whether they have any agency function. If this is just a service for carpoolers then they may be fine.
In any case, I thought Google/Alphabet had put money into Uber. They're unlikely to fund a rival before cashing out.
Re: Promise everything ....
I think everyone knows what you were commenting on :D
Okay, under what legislation would the European Commission be able to prevent a national regulator from imposing conditions on a company operating in a national market? Note, it's not really up to the deliberately toothless OfCom to decide whether OpenReach should be spun out of British Telecom, that would be for the monopolies commission. OfCom should be encouraging unbundling by making sure that there is a competitive market for unbundling (as in France) or alternative suppliers (as in Germany) through setting the prices and conditions of use of BT's network.
Though there are many arguments for splitting up the ownership of the infrastructure from running services on it. And many precedents for doing this in things like the energy markets (managed in Germany by a far beefier network regulator).
Re: Why ?
FFS, you can't have it both ways. Either:
You mean Corbyn failed to adequately support one side or the other
He managed to convince his own electorate to remain by a large margin…
But basically he was the invisible man in the campaign and failed to make the case for anything. As for the numbers being bandied around that Labour supporters were a majority to stay in the EU, that doesn't square up with the votes in most constituencies outside London with Labour MPs and certainly doesn't bode well for the next election.
Re: Why ?
@Phil W. Thanks for the attempted explanation, to which I generally subscribe. But what's still eluding is what is meant by "Brexit traitor"? I can't make syntactical sense of this. Is he a traitor to the anti-EU brigade? That's certainly what it sounds like. Or a traitor to the country because of his anti-EU sympathies? Or is he just another fucking hypocrite? And maybe that would be the better term: "Corbyn, the Brexit hypocrite and incompetent party leader".
Re: Promise everything ....
Wow, looks like I'm heading for my own downvote record! :-)
Just to add some clarity: I wasn't dissing the original post but AMBxx's nonsense.
Anyway, carry on.
Re: Roll-out weasels
So 'exchange goes live on xxx' isn't always something to cheer about if you don't live next door to it.
You are a rogue heating engineer and I claim my £5!
Re: Why ?
Corbyn is a dirty Brexit traitor
You keep writing this and I still don't know what you mean.
Personally, I think he's a principled fool fighting last century's battles.
Re: 25 billion fits easily into 500 billion
At which point we invoke the The Mundell-Fleming trilemma and the UK will be back begging the IMF for loans, as it did in the 1970s.
The mere prospect of the UK leaving the EU is already making funding the national debt more difficult and it is only going to get harder as the costs (lower tax receipts and more bureaucracy) rise. As a result there is going to be even less money available for investment than there already is (the UK compares poorly with other industrialised countries).
The current manipulation of the debt markets by the central banks disguises the fact that not all central banks have infinite balance sheets. As soon as it looks like any particular central bank is directly monetising government debt, then risk premiums will be applied. In the case of the UK, which is both able to issue debt in its own currency and force investors (insurance companies, pension funds and banks) to buy large amounts of debt, this may seem unlikely. But it's happened before and, as the recent failed auction hints at, it could easily happen again.
But I think that Corbyn and his Luddite Militants might actually be quite happy with rolling back technological change. Whereas I'd be content with just social media disappearing…
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said the party will not win elections using strategies from the past,
Strange because everything I hear from him reminds me of the 1980s Militant Tendency.
I really don't mind state-sponsored or organised investment in infrastructure. But without the right kind of oversight it tends to resemble an Oxo-powered train. I'm getting my bowl and soup spoon…
Re: Promise everything ....
Please stop talking such utter shit.
Re: "Intel gave the entertainment giants what they wanted"
I buy my films
Actually, you never do. You only ever buy a licence to watch a film even if they tell you "you own it". The interesting thing, that neither Big Movie nor Big Music, have never come clean over, is that the licence should be independent of the medium. Many of us have, over time, bought new licences for the same content but I don't remember ever being offered to trade my VHS copy of something in for DVD version for a nominal charge to cover duplicating and handling.
You're assuming Apple will support that hardware in MacOS
Google has already indemnified all the patent stuff. So that's 2011's battle.
Safari for Sierra supports WebM and WebP so it looks like they've caved.
Re: Wrong target . . surprise, surprise!
Yes, but that's the way ideology works: make the man on the street feel guilty as soon as you call his name, because we all know we probably have done something "wrong". Note, this is the inverse of "you've got nothing to hide" mantra of the data suckers.
Re: DRM is evil
Sounds more like handwaving than anything else.
It will probably be harder to use hardware accelerated decoding to another stream for anything that is wrapped in DRM but the CPU itself should be beefy enough to allow the DRM to be stripped software at an acceptable rate.
Content owners always demand DRM even if the IT industry keeps telling them that it's a stopgap at best and at worst tissue paper. As long as they intend to distribute their content in places like China, they really don't need to worry about people ripping, often legitimately (backups are legal), content they have paid for elsewhere.
Presumably Apple has been waiting for these chips for the 2016 models.
Hardware support for VP9 will be nice. :-)
Re: Reliability & infrastructure - bandwidth and interference
The biggest advantages might come in places like conference centres where the Wi-Fi is often saturated.
Nope, not saturated, just poorly set up. With professional equipment and a little skill you can always setup a wifi network correctly so that contention will not be an issue. But the uplink might: many conference centres have very poor internet connections: 10 MB/s won't cut it for a conference of more than about 20 people.
No shit, Sherlock
This kind of exploit is builtin to li-fi, which was over ever a proof of concept for particular installations. Ie. a typical research project which is unlikely ever to be directly usable, but still worth doing.
In practice: where can't you use either wired or wireless ethernet?
Well, considering that Irish voters were promised time and time again that the EU did not have tax competency
This isn't about tax: Ireland is still (nearly) completely sovereign in the taxes it raises and the rates it sets. This is about a subsidy given to Apple in the form of a tax break. If the same tax break was offered to all companies in Ireland there would be no case to answer.
Re: Of course, Ireland has already protested
So too has America - the EU doesn't have the right to tax American companies
It isn't. The Irish government was giving preferential treatment to two Irish companies, set up by Apple with specific purpose of doing trade in Europe.
A uniform global tax structure is not only a pipe dream but completely illegal or unconstitutional for the majority of countries.
Re: What about
Yes, but Luxembourg has come up with a new wheeze as a free port…
Re: Barking up the wrong tree?
Apple got a preferential tax rate. This amounts to a subsidy and hence Apple is required to repay the subsidy to the Irish taxpayers.
Sorry to disappoint but no evil EU conspiracy here.
Re: Who are the taxes payable TO?
Sweetheart deals like this are often part of a country's approach to get companies to move to them: "build a factory here and pay x % less tax for ten years". Ireland doesn't want to lose this particular bargaining chip from future negotiations.
But no doubt, together with Big IT's accountants, they'll dream up some other wheeze.
Re: Popcorn time
I doubt this very much. Ireland already has a very low corporate tax rate, which is one of the reasons why so many US companies set up their European operations there. But Apple negotiated an even lower rate. The European Commission quite rightly interprets this as a subsidy which gave preferential treatment to Apple.
I expect Apple to pay in full and tell the US govt to shut up and get on with reforming its own rules corporation, especially the parts pertaining to repatriation of earnings.
Re: How do I buy a license from Apple?
It's definitely a grey area since Apple stopped officially charging for the OS but if you can contain a copy of the OS then, at least in Europe, you are within your rights to install it on whatever you want: the hardware restrictions in the EULA are null and void.
Of course, Apple is also more or less within its rights to add things to the OS that break installs like this in a software "update", presumably by playing with the kernel extensions. And even if the OS still boots and runs, it's unlikely you'll get optimum power management out of it.
You're probably better off picking up a second hand MacBook. Or wait for Apple to finally update their line up.
In the not so distant future, much of the world of work will be knowledge based…
Dream on. But if that is the case, then it will be mainly machines doing the work. In case you hadn't noticed: IT tends to concentrate in cities and is accompanied by an increase in travel elsewhere, not least because the business cycle has accelerated.
It's usually wrong to play one thing off against another. HS2 is merely an expression of decades of underinvestment in the UK's rail network: all of it needs a lot of money spent on it. Sometimes this doesn't just mean replacing the track but adding capacity or choosing new routes. Historically the route of some of the train lines (and later the motorways) was chosen mainly for political reasons, of which the West Coast main line is probably the most glaring example.
Re: I don't think it's much different than the UK in totality.
Do you actually think that having 500 channels of crap/reality crap/ and more crap sent to your home is a good thing?
Who cares as long as the TV companies are helping to cover the costs? In reality nobody watches 500 channels (I'd be surprised if anyone watches more than 10 regularly) but people do like niche channels*. So, Jeffy gets to watch the channels about trolls living in the forest. And I get to watch bog-snorkelling and nose-picking championships and everybody is happy.
*Well, this was the theory anyway back when cable companies could sell you 50 channels of stuff you're not interested in just so you can watch Saffers today. Unbundling will make things change a bit but could mean even more niche and fewer endless MoR repeats.
it's been suggested before that you could probably pay for the entire operation by selling the copper.
By whom? And what we they smoking at the time?
When the telephone networks were built the cables were very much just laid in the earth or behind the plaster along with the rest of the wiring. This was expensive but okay, because the taxpayer was footing the bill. The switch to fibre came to most places after the telcos had been privatised. Digging up and replacing cables is bloody expensive (could be hundreds per metre on a suburban street) and can never be paid for by the copper recovered (currently around $ 4.50 / kg).
What is supposed to happen with new building areas / renovation is that common cable tunnels are built for the relevant utilities. Maintenance should be a lot easier as well. But someone's still got to do all that expensive digging in the first place.
Re: Why FTTP?
Aren't we all supposed to be going wireless?
No. Next question.
Wireless is good for somethings, bad for others. It uses more power per MB, cannot penetrate buildings effectively and has more problems with contention, which is a problem seeing as there is less bandwidth to go round in the first place. This is why the mobile networks ignore remote populations as much as the fixed line lot do.
Dropping fibre to a village centre is pretty cheap. It's hooking everyone up to the trunk that's expensive. This is where you can indeed make use of wireless technologies to share the love, which is just what several villages have ended up doing.
France it will be a city-centre apartment block with dozens of homes fed from a single FTTP drop
France has a relatively small urban population with only 4 large cities: Paris, Marseille, Lille and Toulouse. After that you're into what are essentially larger towns of which England alone has for more.
In any case FTTP doesn't make much sense for large apartment blocks because the cabling in the building will also need replacing.
While France was a laggard in broadband ten years ago, at some point the government took the decision both to force France Telecom to buildout the networks and to support unbundling. This has led to much better broadband provision in much of rural France: friends of mine in la France Profonde recently got upgraded to 50 MB/s. I think all the DSLAMS (cabinets) are now connected by fibre but the last mile is still likely to be copper. This obviously isn't the case everywhere, as you prove, but still pretty impressive. Especially in comparison with how little things have improved in the UK over the same time.
However, I think the overall boost to an economy because of broadband can easily be overstated. Good connections to businesses and offices are important, but boosting residential speeds significantly only makes sense for VoD, which is hardly a GDP booster.