Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Faces Large Penalties In EU Tax Probe

Posted by samzenpus on from the was-that-wrong? dept.

First time accepted submitter chasm22 writes EU Regulators are apparently set to accuse Apple and the Irish government of entering into several sweetheart deals that left Apple with lower taxes than what it legally owed. If the ruling is upheld, Apple could owe billions in back taxes. Interestingly, it seems that the Irish government would actually get the extra money and suffer little for its part in the scheme.

9 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. Finally by johnjones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    they should pay tax somewhere... I do and most of the world does... it's that or death...

    1. Re:Finally by Ihlosi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's "death and taxes", not death (x)or taxes".

    2. Re:Finally by lazyforker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apple (and the *many* other companies that indulge in the same behavior) *do* pay all the legally required taxes. The trick is that there are various governments (ranging from municipal to national) that offer perks, tax benefits etc to companies if they locate themselves in their jurisdiction. You can see this at work pretty much everywhere. It's not an Apple story, or an Irish story: it's just corporations using their leverage to get better deals than you or I (probably just average working stiffs) can get. As for the EU trying to get taxes retroactively: surely the EU would have to first prove that *Apple* did something illegal. But if the Irish laws supported Apple what's the legal basis for trying to claim back taxes?

    3. Re:Finally by Carewolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They do pay taxes. They just negotiated lower taxes in exchange for bringing those jobs to Ireland. It's a WIN-WIN solution for Ireland and Apple. Ireland still collects more revenue due to all the new jobs. The only losers are the countries who want to maintain a high tax rate and don't appreciate competition from Ireland, hence the EU getting their panties in a bunch.

      Yeah, all that win for Ireland was why they went near bankcrupt and had to bailed out by the rest of the EU?

      Ireland sold out, but sold out so cheap they didn't even get rich from selling out. Hopefully they have learned their lesson, though it seemed some people like you haven't.

  2. Ireland perhaps not so unscathed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If this probe results in a precedent that companies can't use Ireland to handwave their taxes away, that may cause companies to stop setting up "headquarters" there, which I imagine could be worse for Ireland than any fine could ever be.

  3. Re:I would like to see a return... by Eunuchswear · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just in case anyone is misunderstanding what jbssm is saying.

    The US public spending on healthcare is the 10th biggest in the world, larger than many countries (E.G. the UK) that have "socialised" health care.

    I.E. The taxes Americans already pay are enough to provide "free" healthcare for every American. And you could stop paying health insurance and all other health costs.

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  4. Re:I would like to see a return... by MrL0G1C · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And yet the UK Tories are doing everything they can to move towards the American system so that someone can turn ever larger profits at our expense.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  5. Re:I would like to see a return... by Xest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yep, they'd never follow through with the bluff anyway. If the UK government called say, Amazon's bluff, and said we're forcing you to pay this tax so go ahead, leave the country if you want and Amazon left then that'd create a massive void in which a competitor for Amazon could start up in the UK and use it as a launchpad to challenge Amazon elsewhere in the world.

    It is genuinely a ridiculous argument that they'd leave if they had to pay intended corporation tax, especially in a country like the UK - no major company is going to forfeit a market like that over a 21% corporation tax rate, it's just still way too profitable to ignore and way too risky to leave open to a competitor that would gladly fill the void and gain a foothold.

    It's even more ridiculous in the context of companies like Starbucks who face heavy competition in the UK from companies like Costa and Cafe Nero - these guys could take over Starbucks' premises and hire all their staff within no time so you wouldn't even really see anything more than a very very short term hit in terms of job losses in many cases. As we've seen during the recession as a result of bankruptcies, you can take over another companies stores post-Administration and rebrand them and get their staff working for you in their old premises within a matter of only as little as a week or two in many cases.

    Companies aren't simply going to turn away and say "We can only make £100 million in profit if we pay corporation tax, instead of £120 million, it's just not worth it" if they were given an ultimatum between paying corporation tax and leaving the UK market altogether. They might well sulk, but millions in profit is millions in profit and you don't say no to that- especially when all your competitors are at the exact same disadvantage.

  6. Re:I would like to see a return... by Rhipf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason no one heads to Canada for medical treatment is that they wouldn't be covered and would have to pay out of pocket.

    Are there problems with the Canadian healthcare system? Sure.
    Would I be willing to give up my healthcare coverage for a US type system? No @#$%ing way!!!
    I am more than willing to put up with the limitations of the Canadian system secure in the knowledge that I won't go bankrupt if something happens to me that involve extensive medical care.