A Third Of Cash Is Held By 5 US Tech Companies (siliconbeat.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Moody's Investors Service released an analysis Friday that shows Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Cisco Systems, and Oracle are sitting on $504 billion, which is roughly 30% of the $1.7 trillion in cash and cash equivalents held by U.S. non-financial companies in 2015. Almost all of their earnings ($1.2 trillion) are stashed overseas in an effort to avoid paying taxes on moving profits back to the U.S. under the country's complex tax code. Apple has more than 90 percent of its money located outside of the U.S., according to its most recent filings. Moody's said in its report that "we expect that overseas cash balances will continue to grow unless tax laws are changed to encourage companies to repatriate money." Some of the other tech and Silicon Valley companies in the top 50 include Intel, Gilead Sciences, Facebook, Amazon, Qualcomm, eBay, Hewlett-Packard and Yahoo.

Comments

Remember where the responsibility is

[PrimeWaveZ]

The responsibility it to the shareholder, no the government.

Re:Remember where the responsibility is

[Carewolf]

The responsibility it to the shareholder, no the government.

Here I thought the responsibility of the tax code was to the voters.

Re:Remember where the responsibility is

[ScentCone]

Yes, and the responsibility of the government should be to its citizens, not corporations.

Because, of course, the people who form a business and incorporate it ... they're couldn't possibly be citizens. And the teachers, welders, farmers, retirees and everyone else who decide to invest some money in a publicly traded company, no chance those are citizens. Nope. The companies are all owned and run by non-human invisible evil ghost people, or AI machines in the basement.

Re:Remember where the responsibility is

[Opportunist]

So, essentially, government AND businesses should only be concerned with those that can invest money. Anyone else simply doesn't count.

Re:Remember where the responsibility is

[Sarten-X]

My point is that the actual laws dictating an executive's responsibilities rarely care at all about the shareholders. Rather, they usually only require that the company follow its charter, and it's that charter that defines the goals, and that's usually done vaguely.

In Apple's case, I don't see any definition of what the shareholders' interests are. It has been upheld in court that such a term can be construed to mean many things beside the often-assumed short-term profit goal. If Tim Cook thinks (and convinces the Board) that it's in shareholders' best interests to pay taxes to bring cash into the United States, then he can do so.

In essence, my point is to question the point of the original comment. Corporations are beholden to the laws of their jurisdictions, and those laws (in the US) make them subject to their charters. Blaming shareholders and invoking the profit myth implies that somehow the executives are being forced to do something distasteful, whether it's outsourcing or polluting or keeping foreign cash. The reality is that the executives have a wide range of options, and usually they only have to make a passable justification like "our polled shareholders said they care about the environment, so we're spending billions of dollars to have recycling in all facilities".

The myth essentially shifts the blame from the corporate executives to "the system". It's the same as the hippies' stereotypical disgust with The Man, the modern rebels' jealousy of the 1%, the historic persecution of Jews, and the vilifying of banks. Rather than a specific mechanism to effect change, such as participating in a shareholder poll or vote, the myth provides a vague target for outrage that the masses can rally against, feeling good about their impotent rebellion. It satisfies a craving to be a noble warrior in a community of fellow underdogs, fighting against a powerful oppressor... but it doesn't require the drudgery of actually changing anything.

I love financial news...

[RyanFenton]

Ah, financial news - a place where you can open make statements like: "Unless the US changes its laws to give me lots of money, I can't help but foresee DIRE, DIRE things happening. Financial catastrophe would be putting it lightly." ... and not only is it counted as somehow news, but the richer or more openly lying the person saying it, the more respect it is given.

Well, WELL past the point of poe's law.

Ryan Fenton

The tax rate is not competitive

[tom229]

The U.S. Corporate tax rate is something ridiculous like 35%. They can claim profits are in a country as close as Canada and it would only cost them 15%. You can't be this wildly out of balance in a global market and expect to function well. This is a fundamental aspect of free market capitalism. Actually, if the U.S. lowered the rate to even something like 17% I'm sure they'd generate more revenue, instead of less. A company the size of Google likely spends a great deal of money on clever accounting to avoid taxes. They wouldn't need to do it if there was little or no benefit.

Re:And they're doing nothing with it

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is the point.

1) Overseas cash is profit from sales overseas, not domestic. Apple, Microsoft, Google, and such aren't sending US profits overseas, they are just not repatriating money made overseas. Which to some extent you don't want to do since it increases FOREX costs exchanging money back and forth.
2) US taxes are far out of line with international ones. Unless there are tax treaties made with Ireland, Panama, and the Virgin Islands, all companies will continue to use low or no-tax countries to effectively "store" the wealth. Every country literately has to agree to have the same tax rate, which is at least 15%
3) US double-taxes. This is harder to explain, and many Liberals will characterize it one way while Conservatives will characterize it the opposite way.

So in short, When you make one dollar in Europe, the company is registered, usually to an Ireland subsidiary as the legal entity, but the customer service is likely based in Germany, because of the labor laws are favorable in Germany (and least-favorable in France.) Only businesses that deal with domestic customers are actually located in their respective countries and pay taxes in their countries, but from a legal perspective the Irish company is the taxable entity. Remember that EU countries are like US states. Each state can have their own domestic tax rate, but if you live in Florida, you don't pay California's tax rate even if Apple is based in California, you pay Florida's tax rate. But of course if you ship an item, there might not be any taxes involved due to the VAT complexity in the EU.

So ultimately sales inside North America are part of the US market, while sales in Europe are usually registered to the Irish entity.

Microsoft was more sneaky about it, having all their software sales registered to an entity in a lower tax state. I'm not sure if Apple or Google did that with iTunes/App Store and Google Play, but it's a reasonable thing to consider.

Apple's hand was kinda forced by one investor to start handing out Dividends because the stock-manipulators at Wall Street were literately robbing the investors blind in the value of the stock price by driving up the price until earnings and then shorting the stock to make it drop. Anytime Apple did far better than expected, everyone won, but if they fell even a penny short of estimates there was a major drop. The value of the company on paper is worth far more than the stock price. That has much to do with the overseas cash. If Apple wasn't doing anything with it, it was literately losing value at negative interest rates while inflation is closer to 2%.

Re: Tax laws will never be changed

[Rob Y.]

There was such a middle ground - it was the America of the 50's and 60's. Ever since high-priced think tanks started giving Reagan (and other lesser actors in the Republican party) homey-sounding reasons to cut taxes on passive income to the bone, the trend has been straight to the 'new aristocracy' scenario. So unless you want to deny the trend line, you might want to try proposing a solution that reverses it. And 'cut taxes to grow the economy' doesn't count. That's been a bald-faced lie wrapped around a tiny kernel of truth from the beginning. We've long since exhausted that kernel of truth and have been living squarely in the lie for decades now.