Slashdot Mirror


Apple Ordered To Pay Up To $14.5 Billion in EU Tax Crackdown, Cook Refutes EU's Conclusion (bloomberg.com)

Apple has been ordered to pay a record sum of 13 billion euros ($14.5 billion) plus interest after the European Commission said Ireland illegally slashed the iPhone maker's tax bill, in a crackdown on fiscal loopholes that also risks inflaming tensions with the United States Treasury. According to the European Union regulator, Apple benefited from selective tax treatment that gave it an unfair advantage over other businesses. In the meanwhile, Apple has refuted such accusations, saying that EU's conclusion has "no basis in fact or law." EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager said, "If my effective tax rate would be 0.05 percent falling to 0.005 percent -- I would have felt that maybe I should have a second look at my tax bill." Apple CEO Tim Cook said, "Over the years, we received guidance from Irish tax authorities on how to comply correctly with Irish tax law -- the same kind of guidance available to any company doing business there. In Ireland and in every country where we operate, Apple follows the law and we pay all the taxes we owe."

40 of 564 comments (clear)

  1. Good by MitchDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Long overdue

    1. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ah ah

      also US people is already fucked up by Apple, you're paying more taxes since Apple does not pay them, even in US :)

    2. Re:Good by fluffernutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm all for giving breaks for inventions that feed people in poverty or cure diseases, but the world would have been just fine without the iPhone. Maybe a few hipsters would have lost track of their Starbucks points, no great loss.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    3. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And you seem to think invention happens at Apple.

    4. Re:Good by MitchDev · · Score: 5, Insightful

      BIng bing bing! Yep, corporations buy the congressmen to create the tax loopholes while still demanding corporate welfare and the working people have to pay for it all, it's ridiculous.

    5. Re:Good by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Long overdue"

      Indeed. Being forced to accept >14 billions from Apple will teach the Irish that this is a bad idea. :-)

      But seriously, this will just encourage other countries to do even worse, since now they know they'll get the billions anyway later, it's the best investment one can do.

    6. Re: Good by Carewolf · · Score: 5, Informative

      But if Ireland broke its treaty with the EU, why punish Apple for following the law as it stood at the time? Punishing Ireland would seem fairer.

      They are not punishing Apple, there is absolutely no punishment levied against Apple. Apple is just asked to pay what they owe Ireland with no damages or punishment added on top.

    7. Re: Good by iris-n · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Weird as it may sound, they are punishing Ireland. By giving them 14.5 billion euros. The point is, Ireland was giving illegal state aid to Apple, gaining an unfair competitive advantage over other countries. By making Apple pay back taxes Ireland's advantage is negated, making the playing field level again. This is why Ireland is fighting against this ruling, it wants to preserve its reputation as a tax haven and keep attracting tax-dodging companies.

      --
      entropy happens
  2. I hate Apple, but no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They can crack the whip now and say that, going forward, the tax laws have changed and Apple should pay more.

    However, you can't claim you're owed past money when Apple wasn't hiding anything. They knew what Apple was doing and let it go. This is nothing but theft.

    I'm all for fixing the tax laws going forward, but I'm not for killing companies that played by the rules that were in place. Apple can survive this hit, but many companies cannot.

    1. Re:I hate Apple, but no by jabuzz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apple got a special tax deal from the Irish government in exchange for locating their European headquarters in Ireland. This has been ruled illegal state aid which was illegal at the time.

      A number of other companies such as Microsoft, Dell and Google have similar arrangements and they are now all under investigation.

    2. Re:I hate Apple, but no by fluffernutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, if Ireland did indeed step beyond their bounds they can. Apple's bad for not ensuring it was cleared with the EU which has overall governance over Ireland.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    3. Re:I hate Apple, but no by fluffernutter · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's silly, the UN has no say over taxes of member nations.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    4. Re:I hate Apple, but no by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe Apple has replied "You can have your back taxes or you can have our jobs - but not both."

      Good for them.

      What jobs? These Irish headquarters barely produce anything or provide services except as a means to funnel corporate profits to a location with an extremely low tax rate. Apple does most of their design work in the US, manufacturing in Asia, and I can bet you most of their marketing is handled from the US as well. At most their Irish division might handle some EU marketing and customer service duties, but most of their employees are probably accountants and lawyers whose sole function is to keep the scam going.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    5. Re:I hate Apple, but no by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

      EU which has overall governance over Ireland

      That's not correct. In this case the EU can't actually force Ireland to collect the tax, but they will because they want to remain part of the club and not face other sanctions. The EU doesn't actually have powers to govern Ireland directly, although Irish law does recognize EU institutions.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:I hate Apple, but no by jabuzz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The EU has enough clout that they easily enough force Apple to pay. They can either seize assets to the value of the back taxes and/or prohibit Apple from doing further business in the EU, which would even with a 14billion Euro back tax bill be economic suicide for Apple to pull out of the EU.

      Now while Ireland might be upset that the jobs are going, they are not going from the EU because Apple will still need an operation inside the EU to trade there, and the EU Commission does not favour the jobs being in Ireland over anywhere else inside the EU.

      So as far as I am concerned both Apple and Ireland can go pound sand.

    7. Re:I hate Apple, but no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      What? The EU, formally known as the EEC, has existed since 1958, if you discount the ECSC. The provisions against state aid within the single market were established in the Treaty of Rome (1958). Ireland joined in 1973.

    8. Re:I hate Apple, but no by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Informative

      Whether or not the tax breaks were illegal, Apple simply paid what the Irish government told them to pay, so as far I am concerned the EU can pound sand.

      Apple didn't simply "pay what the Irish government told them to pay", there was a huge amount of negotiation between the two parties, leading to an agreement.

      That agreement does not transcend EU rules, so it was illegal at the time and I'm sure you will understand that illegal agreements are not worth the paper they are written on.

      I believe Apple has replied "You can have your back taxes or you can have our jobs - but not both."

      Good for them.

      Wow. 6,000 jobs. When Apple already employ more than that in the UK, where they have no tax deal. What a wonderful deal the Irish got...

    9. Re:I hate Apple, but no by Arroc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would agree with you - except that is not a matter of sovereign tax policy. Ireland basically allows Apple tax-free access to the entire EU market. It would have been fine if it was confined to the internal Irish market.

    10. Re:I hate Apple, but no by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Irish subsidiary is (supposedly) the largest tax payer in Ireland. They have roughly 5,000 employees and are growing in Ireland.

      They certainly will be once they pay back $14.5 billion in back taxes. In any case, say they are reporting $100 billion in profit in Ireland. At the rate of .005% that still $500 million in taxes paid. With the volume of sales and cash Apple has, it's easy for them to be one of the highest taxpayers in Ireland even with their ridiculously low rate.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    11. Re:I hate Apple, but no by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Forcing companies to pay taxes on earnings they made in a country, rather than allowing them to move that money to a lower-tax jurisdiction is hardly breaking that company's back. It's about time international bodies started going after these race-to-the-bottom tax avoidance schemes.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    12. Re:I hate Apple, but no by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Except the EU does have that power. Ireland is a party to the treaties that create these power. If Ireland finds those rules so onerous, it can always join Britain in leaving the EU.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    13. Re:I hate Apple, but no by cahuenga · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And... had Ireland not received a $64B bailout from the EU a few short years ago, maybe he would have a point.

  3. 'Refutes' or 'denies'? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did Cook actually 'refute' the conclusion, or did he just disagree with it? Those are very, very, different things.

    1. Re:'Refutes' or 'denies'? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The letter they posted is signed Tim Cook, and does indeed refuse the EU's claims, however it contains obvious lies of omission and seems to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of how the EU works.

      The Commissionâ(TM)s move is unprecedented and it has serious, wide-reaching implications. It is effectively proposing to replace Irish tax laws with a view of what the Commission thinks the law should have been.

      No Tim, the EU member states have all agreed on some basic ground rules for taxation so that they can have a free market without any of them gaining a competitive advantage. It's hardly a shock to anyone that the extremely advantageous tax arrangements in Ireland were incompatible and the EU has been warning Ireland of this for many years. In fact Ireland changed its laws in 2010 to block companies from doing what Apple did, and as I'm sure you are aware even Apple will have to find a new corporate structure by 2020 or start paying that tax anyway.

      The letter is pathetic. It makes out that Apple did Ireland a massive favour by opening a factory and bringing jobs, ignoring that it only did so in order to dodge billions of Euros worth of tax that rightfully belonged to the Irish people.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:'Refutes' or 'denies'? by locofungus · · Score: 3, Informative

      extremely advantageous tax arrangements in Ireland for Apple were incompatible

      FTFY.

      The problem is that Ireland didn't even charge Apple it's standard corporation tax rate that other businesses were liable for. That is state aid.

      --
      God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = -@B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.
  4. Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's see.. $14.5B in tax savings... 6500 employees in Ireland...
    If they'd paid the Irish employees an average of $2.2M each, it would still not be as much as this tax bill.
    The point is, $14.5B went into Apple's pocket, and Ireland gets what out of it? 6500 measly jobs?

    1. Re:Money by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They probably threatened to put the factory somewhere else, so Ireland thought it was a choice between getting nothing and getting 6500 jobs and a small amount of tax.

      The thing is, the EU doesn't play the "race to the bottom" game. The whole point of having a single market is that rules are harmonized and the playing field is level for everyone. No member state can offer terms like this to get business, which is ultimately bad for everyone except Apple anyway.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Money by GNious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ireland joined the EEC, now the EU, in 1973
      Apple was CREATED in 1976

      You might want to review your statement, especially since you're basically saying that the EEC's creation in 1958 is after Apple opened an Irish branch in the 1980s.

  5. Re:SubjectIsSubject by ArgonautThief · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Both Apple and the Irish Government have already confirmed their intent to appeal and their confidence that same will be successful.

    --
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. - Albert Einstein
  6. demands by fluffernutter · · Score: 3, Funny

    The last time I was in Walmart I told them, "You can have the money for this USB flash drive or you can have the tax for it, but NOT BOTH". It didn't go so well.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  7. Re:SubjectIsSubject by jabuzz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Freeze assets worth 14 billion Euro that are present in the EU, and/or prohibit them from doing further business in the EU till they comply. Walking away from a market the size of the EU is a tough call even with back taxes being asked for.

  8. Re:SubjectIsSubject by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really? Tim Cook undermines his argument by pushing to get a tax holiday to re patriot his Irish earning to America. If he was sincere about Apple' revenues being "earned" in Ireland, then he would keep them there instead if engaging in this ponzi scheme.

  9. Re:The EU needs money desperately by jabuzz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Funnelling the sales through Ireland was not illegal.

    What was illegal was Ireland giving Apple a special tax deal where they only needed to pay tax on profits generated in Ireland, so all the profits from sales in the rest of the EU where tax free. EU has now decided that this is against the state aid rules. Had every firm in Ireland had the same tax deal it would not have been illegal.

    So while Mr. Cook is claiming that they complied with Irish law and may well be right, this is utterly irrelevant to whether they broke EU laws.

  10. EU wins... by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple CEO Tim Cook said, "... Apple follows the law and we pay all the taxes we owe."

    Yes, and the EU's law just said you owe 14 billion. Pay and quit whining about it - maybe if Apple had pulled its profits back into the US, they wouldn't be having these issues.

    --
    That is all.
  11. Re:SubjectIsSubject by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In other words, the money wasn't earned in Ireland, and Ireland and Apple colluded to create a partial tax shelter, just like the EU is claiming.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  12. Re:Proves that Brexit was the right call by jabuzz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    More Brexiter nonsense and ignorance.

    Ireland could only make that attractive deal with Apple because they where in the EU. The deal is that Apple don't have to pay tax on profits generated in the EU outside Ireland in exchange for setting your headquarters up in Ireland. If you are outside the EU you can't offer that tax deal because "tax passporting" aka a firm in the EU only has to pay tax on the profits in the EU in theq country it is head quartered would not be possible.

    So while Apple was compliant with the tax laws of Ireland, Ireland by giving a special deal to Apple was breaking EU state aid rules and the EU commission has every right in the world to poke their noses in.

    Apple is wrong, the guidance of Dublin is all well and good, but that does not get you out of EU state aid rules, and they should have checked.

  13. Re:SubjectIsSubject by GNious · · Score: 5, Informative

    From what I gather, it is not the EU ordering Apple to do anything, but the EC ordering Ireland to collect the money as outstanding taxes.
    If Ireland refuses, the EC could fine them, or better, remove Ireland from the Common Market, incl all effects this would have.

    If Ireland does end up having to collect the taxes, and Apple refuses to pay them, then freezing assets would be on the table.

  14. Re:The EU needs money desperately by jabuzz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Irish government are a member of a club that has rules, and they where breaking the rules of that club. Ireland could just leave the club if they wished, but then the illegal deal they gave Apple would not have been possible. While in the club they need to abide by the rules of the club. That club of course being the EEC/EU.

  15. Re:SubjectIsSubject by iris-n · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...the countries stepped forward with tax breaks that were against the intent but not the legal structure of the EU.

    This is not true. What Ireland did was patently against EU law, violating the no state aid rule. And this is what the Comission decided today, that this sweetheart deal configured state aid because it was not available to all companies, it was only for some select few.

    And you are being disingenuous by suggesting that Apple did nothing wrong. The deal was obviously negotiated directly between Ireland and Apple. And to suggest that Apple didn't know this was illegal, come on. They can afford some pretty good lawyers, you know.

    This all, of course, without mentioning the massive scam that is establishing itself in Ireland in the first place. Apple pretends to make no profit in any EU country, all of it goes to Ireland. But this is apparently legal.

    --
    entropy happens
  16. Re:Proves that Brexit was the right call by iris-n · · Score: 5, Informative

    You are apparently completely ignorant of what Apple's tax arrangement was. Please read the statement of the European Comission.

    To spell it out: Ireland was charging Apple the 12.5% tax on sales made in Ireland. The sales made in the rest of Europe were not taxed. At all. So Ireland was simply robbing the other EU countries of their tax money. Stopping this scam is precisely what we need the EU comission to do.

    And you think exiting the EU would be the proper answer to this? Go ahead, please. Let's see how Apple likes to stay in Ireland without access to the European market.

    --
    entropy happens