Slashdot Mirror
'Paying Taxes Is a Lot Better Than Phony Corporate Courage, Apple' (theintercept.com)
theodp writes: Every fall," writes The Intercept's Sam Biddle, "internet and its resident tech mumblers congregate for The Apple Event, a quasi-pagan streaming-video rite in which Tim Cook boasts of just how much money his company is making (a lot) and just how much good it's introducing to the world (this typically involves a new iPhone). This is merely annoying most years; but in 2016, when Apple is loudly, publicly denying its tax obligations around the world, it's just gross." Biddle finds Apple's use of the word 'courage' to describe the corporate ethos that pushed the company to remove the headphone plug from the newest iPhone while offering a new pair of $160 jack-free earbuds particularly irksome: "Removing a headphone jack or adding 20 headphone jacks does not require courage; engineers are very smart, but their job does not typically require much bravery. Courage is more often found in, say, running into a burning school to rescue the students and class rodent. Or, maybe, you could call courageous the act of paying the many billions you owe around the world into the system that ensures those students have all of the resources they need in order to learn and grow. Just a hint: Collaborative spreadsheet software doesn't count [introducing new real-time collaboration features, Cook called iWork a "very important tool in education"].
I have only apathy-to-mild-antipathy for Apple, but think it's pretty abusive of these governments to attempt to charge them retroactively for taxes that they were dodging fair and square, and pretty dangerous and short-sighted for the general populace to so gleefully support these sort of violations of ex post facto.
It's important to understand the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. Tax avoidance is taking all the deductions, programs, etc. you are entitled to under tax law. We would never expect an individual to not take a tax deduction or child credit etc. because they have "courage". That's just bad personal finances. Tax evasion, on the other hand, is illegally trying to avoid paying taxes you owe. For example, lying on your tax forms.
I have no problem with Apple doing legal tax avoidance, and all their investors (including a lot of your personal retirement plans, etc) would agree. Anything else would not be patriotism, it would just be bad finance practice. If they're doing something illegal, that's another issue. But let's not slam a corporation that is legally following tax law. Instead, let's slam legislators and encourage legislation to close tax loopholes and simplify the tax code.
Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
...neither did you sign a contract to receive the services which are paid for by those tax dollars...but you use them anyway.
Really? You didn't go to school? You don't walk on sidewalks and drive on roads? You weren't protected by the nations military? You don't shower? The amount of infrastructure required for everyone to live the most basic elements of their lives is virtually endless.
People like you piss me off to no end, because you MUST be actively choosing to be willfully blind to everything that those tax dollars do for you.
It's like we're living that one scene from Monty Python, "What have the Romans ever done for us?"
So the constitution doesn't say that Congress can't enact tax legislation? You sure about that?
If you're sure, you might want to go read the 15th amendment. It's pretty fucking clear. In fact, I'll copy it here for you to show how full of shit you are.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Didn't you get the memo? Only little people pay taxes.
I think a lot of people didn't get the memo. From 1980 to 2013, the share of total income tax revenue paid by the top 5% of earners increased from 37% to 59%, while the share paid by the bottom 50% decreased from 7% to under 3%. More details here.
Saying that life isn't better now compared to 50 years ago for the majority of people is laughable.
I think they've outgrown that last part by a LONG shot, but can argue that later.
What I don't want..is the govt using taxation as a means to try to change private personal and business behaviors. I don't see THAT anywhere in the constitution.
If we would get the govt back to taxing only and I mean ONLY for needed services, like defense, infrastructure (roads, hwys, etc),, border security and more local things like schools, etc....we'd get back to having reasonable taxes that I don't think most would have problem with paying a reasonable amount. And that amount would drop if we'd quit having the feds and states suck up money to try to do everything under the sun and every speciality cause. The system just grows lately to feed itself and that's not right.
I have NO problem with an individual or a company taking advantage of the current tax laws out there to try to save THEIR own money. I do it as much a possible.
And for all those bitching about it out there do a couple things:
1. Get the govt out of the business of trying to mold behavior.
2. Get back to basics for services, this will lower the tax bill to everyone and make a more reasonable amount to pay.
3. If you don't like the current tax laws and "loopholes" and deductions, change the laws, don't blame those trying to use them. Hey, if we simplified the tax code, went with something MUCH more fair and easy to navigate (i.e. you made X...after expenses you owe Y%), then we'd not have the problems and no one would feel someone is getting away with something.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Income tax was initially ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. But that's why the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution was passed, explicitly authorizing Congress to pass an income tax:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Yes, it was a "temporary wartime measure". The same way it was promised that the Social Security number would *never* be used for any sort of identification purposes.
Why do people still want to believe these lying scum when they make another promise that a power will not be misused? The only hope of having that happen is strict rules, extreme transparency, effective oversight, and a hair-trigger willingness to prosecute anyone in any position of power who breaks the rules. All of that is hard to arrange and even harder to retain, so it's better not to give the government extra powers in the first place, however convenient the idea may seem at the time.
But 90% of the people in the top 5% are also getting a raw deal and are shafted. It is the top 0.5% that is reaping all the benefits of the growth. Their share of the income went up by a factor of 10, and their portion of taxes remained the same. That tax burden is borne by the people in the 99.5% to 90% bracket. Below 90% level they have neither the income, nor the tax burden.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Police wont do shit to stop you getting robbed. Best you can hope for is they turn up not too long after and give you a crime reference number so you can claim on your insurance if you have any. In America they might turn up quicker on the off chance they get to shoot someone.
I suggest you spend some time in a country that doesn't have a strong police presence and then re-think that statement. In a lot of countries around the world, if you have any significant possessions, you have to live inside of a cage to keep from getting robbed. In America that is the exception rather than the rule.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
There really is no way to do that.
Leftists like to bring up Somalia. There is a government in Somalia: a crappy one, in a string of crappy provisional governments. With warlord governments layered on top of this crappy government. There really isn't a place without a government. That being said, I'm not an anarchist. I'm libertarian, so I see the value in public infrastructure.
But leftists don't even understand what they're advocating. They believe that anyone who doesn't think government should inject itself into every part of their lives (except the bedroom, amirite?) is some straw man who doesn't want to pay taxes for roads or police.
I want roads. I don't want bridges to nowhere, or federal highway funding paid for by direct income taxes that is used to politically pressure states and local governments.
I want police and courts. I don't want APVs, select fire M16s, no-knock warrants, and civil forfeiture.
I want public access to education. I don't want public schools run by $250K administrators and directed by federal requirements.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
If a country enters into a binding diplomatic agreement with other countries to regulate X, they can't then change the rules on X for their own benefit. Basically the agreed to align their sovereign law with the diplomatic arrangement.
In terms of figuring it out, how simple do you think this agreement is on paper? Six lines in the middle of an A10 sheet with room for big signatures?
I would imagine that the EU tax regulations extend for volumes and that almost no one person understands them fully. I'd wager that most of the regulations are in extremely abstract terms and are not highly specific, allowing Apple to define their business to fit where they want it to fit in the tax code, rather than the tax code defining their taxing obligations.
It takes an actual tax court ruling to actually decide if what Apple is trying to do meets the letter of the law.
And at the end of the day, there's politics that rules it all. The EU isn't going to allow member countries to act as tax havens, especially with the volatility of north/south economies among member states. They're going to demand maximum compliance with tax revenue.
The global demands for revenue will keep Apple from finding another tax haven it can use unless it chooses to align politically with a regime powerful enough to shield it from the US and the EU, but then it runs the risk of other kinds of coercion which might cost as much or more.