Apple Says It Will 'Contribute' $350 Billion in the US Economy Over the Next 5 Years (cnbc.com)

LOL by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 06:52 · Score: 0

These guys....

per person by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 06:54 · Score: 0

350000000000 / 20000 = $17,500,000.00

Re:per person by jellomizer · 2018-01-17 07:13 · Score: 3, Interesting

There are a few factors.
First there is the multiply by 12 rule. Where every dollar spent, will be Multiplied by 12 benefit to the economy.
So that brings it down to 1.46 Million per person being spent. Then this is over 5 years so we get 292 thousand a year. Roughly 1/3 spent goes to benefits outside of ones salary, so that bring $194 Thousand per year on average per employee in raw salary. Which is still on the high side, and I bet Apple is calculating some other bogus numbers such as community starting businesses such as restaurants and stores to accommodate these people.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Re:per person by ClickOnThis · 2018-01-17 07:31 · Score: 2

I think you forgot overhead. Aside from salary and benefits, it costs money to give an employee a desk and chair to sit in, a phone, a computer, people to manage the IT infrastructure, administer HR and payroll, run the AC and get the place cleaned, pay mortgage/rent/property tax on the building, and so on. Typically that can be anywhere from 50% to over 100% on top of an employee's salary.
That said, I still agree that the numbers appear to be suspiciously high.

--
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Re:per person by nospam007 · 2018-01-17 08:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

"There are a few factors."
There's only one.
Trump allows them to pay only 8% taxes on the hundreds of billions they bunkered offshore and they'll distribute that as tax-free dividends to their shareholders.
Re:per person by Required+Snark · 2018-01-17 16:53 · Score: 1

The wording of the Apple statement is deliberately misleading. When they say "contribution" to the US economy, what they really mean $350 billion of subsidies from the US economy. That's how they got all that money in the bank in the first place. Direct and indirect subsidies.
You have to learn how to decode corporate-speak. For example, when a company says that the tax cut saving will go to a bonus, what will actually happen is that amount will be subtracted from people's total compensation. The $2500, or whatever, will go towards corporate profits, and most of it will end up in the pockets of the corporate executive class. It's how trickle down economics works.

--
Why is Snark Required?
Re:per person by emaname · 2018-01-17 17:17 · Score: 1

We ref'd to that as "labor and burden." We used a multiplier like 2.5 to determine the total. So if an employee was paid 40k a year, labor and burden put their total cost as 100k. The multiplier would change depending on area of operation.

--
An effective "democracy" creates the illusion the people have a say in their government.
Re: per person by kenh · 2018-01-18 06:45 · Score: 1

Because the only way Apple can 'contribute to the economy' is by directly creating jobs...
Perhaps they will build autonomous factorys and manufacture phones and laptops with minimal direct human involvement?

--
Ken
Re: per person by kenh · 2018-01-18 06:55 · Score: 1

They will pay 8% on $35BN in previously generated profits, that's a one-time tax bill of what, almost $2.5BN this year, on top of this year's regular tax obligations.
Before you get all worked up over paying 'only' 8% taxes, ask yourself what is the actual rate you pay? Half of filers make no net income tax payment, their refunds and credits ensure the gov't pays them, not the other way around. But let's say you are among the 75M tax filers that actually pay income taxes, try a little exercise and take the total taxes withheld and paid and divide it by your salary plus bonuses and commissions (if any), then multiply by 100 to determine your actual tax rate. Don't tell me your last dollar tax rate, don't use your Adjusted Gross Income, actual earnings and actual tax payments.
I bet you pay less than 10% taxes on your actual income.

--
Ken
Re: per person by kenh · 2018-01-18 06:57 · Score: 1

"When did dividends become 'tax-free'?" He asked the fellow that never collected a dividend in his life...
And they are repatriating $35BN, the rest is 'economic activity, like domestic manufacturing.

--
Ken
Re: per person by kenh · 2018-01-18 06:59 · Score: 1

A big part of the projected/promised economic activity is from domestic manufacturing of their devices in the near future. Something Steve Jobs said would never happen.

--
Ken
Re:per person by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 07:57 · Score: 0

Versus the $0 that would have never returned to the US. Smart alternative!

How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 06:54 · Score: 1

You know, the ones they weaseled out of by pretending they're an Irish company?!? Yeah, they're now paying some of it to the E.U., but that's still B.S. for America.

Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by sycodon · 2018-01-17 06:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

They were able to do that due to tax laws duly voted into existence by Congress. Or, by the unintended consequences of tax laws duly voted into existence by Congress.
Means, they did nothing illegal. As most companies who did similar things did nothing illegal.
The new Tax laws lesson the incentive to keep cash overseas. Add to that the Bully Pulpit effect and you have cash coming home and being taxed, albeit at a lower rate than if it were raised here. But to you want 30% of nothing or 10% of something?

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by 110010001000 · 2018-01-17 07:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

Who cares about "illegal"? This is Apple. They claim to be good global citizens. Meanwhile they are using slave labor to build their products and actively trying to avoid paying taxes. So they need to drop the whole SJW, good company act. Hypocrites.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:06 · Score: 0

You know, the ones they weaseled out of by pretending they're an Irish company?!? Yeah, they're now paying some of it to the E.U., but that's still B.S. for America.
Perhaps the U.S. Federal Government should assign a per-company sales tax that slides based on the taxes the company paid and the amount of profit they made (increase in share price + dividends paid to shareholders).
That is, if Apple shareholders make a ton of money, but the government notes a 0% corporate tax rate ... it could assign Apple a 50% federal sales tax for all products sold in the next calendar year.
Or: Since you didn't want to pay your taxes at the end, how about we collect it up front at the register?
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:28 · Score: 0

sounds like somebody didn't get that new iPhone they wanted for Christmas
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by sycodon · 2018-01-17 07:32 · Score: 0

News for ya...most electronics manufactures are using overseas manufacturing. I bet the computer you are using to post here was at least in part built by some 12 year old working for 50 cents a day.
Do you expect Apple to put itself at an economic disadvantage compared to other companies?

--
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by luis_a_espinal · 2018-01-17 07:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

Who cares about "illegal"? This is Apple. They claim to be good global citizens. Meanwhile they are using slave labor to build their products and actively trying to avoid paying taxes. So they need to drop the whole SJW, good company act. Hypocrites.
Slave labor? People aren't forced to work at FoxConn. Surely work conditions suck, but that doesn't mean people are held by chains without pay. They get paid, substantially more than what they would make back at the village, and many actually see it as a opportunity to climb up (which they do) as opposed to the many people we have here that do nothing to learn new skills and keep dreaming about having those level-pulling 9-5 jobs that are forever gone.
These workers are actually not the poorest from their village. Educationally they are the cream top from Rural China, and go there to climb up, not to escape rampant poverty.
I suggest you read "Factory Girls: From Village to City in a Changing China" by Leslie T. Chang. Obviously we want those workers to have better conditions (which they are getting, incrementally). And there is no doubt there is injustice in the system (in particular sexism.)
But to call the slave workers is just idiotic, and it simply demeans the very workers that chose to try their luck in the factory lines.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Killall+-9+Bash · 2018-01-17 08:13 · Score: 1

It amounts to the same thing. Corporations don't pay taxes, people do. corporate tax increases price of goods.

solution: set corporate tax to 0%. increase income tax on top bracket (who are the ones who own, and receive profit from the companies). This will shift the problem from corporate tax shelters being abused to personal tax shelters being abused.... but the difference is people can go to jail for breaking the law. Also, it will make America more attractive location for business.

--
"Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:29 · Score: 1

[citation needed]
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by tsa · 2018-01-17 08:30 · Score: 2

What mindless drivel. Corporations also use infrastructure and other things provided by the state so they have to pay for it.

--
-- Cheers!
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by LynnwoodRooster · 2018-01-17 08:32 · Score: 1

Using slave labor is bad, but trying to avoid taxation - that's OK. Do you take all the exemptions you can? Can we also accuse you of actively trying to avoid paying taxes?

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re: How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:37 · Score: 1

There are other stories out there as well. Iâ(TM)m on an iPhone and donâ(TM)t feel like ducking around looking for the articles without search in page.
Foxconn historically was a means of providing dowries for girls abandoned by the parents. Like the old stories of unwanted children dropped at the church doorstep, China had a one child per family law which caused parents to drown their daughters in order to be allowed to have a second chance to get a son. The government responded by actively outlawing this practice so parents started abandoning their daughters at government offices. This caused a massive number of girls to be âoestockpiledâ in government run dormitories/orphanages. When these girls reached working age 12-13 years old, some were expected to help care for the new babies as well as others who were given jobs.
The girls would then work for wages until they were old enough to be married off. They lived a life of something like indentured servitude. Their wages were basically withheld until they came of majority and their living conditions within the orphanage were taken from their savings.
It was never made clear in my readings whether they were required to repay the cost of the first 12-13 years of their existence. What was important though was that men from poor families would marry these girls to gain access to their dowries. The result would be something similar to government arranged marriages and the money earned by the women would allow them to start a farm or similar together.
Times have changed and between companies like Apple forcing better work conditions for Foxconnâ(TM)s employees... the girls are paid their wages and now young men can work at Foxconn as well and couples can meet and take their earnings to start life together. Many women choose to not live the farm life and instead choose the city life.
But for a very long time, Foxconn very definitely did âoeforceâ the girls to work there. Even now, the work age is generally too young. Because 13-14 year olds are excluded from the work-force, Foxconn has to convince girls 16-20 to stay on. Conditions are better and it is more elective. The environment and wages are better than many other places, mostly because being a direct supplier to foreign companies, they are more actively watched.
With the tremendous wage increases in China, where around 1990, $300 a year was common pay and now and assembly line worker earns $4400 a year on average.
If prices continue to increase, it may not be long before jobs become scarce as it is too expensive to employ these people.
Who knows. My information is probably as shitty as others. I remember learning most of it from a documentary which wasnâ(TM)t even in English 10 years ago.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:42 · Score: 1

exactly. I work for one of the large companies that does the exact same tax arrangements, I have no problem with it personally as they are only doing what is legal. But I get pissed when any of our management stand up at meetings and claim what a good corporate citizen our company is to the community and all the wonderful benefits they bring as with the tax arrangements it is still a massive net negative benefit. I few of us have even pointed even pointed out the hypocrisy of this on occasion in those meetings but usually get hushed up.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by upl8n87447 · 2018-01-17 08:44 · Score: 2

True, it's not slave labor, and I don't think we should necessarily complain that Apple gave Chinese people jobs. A human is a human afterall. What we should complain about is that Apple got away with paying their laborers pennies in the Chinese labor market while simultaneously raising the prices of their products in the US. In other words, they used cheap labor to drive their profits through the roof. On top of this, they used tax tricks to get out of paying their fair share back into the US economy.
If you really break down their strategy for what it is; they used Chinese laborers (and their weaker labor market) as a mechanism to generate a massive transfer of wealth from their many American customers (low/middle/upper classes) to the very few wealthiest individuals at the top. I have no problem with Chinese laborers; I have a problem with unethical companies like Apple who took advantage and with unethical government officials that passed the regulations for companies to take advantage of, that resulted in screwing their neighbors cumulatively out of a fortune.
A more balanced economical equation is to employ laborers that reflect the market so that higher employee pay results in more of the product sale proceeds to work its way back into the lower/middle classes. *OR* If a company uses foreign labor, their products sold in the US and profits made as a result should be taxed at a higher rate. That's fair.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Killall+-9+Bash · 2018-01-17 08:46 · Score: 1

except that they don't. We pay for it, directly or indirectly. If taxing corporations makes populists feel good, great, but that's all it accomplishes. We still pay the tax in the form of costlier goods.

--
"Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by upl8n87447 · 2018-01-17 08:55 · Score: 1

The market sets the price of goods. Tax rates may have an impact, but I'm doubtful that it's a 1-for-1 impact. If tax rates go up and Apple tries to raise the price of that $900 iPhone to $1000, then fewer people may buy the $1000 iPhone; requiring Apple to either lower their price back to $900 and take a lower margin on the sale, or sell less phones.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Dragonslicer · 2018-01-17 09:06 · Score: 1

solution: set corporate tax to 0%. increase income tax on top bracket (who are the ones who own, and receive profit from the companies). This will shift the problem from corporate tax shelters being abused to personal tax shelters being abused.... but the difference is people can go to jail for breaking the law. Also, it will make America more attractive location for business.
I'm pretty left-of-center (actual, global center, not what most of America calls "center"), and I would fully support this idea. I would also add, though, getting rid of loopholes that allow executives to have $0 personal income (e.g. the company paying all of their personal expenses like food and travel).
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by upl8n87447 · 2018-01-17 09:23 · Score: 1

There is a difference though. Tax exemptions on personal income is usually the result of spending money locally; effectively investing in the local economy. When you donate money to a church, or have a mortgage on a house, the money you spent is effectively circulated back into the economy. In Apple's case, they used tax *loopholes* to hold their profits overseas; neither paying taxes, nor investing the money back into the economy. The local (US) economy (including public entities/programs) invested substantial money into Apple that resulted in their products that generate massive profits worldwide. This could have been infrastructure such as water / roads / grid, protections such as our IP laws / military, our public education system that provided them a skilled workforce, etc...
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by LynnwoodRooster · 2018-01-17 09:55 · Score: 1

However, now that local taxes are more in-line with overseas taxes, Apple is repatriating those funds. They are no long held overseas. Additionally, if you think it is all held in cash, you are sorely mistaken! Most is held in short-term investments, often including bonds and stocks of other companies, which is in fact going back into the economy. And of course, more cash locally means easier to share dividends with shareholders and 401Ks/IRAs meaning more money in the economy.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re: How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 09:59 · Score: 0

âoeFair share.â I like that phrase. It immediately informs you youâ(TM)re dealing with a true parasite.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 10:46 · Score: 0

Being legal does not mean being right, and it's not surprising in the least that one of slashdot's resident conservatards would be the first defending such bullshit.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by upl8n87447 · 2018-01-17 11:08 · Score: 1

Stocks and bond investments don't result in a full transfer of wealth back into the economy. If it did, then the value of their investments would go to zero with the balance of those investments getting recirculated back into the economy. Instead, what likely happened is that they invested in companies that were safe and successful, and with the soaring stock market they made even more money. Government bonds are typically safe. I'm sure governments used it, but now Apple will be cashing them out with interest.
I'm more curious why the US government allowed for Apple to get away with using overseas tax havens to begin with, rather than forcing repatriation of those funds under the previous tax rates. Of course Apple will repatriate after their taxes get slashed substantially... It's also a good time for it with a hot economy. Heaven forbid they pay their tax dues when the economy is most in need of it. Who knows what type of impact that had on our weak economy a few years ago when the economy was desperate for the money. How many negative economic effects did that have?
Yes, shareholders will make a lot more money if Apple buys back their stock; but it's also true that shareholders are, by and large, already the wealthiest people in the country. This is the trickle down theory; these people will get more money and spend it, and eventually all the money will trickle down. What do people with so much money that they invest substantial portions of it in the stock market plan to do with even more money?
Yet, the money that Apple kept out of the country to begin with has absolutely already had a negative impact on the poor/middle class in this country.
Apple may have done everything legally and may be considered smart for using every tax loophole they could find... but has it done any favors for our economy / society? There's the real question. At the end of the day, I'd rather see a society with a better distribution of wealth and fair tax policy where companies can't get away with these silly loopholes.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anubis+IV · 2018-01-17 11:19 · Score: 1

Cut the unhelpful "slave labor" hyperbole. There is actual, real slave labor still going on today, but so far as we know Apple is not involved with it in any way.
While situations certainly aren't ideal in the countries where much of Apple's manufacturing takes place, those problems pre-date Apple's existence as a company and go far beyond Apple's influence in the global community, so you can't expect them or any other individual organization to fix the issues instantly. Apple, among many others, seems to have a self-interest in keeping their reputation as clean as possible, which is evidenced by the steady stream of reforms and improvements in the supply chain, both on the manufacturing and mining side of things. It's still not anywhere close to perfect, but it's far, far, far better than it was a decade or two ago, with changes occurring on a regular basis.
And cut the false moral dilemma. If Apple's tax avoidance is legal (which—based on your disregard for the question of legality*—you seem to have ceded for the sake of argument), then you're suggesting that they must over pay their taxes unnecessarily lest they cease being a "good company". That's bull. Choosing to pay only what is required is not evil.
The fact is, while Apple's accounting tools are far more sophisticated than ours and their motivations are almost certainly not altruistic, that money is (until the laws change) still theirs to keep, and they aren't any more "not good" for keeping it than you are "not good" for itemizing your deductions. Hell, we can even imagine scenarios where it'd be downright immoral for them to pay excess taxes, such as if they believed that the government would squander the funds or that they were more capable of using those funds to better society. On the flip side, many of us (myself included) will argue that Apple should be paying those taxes, but we'll also acknowledge that they are under no legal obligation to do so, so the proper way to fix that problem is through legislation, not a guilt-trip. So long as the legal avenue remains open, I don't fault Apple or any other company for taking advantage of it, any more than I would fault an individual for realizing capital losses to gain a tax advantage.
All of which is to say, if you want to suggest Apple isn't doing enough to fix the supply chain, fine. If you want to suggest that Apple should be paying more taxes, fine. Those are good discussions we should be having. But claiming "they are using slave labor" doesn't help the discussion at all, and your unhelpful attempt to paint the moral situation with a black-and-white brush disregards the numerous and complex moral considerations at play.
*I'm also setting aside the topic of legality, so my comments are strictly with regards to their use of legal tax avoidance practices, and not to any illegal tax evasion they may be engaging in, such as what may be the case with the illegal state aid they allegedly received from Ireland. I have no qualms in categorically condemning any illegal activities they may be engaging in.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 11:29 · Score: 0

Oh son, lemme tell you a story about "they aren't forced to work..." mythology.
Way back in the middle of the 20th century, a company called Del Monte conspired with the government of central american countries and bought up all the fertile land that farmers had been working for centuries.
The farmers were then forced to leave the best land and make do on mountainous hillsides, which severely reduced their efficiency and lead to starvation.
The only game in town was to work at del monte plants, on the land they used to own, for wages that could barely feed their families.
Fast forward to the 80's and 90's, and you have conservatives claiming that Del Monte is doing them a favor by giving them jobs, otherwise they'd be poor and starving.
That's why your claim, while technically true, completely misses the context and imperial/capitalist power structures that create poverty in the first place.
It's like pointing a gun to your kids head and forcing you to suck my dick. By your logic: technically I'm not pointing a gun at your head, so you DO have a choice.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by swillden · 2018-01-17 11:46 · Score: 1

Who cares about "illegal"? This is Apple. They claim to be good global citizens.
Do you claim to be a good citizen? Do you take any legal tax deduction you can?

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 13:47 · Score: 0

Means, they did nothing illegal. As most companies who did similar things did nothing illegal.
A pretty good example of why illegal and immoral are different things.
And before someone jumps in and claims that Apple is amoral rather than immoral: I'm not talking about Apple, I'm talking about the people running the company.
And no, that a company must do everything they can to economically benefit the shareholders is a myth.
It is perfectly legal for a company to tell their shareholders that they do things ethically at this company and that the shareholders can go elsewhere if they don't like it.
A company can also be founded with another goal than to generate profit for their shareholders.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 13:56 · Score: 0

exactly. I work for one of the large companies that does the exact same tax arrangements, I have no problem with it personally as they are only doing what is legal.
Did you know that in total more taxes are evaded/avoided than are paid?
The consequence of this is that the people that can't do this kind of tax arrangement (That means you.) pays twice as much tax as they would have to if everyone paid their fair share. (Or the government would have twice as much money to work with and wouldn't need to increase the deficit.)
Are you really that OK with the company taking that money from you and pocketing it?
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by deathguppie · 2018-01-17 18:13 · Score: 1

The company owns the housing and the food. They set the prices to make sure that people can't make enough to do anything except survive. If it isn't slave labor by name it is in practice.

--
once more into the breach
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by tsa · 2018-01-17 18:20 · Score: 1

I know. I live in a tax haven too (the Netherlands). It's not fair to squeeze all taxes out of the working population and give companies the freedom to do as they like without it having any consequences dor them.

--
-- Cheers!
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by AmiMoJo · 2018-01-17 20:53 · Score: 1

If only it was like that. In reality many of those people are desperate, they are extremely poor and Foxconn is one of the few reliable sources of income available. Their family probably still grows it own food just to survive. Things like health insurance are unheard of.
This creates immense pressure on those workers. If they quit then it cuts off a vital source of income for their families.

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 22:24 · Score: 0

Apple's foreign cash reserves consist of money made abroad. It cannot be repatriated to the US. It was never in the US to begin with.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 02:23 · Score: 0

Apple paid taxes on the profits made in the US. Why should they pay taxes to the US on profit made in other countries which was already taxed by those countries?
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by luis_a_espinal · 2018-01-21 01:05 · Score: 1

The company owns the housing and the food. They set the prices to make sure that people can't make enough to do anything except survive. If it isn't slave labor by name it is in practice.
People can quit (and many times they do, they go "fuck it, I'm going back home"). So, no, it's not slavery.
Re:How about just paying their f*@king taxes? by luis_a_espinal · 2018-01-21 01:07 · Score: 1

If only it was like that. In reality many of those people are desperate, they are extremely poor and Foxconn is one of the few reliable sources of income available. Their family probably still grows it own food just to survive. Things like health insurance are unheard of.
This creates immense pressure on those workers. If they quit then it cuts off a vital source of income for their families.
No, it is not. Talk to Chinese people. Or I would take my own experience growing up in a very poor country. The people going to work at Foxconn aren't escaping survival conditions. They are escaping lack of opportunities. Having grown up seeing those two, I can tell you they are not the same.
Believe me. Or not. It's all the same.

#MAGA by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 06:55 · Score: 0

And I thought Trumps tax plan would bankrupt america.

Re: #MAGA by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:28 · Score: 0

The economy would be way better if we still had slavery. Abraham Lincoln fucked everything up. I want to dig up his skull and put another hole in it.
WITH MY DICK!!!!

right by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 06:56 · Score: 0

"We have a deep sense of responsibility to give back to our country and the people who help make our success possible," ... says the biggest tax cheat in recorded history

Re:right by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:00 · Score: 0

"We have a deep sense of responsibility to give back to our country and the people who help make our success possible," ... says the biggest tax cheat in recorded history next to Trump.
FTFY
Re:right by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:02 · Score: 0

Meanwhile, Cook has admitted to aiding and abetting criminals.
ICE needs to take a tour of the new campus.
Re:right by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:04 · Score: 0

We have a deep sense of responsibility to give back to our country and the people who help make our success possible...
...but only when the corporate tax rate is lower than 34%.
Re:right by LynnwoodRooster · 2018-01-17 08:36 · Score: 2

Why not? We had the highest marginal rate, and one of the highest average and effective rates in the G20. Our biggest competitors - Germany, China, France, India - all enjoyed much lower marginal average, and effective corporate tax rates. Why shouldn't we be more in-line with our competition?

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re:right by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 14:40 · Score: 0

US taxes overall are way below average http://www.oecd.org/tax/revenu...
Re:right by LynnwoodRooster · 2018-01-18 06:29 · Score: 1

First off, your data is about entire tax load including individuals - we're talking corporate tax rates here. Do you have anything that says US corporate tax rates were lower than the OECD average? Second, take a look at your own data, the second page. The US is higher - or even - in just about every category EXCEPT for VAT. We don't have a national VAT, we have individual State/County/City sales taxes. And those aren't counted at all. When you look at total tax receipts across all jurisdictions, you'll find we're quite close as a whole. But hey - ignore a major source of funding for our various levels of Government and things look fabulous! Remove the VAT from the OECD calculations and you'll find the US is quite high, actually...

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re:right by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 13:19 · Score: 0

How about this from the same link you just mentioned...

Equal to the OECD average from taxes on corporate income & gains
and

A lower proportion of revenues from social security contributions
Seems the US isn't higher after all.
And this bit

Tax revenue includes net receipts for all levels of government;
Clearly shows you didn't read it properly or are just bullshitting again.
You people always like to claim that state taxes etc aren't counted, but they often are. Yours is just a knee jerk reaction to facts that don't confirm what you want to believe.

He who shall not be named... by swan5566 · 2018-01-17 06:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

...in a positive light?

--
In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.

Re:He who shall not be named... by Gilgaron · 2018-01-17 07:06 · Score: 0

Mitch and Paul wrote the tax bill, I doubt Trump has ever seen a W-2 in person.
Re:He who shall not be named... by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2018-01-17 07:14 · Score: 1

You think either McConnell or Ryan have seen a W-2 in person? All these guys employ other guys who deal with dirty little stuff like W-2s and tell them what laws need to be changed to make them even more millions.
(actually, I should have said "needed to be changed" - they just gave themselves a huge payout a few weeks ago)

--
#DeleteChrome
Re:He who shall not be named... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:00 · Score: 0

Mitch and Paul wrote the tax bill, I doubt Trump has ever seen a W-2 in person.
That doesn't stop every "news" outlet from claiming anything and everything bad happening is solely and directly Trump's fault.
Re:He who shall not be named... by swan5566 · 2018-01-17 08:38 · Score: 1

As someone who moderately leans to the right, I agree that a lot of the treatment of Obama wasn't justified.

--
In debates about Christianity, there are two groups: those looking for answers, and those looking to just ask questions.
Re: He who shall not be named... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 11:57 · Score: 0

Trump would look a lot worse if he stuck to the facts.
FTFY. Which of course, is why Trump presents his alternatives so vigorously.
Which means he looks twice as bad.
Just look at his recent lie about terrorism, a concoction of misrepresented statistics and slanted data. Why?

This definitely doesn't pass the wiff test. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 06:58 · Score: 0

This sound like BS. Especially with there products loosing favor with the public (or demand going down whatever).

Re:This definitely doesn't pass the wiff test. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:14 · Score: 0

" there products loosing"
Dude, go to class. Quit skipping school.

AT&T and Walmart followed up with LAYOFFS by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:01 · Score: 5, Informative

Thursday morning, Walmart had a flashy announcement: Thanks to corporate tax cuts, it was giving its employees bonuses of up to $1,000. Walmart and President Trump pointed to the announcement as proof that the corporate tax cuts are really a boon to working-class Americans.
This announcement, as ThinkProgress reported earlier, was much more complicated than it first sounds.

Walmart employees are eligible for the $1,000 bonus only if theyâ(TM)ve worked at the company for 20 years. Most Walmart employees, of course, havenâ(TM)t worked there that long. Those employees will receive a smaller bonus based on seniority. Walmart didnâ(TM)t explain exactly how the sliding scale will work, but said the total value of the bonuses will be $400 million. Walmart has about 2.1 million employees, which works out to be an average bonus of about $190.

The one-time bonus Walmart announced this morning amounts to just over 2 percent of the total value of the tax cut to the company.

In fiscal year 2017, Walmart had pre-tax profits of about $20.5 billion and paid an effective federal tax rate of around 30 percent. With a new corporate tax rate of 21 percent, the corporate tax cut is worth at least $1.85 billion to Walmart every year. Since this cut is permanent, the true benefits to Walmart will grow much larger over time. But itâ(TM)s safe to say that, over 10 years, this corporate tax cut will be worth over $18 billion to Walmart.

But now it appears the announcement was timed carefully to cover for thousands of unannounced layoffs.

Business Insider reports that today, Walmart is abruptly closing numerous Samâ(TM)s Clubs stores across the United States. In some cases âoeemployees were not informed of the closures prior to showing up to work on Thursdayâ and âoelearned that their store would be closing when they found the storeâ(TM)s doors locked and a notice announcing the closure.â

citation provided

Re: AT&T and Walmart followed up with LAYOFFS by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:11 · Score: 0

In the future, when your citation is "Think Progress", you should probably put that at the top of your rant so that we know not to bother reading the rest of it.
Thanks in advance.
Re: AT&T and Walmart followed up with LAYOFFS by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:26 · Score: 0

In the future when blaming the messenger for reality, try to make sure that you aren't just whining about having read something accurate which has been completely misrepresented to the public.
Re: AT&T and Walmart followed up with LAYOFFS by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:33 · Score: 0

Agreed! I never heard of think progress before. Just a sampling of the stories on their front page show they are a liberal cum rag of a news site.
This one alone takes the cake from the few minutes i spent on there.
https://thinkprogress.org/puerto-rico-trump-power-failure-313fe10bd06d/
Hurricane Irma never directly hit the island, and really fucking hurricane Wilma? That one was all the way on the west side of the Caribbean, it was never anywhere close to PR.
Re: AT&T and Walmart followed up with LAYOFFS by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:03 · Score: 0

Again, you are criticizing a report that is 100% accurate.
Puerto Rico's restoration of electrical power is not being done as quickly as any other American hurricane.
PR has its own grid problems and is an island, but with the cronyism and incompetence that the Trump administration has had a giant measurable impact on the very slow pace of power restoration in Puerto Rico.
At this point we really just need to make Puerto Rico a normal US state so that their citizens have a voice in electing the next president, and the president has an incentive to restore power quickly after a hurricane.
Re: AT&T and Walmart followed up with LAYOFFS by b0s0z0ku · 2018-01-17 08:35 · Score: 1

Or let PR leave. PR can be a member of CARICOM or maybe even the EU (former Spanish possession) -- it would actually be better off than under the US banking system and under the thumb of antiquated US laws like the Jones act.

Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:04 · Score: 0

Just wait. Recession is coming. More markets rise, harder they'll fall.

Initial unemployment claims are starting to tick up. Leading indicator.

I'm not upset. I'm actually rooting for a repeat of 2001 and 2008. Nothing nicer than buying a Trumpkin's home at auction and renting it out to a hard-working immigrant family. (After giving them 24 hours to vacate.)

Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:21 · Score: 0, Funny

Unfortunately for the doomsayers, we have no bubbles; we have true solid growth. The only thing approaching a bubble is Bitcoin, but that is a new market.
Sorry to disappoint you, but with Libertarians at the helm, the US economy has the highest Dow numbers ever, and this only will continue to happen over the next seven years.
Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:28 · Score: 0

... said everyone right before a bubble popped. As I said. It will be HILARIOUS to watch dot.bomb 2.0 unfold.
It's always different this time, until the piper gets paid. But yeah, I encourage Trump supporters to mortgage their homes to buy Bitcoin.
Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:31 · Score: 0

yup, been saving like a mofo these last few years, cant wait for the crash so I can do some spending
Re: Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:34 · Score: 0

LOL
Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:45 · Score: 0

Bitcoin
Real estate values around the world
Car loans
Educational debt
Price of fine art
Stocks blasting upwards despite no real improvement in overall business for most companies
Appy app app companies worth billions despite making no real cash
Streaming services pumping billions into content hardly anyone watches
Nope. No bubble. None at all.
Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:48 · Score: 1

Ah, remember the heady days of 2007 going into 2008?
Dow at 14000, hurrah! Bush's policies are amazing. America will boom.... oh, shit, hello 2008 banking crisis economic collapse permanent bailout economy...
Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by sixoh1 · 2018-01-17 08:07 · Score: 1

Labor indicators are much more volatile than others, but the signals are highly mixed because of major contrarian macro-economic things the Fed undertook post 2008 - QE, QE2, QE ad-infinadum. This is a little like the S&L bust in the mid 80s but in reverse. Instead of a giant drain on available cash & capital for large businesses, instead we've essentially hollowed out the entire capital market for the small businesses. As the Fed increased QE to pump in "liquidity" it was making sole proprieterships harder to run as capital often will flow to the lowest risk with stable returns.
Look at the housing market - growth has not been in single-family dwellings, instead lots of capital has gone into new multi-tennant dwellings and high-end. Both of these are now going to be hit hard by the tax changes. High end housing is being slapped by the SALT and mortgage changes, while leased properties depend on a large supply of families without sufficient capital to purchase a starter property.
On the corporate front, if you look at where large-cap firms have spent their money up till now it has been quite sparse on the capital expenditure front, lots of stock buy-backs and such meant to goose share prices in absence of revenue and income growth. Aside from oil, very little of the hoarded cash and injected cash from the fed was spent on re-tooling and factory upgrades (domestic US that is). Now we're seeing countless announcements of re-tooling, and even surprisingly a number of factory moves _ON_ shore such as the Mazda plant in the southeast and claimed moves of auto production lines from Mexico back to Detroit! That's not possible unless there's capital ready to spend on these investments and the companies think they'll get that money back from revenue.
If you want to know when (not if) the bubble will pop, don't look at bitcoin and Dow Jones Industrials - look at their capital expenditures, as soon as that starts to dry up either we'll see a big market contraction, or the in-flow of capital will have flowed to the workers and personal spending will have caught up. Like we're at least a year out from the next contraction, or it could be 2-3 years before we see the economy get tired of the growth and build up enough errors to start shrinking again.
Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 02:26 · Score: 0

Then put your money where your mouth is and sell any stocks, mutual funds to avoid the losses from this coming recession.
Re:Re-cess-ion is coming ... to town. by q_e_t · 2018-01-18 07:07 · Score: 1

Without QE, the banks certainly wouldn't have lent money to anyone with any amount of risk, as they would have had very slim capital adequacy to play with.

Correction by Oswald+McWeany · 2018-01-17 07:06 · Score: 0

Apple Executives will receive $349 billion over the next 5 years. A small percentage of that will be used to buy US made goods and services; the rest invested around the world.

--
"That's the way to do it" - Punch

Bingo. by b0s0z0ku · 2018-01-17 07:07 · Score: 1, Informative

Bingo.

The $1000 bonuses will go to top Walmart brass...

Meanwhile, on page 20, Walmart closed a bunch of Sam's Club stores and laid off their entire staff.

Re:Bingo. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:46 · Score: 0

Literally 5 seconds of google shows this as total garbage. Bonus are not going just to "top brass". Per CNBC min wages are going up, and bonuses for most employees. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/11/walmart-to-boost-starting-wage-give-employees-bonus-after-tax-bill.html
Closing under performing stores has literally nothing to do with the tax situation. Or would you prefer they be required to keep all stores open regardless of losses?
Re:Bingo. by b0s0z0ku · 2018-01-17 08:00 · Score: 1

The $1000 bonuses only go to workers with 20 years' service. Look it up -- MULTIPLE sources say the same thing.
Re:Bingo. by tsqr · 2018-01-17 09:03 · Score: 2

The $1000 bonuses only go to workers with 20 years' service. Look it up -- MULTIPLE sources say the same thing.
OK, I looked it up. The retail giant said the pay raises would take effect Feb. 17 and the bonuses paid sometime after this month. It also plans to give one-time cash bonuses to some part-time and full-time workers, ranging from $200 (for workers who have been at Walmart for less than two years) to $1,000 (for those who have been working there for 20 or more years).
Re:Bingo. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 11:36 · Score: 0

the bonuses range from $200 to $1000.
and a bonus in that range is nothing compared to the $10,000 they now have to pay in healthcare which is being scuttled by the GOP.
remember when that war criminal Bush Jr gave everyone $300 cash with Clinton's surplus the summer of 2001 and then drove the economy into the ground?
Re:Bingo. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 12:56 · Score: 0

If you look close at the locations that they closed...
it's all ghetto shitholes.
You're racist if you don't let them rob you blind?

doh by Tailhook · 2018-01-17 07:25 · Score: 1

Yesterday we saw Apple fanbois bemoan the "Apple Shaming Society" when a story appeared about the shameful working conditions at less visible suppliers in China. Today, however, the fanbois will find very little to like about this news; validating Trumpanzian tax policy is not what they want to see from their gadget god.

Not at all.

--
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!

Not at all by SuperKendall · 2018-01-17 07:38 · Score: 2

I think you overlook those who view Trump, the tax law, and Apple all as positive things. It's way more people than you might think...

Android and Apple devices are so widespread I don't think you can derive much political leanings from them.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

They are paying the taxes, that is the point by SuperKendall · 2018-01-17 07:40 · Score: 2

A large sum of money is going to be re-patriety now that the tax law makes more sense and is in line with other countries... Apple is going to be paying hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. taxes bringing money back to the U.S.

Just where did you think this money was coming from anyway?

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by smooth+wombat · 2018-01-17 08:10 · Score: 2

and is in line with other countries

You know what other countries do as well? They have low corporate tax rates and high personal tax rates. Many European countries have tax rates of 50% on personal income.

If we're going to go "in line with other countries", it only seems right to go whole hog and crank up the personal tax rates as well.

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by SuperKendall · 2018-01-17 08:58 · Score: 1

Anyone is welcome to add as much extra tax as they like. Have you personally contributed extra in your life a tall, much less a total of 50%? No? HMM.
Just because someone sets fire to their leg doesn't mean I plan to follow. Apparently haver low corporate rates AND low personal rates is the best idea since we flourish while they languish.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by smooth+wombat · 2018-01-17 09:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

Apparently haver low corporate rates AND low personal rates is the best idea since we flourish while they languish.

False. Europe is flourishing despite having high personal tax rates. Lower debt, higher standard of living. European countries are consistently ranked at the top in worldwide surveys for quality of life and happiness in general, not to mention education. Guess where the U.S. ranks in those categories? Like broadband, not even in the top 10 of the world.

As to the canard of paying more than one has to for taxes, look at Mississippi and Alabama for what happens when people think paying taxes is wrong. Talk about shitholes.

--
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Re: They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 10:50 · Score: 0

Back? This money has never been in the US. It's all profits made in other countries.
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by CodeInspired · 2018-01-17 11:26 · Score: 0

I like to judge my standard of living based on my own personal accord. Not some dubious metric that is applied to an entire country. Have you ever talked to someone who lives in Alabama or Mississippi? I'm willing to bet the majority of them could scrounge up enough money to move to California and live the happy high-tax paying life. Why do you suppose they don't?
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by swillden · 2018-01-17 11:50 · Score: 1

and is in line with other countries You know what other countries do as well? They have low corporate tax rates and high personal tax rates.

And they don't tax overseas earnings at all.

If we're going to go "in line with other countries", it only seems right to go whole hog and crank up the personal tax rates as well.
I agree with that. We should abolish corporate taxes entirely and instead fund the government with individual taxes -- including a healthy capital gains tax rate. The reason is that corporations never actually pay taxes anyway; the money always comes from some mixture of investors, employees and customers. Better to tax those people directly rather than trying to hide it by pretending to tax the corporation. Then the legislature can make sure that the tax burden is allocated the way public policy wants, rather than the way corporate execs decide, too.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 14:28 · Score: 0

Have you ever talked to someone who lives in Alabama or Mississippi?
I am going to take a wild guess that you aren't the kind of person to talk to homeless people.
Right wing politics doesn't push everyone down. It pushes people to the extremes.
The lower end falls out from society and those who are left aren't the ones who would complain.
Left wing politics tend to push people to the middle. You won't have the extreme rich anymore but you also won't have people who starve.
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 15:58 · Score: 0

Well, if he's in Alabama or Mississippi he doesn't have as many homeless people around to talk to. The "left wing" states like California and New York dwarf any other state by number of homeless people.
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 16:01 · Score: 0

Homeless per capita, to head off that argument. Per capita only makes the situation look worse.
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Demena · 2018-01-17 18:58 · Score: 1

If you call the lousy medical outcomes in your country "flourishing" you have to be young.
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 22:21 · Score: 0

To be fair, it is usually only the highest tax bracket that comes close to 50%. Most people pay something around 30-35% in income taxes. Additionally, their taxes buy include most or all of the cost of healthcare and education, which Americans have to pay for separately.
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 02:04 · Score: 0

because they are as dumb as you?
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 02:22 · Score: 0

Anyone is welcome to add as much extra tax as they like. Have you personally contributed extra in your life a tall, much less a total of 50%? No? HM
Exactly right. And we know that every single anti-Trump Apple employee, or not even just Apple employees, every anti-Trump employee getting a bonus or higher paychecks because of the Trump tax plan is going to take all the extra money they get and give it back to the government so they can stick it to Trump,
right? You're all going to add that extra to your tax form and send them a check, right?
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 04:41 · Score: 0

Pretty racist that you describe states that have some of the largest African-American populations as "shitholes".
Re:They are paying the taxes, that is the point by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 11:49 · Score: 0

False. Europe is flourishing despite having high personal tax rates. Lower debt, higher standard of living. European countries are consistently ranked at the top in worldwide surveys for quality of life and happiness in general, not to mention education. Guess where the U.S. ranks in those categories? Like broadband, not even in the top 10 of the world.
Actually, personal debt rates in some European countries are extremely high - and they have much better regulation than the USA does.
In the USA, credit card companies just bribe the nearest politician with a "campaign contribution" to let them get away with all kinds of bad things, which creates high levels of debt.
The high personal debt rates of these European countries, on the other hand, are a consequence of the high taxes. Those policies do not come for free.
Another consequence of high taxes is extremely high black market participation. Some of Scandinavian countries have over 50% of the population participating in black markets. The corresponding rate for the USA is less than 1/3 of that.
The ideal would be to come up with a balance between the two extremes: taxes should be low enough to avoid the problems Europe is seeing, while high enough to provide reasonable government. Further, regulation of debt along European lines is long overdue in the USA.
A lot of the problems in the USA are not actually in the tax rates, it's in how money is spent. The USA has deeply entrenched corruption in the two major political parties - and that means a lot of money is not spent wisely. It makes this problem worse by having a massively unethical legal profession that has created a legal system riddled with conflicts of interest - this in turn creates overhead that compounds throughout the logistics chains needed to produce all goods and services - raising the cost of everything in the same manner as a regressive tax.
The net effect of these two problems is a lot of wasted money: if we were to fix these problems they could both pay off all government debt and simultaneously do better at helping with quality of life. That would probably also reduce the gun violence (legalizing pot would help with that as well). A corrupt unethical state will necessarily have some serious public health problems with mental health, problems that won't occur or will be far less serious in states run along more competent lines. People have to have some hope for the future, or bad things happen.

As to the canard of paying more than one has to for taxes, look at Mississippi and Alabama for what happens when people think paying taxes is wrong. Talk about shitholes.
It's popular in blue circles to bash these two states.
However, a lot of this results from ignorance (plenty of ignorance on the red side, too, but this particular issue is more blue).
The simple fact of the matter is that you end up with a lot of poor people in places where the cost of living is low. It's not solely a reflection of the government (though low taxes help), and it doesn't mean a location is a bad place to live.
In both of those states, the weather greatly reduces the cost of living: people don't need to spent enormous amounts on insulation and heating (air conditioning is much less expensive, this is why building codes in Southern states are so much more lenient than in Northern states). Also, people can more easily grow some of their own food, or purchase it locally at low cost, with multiple crops a year - and staple crops are readily available (California growers focus more on luxuries, not staples).
It doesn't require a farm to grow food that provides a useful supplement to the diet, just some space on an apartment balcony or a plot in a community garden. Even a windowsill can be enough to grow herbs or other small plants, at a very low cost.
Also, in these places water is more readily available, and you don't to be wealthy to own a small house (unlike California).
Th

"labor saving devices" by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:43 · Score: 0

If computers are "labor saving devices", then more computers equals fewer jobs.

Re:"labor saving devices" by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:46 · Score: 0

Get some skills and learn to code bro.
Re:"labor saving devices" by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:21 · Score: 0

Get some skills and learn to code bro.
please tell us more about this language "bro" and where one can get a job working with it
you really don't have a clue, do you?

Two corrections - 38 *billion* in taxes by SuperKendall · 2018-01-17 07:48 · Score: 3, Informative

The first correction - "re-patrriety" (whatever the hell that is) should be "re-patriated".

Secondly, that re-patriation will cause Apple to pay a one-time payment of 38 BILLION dollars in taxes to the U.S. Is that enough to slate your dramatic thirst for Apple's cash?

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Sound like more by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:50 · Score: 0

Lies and bullshit from apple.

Thank you President Trump! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:51 · Score: 0

Sorry to say Obamaâ(TM)s 8 years ruined this country. Thank goodness Clinton didnâ(TM)t win. That was a bullet dodged.

No real improvement???? by SuperKendall · 2018-01-17 07:53 · Score: 1

Stocks blasting upwards despite no real improvement in overall business for most companies

How is a drop in corporate taxes from 35 to 21% not a VAST improvement in every business in the US? I mean, without any changes products that were marginal in profitability are suddenly wildly profitable. Who knows what kind of new businesses are now possible that would not have been possible with that kind of tax overhead. That is a huge improvement which is why the stock market is rocketing.

Not going to argue with the rest of your choices except a little quibble about Bitcoin, but I agree it's still speculative. Real estate prices will come down in some regions, but only ones that are trending towards shithole status. For others they will keep rising.

Also the streaming service race does seem a bit absurd but the long tail and halo effect are powerful forces there to help pay back costs.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:No real improvement???? by plague911 · 2018-01-17 08:14 · Score: 2

That is not how profitability works. If a project costs 1 billion but generates 11 billion revenue, now the company gets to keep 79% instead of 65%. If that project generated 1 billion in revenue they could still keep 0 profit. If a project generated only .8 billion, they will loose .2 billion....... The result is that ZERO new business opportunities are now profitable. You portray yet another myth of conservative "economics" which basically stem from zero understanding of the basic economic, accounting,capitalistic theories.

CEO is a lier by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 07:56 · Score: 0

"We have a deep sense of responsibility to give back to our country and the people who help make our success possible," chief executive Tim Cook said in a statement.

Right here. If you ever need a definition of what a lying cunt is, Tim Cook is it.

Other way champ by SuperKendall · 2018-01-17 07:59 · Score: 2, Informative

Initial unemployment claims are starting to tick up. Leading indicator.

Actually unemployment claims are at a 44 year low...

As you say - leading indicator.

I'm not upset. I'm actually rooting for a repeat of 2001 and 2008. Nothing nicer than buying a Trumpkin's home at auction

You mean the ones that bought stock after Trump got elected and are living the good life now? Yeah I guess they might be selling the house for a hefty profit and move into something larger, probably not at Christies though... not that you could afford anything a Trump supporter would deign to sell you.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Other way champ by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:13 · Score: 0

Initial claims are ticking up, which is what matters as a leading indicator... tick ... tock ... tick ... tock.
Re:Other way champ by sixoh1 · 2018-01-17 09:13 · Score: 1

not that you could afford anything a Trump supporter would deign to sell you.
You seem to suggest here that Trump supporters own the expensive properties?
I'm just going to put this here.... (20 to 1 ratio of Billionaire donors to Clinton campaign)
https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
Re: Other way champ by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 09:33 · Score: 0

Eh, that's just because Trump personally donated $500 million of his own to his campaign (just as he promised), so he didn't need those other billionaires. A drop in the bucket of his Huge net worth, which is at least $100 billion.

You are so FULL OF SHIT by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:09 · Score: 0

Video of progtard opinions "tax cuts don't mean higher wages" interspersed with actual news reports of increases in wages, benefits, and bonuses

Watching that has got to HURT a useful idiot who actually thinks "ThinkProgress" is a source.

Awwww, Obama's failures at "remaking" the US economy on progtard lines like Venezuela and Greece are being laid bare.

And yes, "remake the US economy" is a progtard dog whistle for failed socialist/redistributionist "FWEEE STUFFZ!!!" bullshit.

Re:You are so FULL OF SHIT by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:23 · Score: 0

Can't tell if you are an 'English as a second language' bot, or a severely mentally retarded republican who has been huffing Sarah Palin's blood stained panties to the point of major brain damage.
But I guess that's the point, isn't it...
Republicans are on average so mentally retarded that you just assume malevolent foreign bots, domestic traitors, and generally deranged people are somehow just average republicans.

Simple math by pjrc · 2018-01-17 08:10 · Score: 1

20,000 jobs is pretty skinny for 350 billion "contributed" to the economy.

Even if all 20,000 of those people are paid $100,000/year, their pay would be only 2 of the 350 billion, or just over half of 1%.

A lot of money will be going somewhere, but probably not to workers.

--
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools

Re:Simple math by Carbonite · 2018-01-17 09:25 · Score: 1

It's a little more complicated though:
The $350B is over 5 years, so assuming the same $100k base salary/person/year that's $10B.
Also, the "fully loaded cost" of an employee is often 2x base salary once benefits (health insurance, retirement, etc...), bonus, overhead (rent, equipment) are taken into account. So the cost to Apple for those 20,000 employees is likely around $20B total.
That's about 5.7%, not an insignificant amount, either in dollar or as fraction of the total spend. Of course, folks are free to debate whether the amount could/should be even higher....

--
ich muß mehr Kuhglocke haben
Re:Simple math by scatbomb · 2018-01-17 09:26 · Score: 1

20,000 jobs is pretty skinny for 350 billion "contributed" to the economy.
Even if all 20,000 of those people are paid $100,000/year, their pay would be only 2 of the 350 billion, or just over half of 1%.
A lot of money will be going somewhere, but probably not to workers.
In other words, worker salaries are a small part of the investment. Who'd have thought a semiconductor company has expenses other than salaries? Also, you forgot "over the next 5 years" in your maths.
Re:Simple math by rtb61 · 2018-01-17 15:28 · Score: 1

All about security. The is a growing push for local tech production in all infrastructure areas, as a matter of state security. Source tech from another country and make no mistake that country owns your digital future, they can switch you off, dangerous stuff. With that push, so more countries will locally tech develop or set up trusted security partnerships with other countries (anyone who trust the US is a bloody idiot and the US has most emphatically proved that over the last couple of decades, absolutely not to be trusted and that is by it's own citizens as well, a sorry state of affairs).

--
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen

Meaningless by quantaman · 2018-01-17 08:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

Companies have been re-branding existing expansions as the result of Dear Leader since election day.

Why should I now believe this expansion happened because of Trump or the tax law? It's not like Apple was previously short of cash or didn't need to expand their workforce.

--
I stole this Sig

Re:Meaningless by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 09:41 · Score: 0

Companiesâ(TM) haveâ(TM) beenâ(TM) re-brandingâ(TM) existingâ(TM) expansionsâ(TM) asâ(TM) theâ(TM) resultâ(TM) ofâ(TM) Dearâ(TM) Leaderâ(TM) sinceâ(TM) electionâ(TM) dayâ(TM).
Whyâ(TM) shouldâ(TM) Iâ(TM) nowâ(TM) believeâ(TM) thisâ(TM) expansionâ(TM) happenedâ(TM) becauseâ(TM) ofâ(TM) Trumpâ(TM) orâ(TM) theâ(TM) taxâ(TM) law?â(TM) Itâ(TM)s notâ(TM) likeâ(TM) Appleâ(TM) wasâ(TM) previouslyâ(TM) shortâ(TM) ofâ(TM) cashâ(TM) orâ(TM) didn'tâ(TM) needâ(TM) toâ(TM) expandâ(TM) theirâ(TM) workforce.â(TM)
Re:Meaningless by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 09:50 · Score: 0

Read Tim Cook's past statements about not bringing the money back to the US at the existing 35% tax rate. It's well documented. He said he would only bring it home when the tax laws were changed to be more favorable to business in the US.
If you haven't figured it out already... higher taxes = money leaves to find a lower tax location. Pay attention!
Re:Meaningless by quantaman · 2018-01-17 11:00 · Score: 1

Read Tim Cook's past statements about not bringing the money back to the US at the existing 35% tax rate. It's well documented. He said he would only bring it home when the tax laws were changed to be more favorable to business in the US.
If you haven't figured it out already... higher taxes = money leaves to find a lower tax location. Pay attention!
I've no doubt Apple's decision to bring the money into the US had to do with the tax law (whether that law was the best decision is debatable, you might have gotten a lot more than $38 billion with another law).
What I contest is that the expansion was a result of the tax law or something they would have done anyway. Apple was not short of cash before this.

--
I stole this Sig

Swami Anderson places his clenched fist... by gander666 · 2018-01-17 08:14 · Score: 4, Insightful

... upon his turban and predicts:

$230B of stock repurchases
$10B of new hires
Massive one time bonuses for Director level and above
Swami Anderson knows all, tells all

--
Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T

Re:Swami Anderson places his clenched fist... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 11:22 · Score: 0

you accidentally added a capital B next to the value for new hires.
Re:Swami Anderson places his clenched fist... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 11:23 · Score: 0

I don't know if I should mod you +5 insightful, or +5 funny.
you nailed it.

You are a tool by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:17 · Score: 0

So raise taxes to 99%. No businesses would be affected, according to your mastery of economics. That would be ZERO businesses going under.

You are an idiotic tool

Re:You are a tool by plague911 · 2018-01-17 08:22 · Score: 1

"So raise taxes to 99%. No businesses would be affected" That is the working economic theory. Have you ever taken an economics class? The intersection of supply and demand curves are not impacted by a profit tax, only a sales tax.
Re:You are a tool by _Sharp'r_ · 2018-01-17 09:59 · Score: 1

You're missing the part where the risk-adjusted returns on investment need to be higher than alternative potential returns in order to attract money for an investment.
Instead of putting your money into a company where 99% of whatever you make will be taxed away, you'd put it into a company in another country doing something else, or invest it in municipal bonds, or loan it to the FED, or keep it in cash (because there is otherwise a risk you will lose your investment instead of making money on it), or just spend it on consumption (because why bother investing it for no return?). At a 99% tax rate on profits, the supply of investment money would vanish and go elsewhere.
So yeah, the economic theory on the matter is pretty clear, tax rates majorly impact investment supply. You're confused by not considering the impacts on supply. You only get supply when it's profitable (compared to other potential investments) for someone to supply something.

--
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
Re:You are a tool by Xylantiel · 2018-01-17 11:44 · Score: 1

Haha, but your logic means there is a floor below which reducing the tax rate no longer increases investment because there are no other alternatives that have a lower risk-adjusted return. In fact it may reduce investment (since less is needed for a fixed return) or artificially encourage overly risky investments. hmm... have we had some recent problems with overly risky investments? More generally, this is one of the problems with overly concentrated wealth -- the holders of the wealth cannot effectively manage it and it ends up being wasted. Wait, weren't we talking about a company that has so much cash on hand that they can't figure out what to do with it? They'd rather it sit offshore doing nothing than repatriate it and let some of it go back into the economy through the government.

Tax by tsa · 2018-01-17 08:27 · Score: 1

Ah, they will start paying taxes!

--

-- Cheers!

Re:Tax by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 09:10 · Score: 0

Until they decide the new lower taxes are now also too high and start hiding money overseas again while whining for another tax cut.

Inflation? by barakn · 2018-01-17 08:30 · Score: 1

With all that money coming home to roost due to tax "reform," won't the burgeoning money supply lead to rapid inflation? Or is there something I'm overlooking?

--
"I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show

Re:Inflation? by sixoh1 · 2018-01-17 09:26 · Score: 2

If the Fed does as expected and raises interest rates 3 times this year, you'll see a net outflow of capital from the stock market (and hello special dividends to keep investors holding share prices up a little longer) and into long term items like T-bills and higher rate commercial paper. Realistically the US economy needs this cash right now to help sop up all of the QE that was done post 2008 to create "artificial" liquidity in the market just as that fed created liquidity needs to disappear to restore a somewhat healthy balance.
Now if the Fed doesnt Fsck up and let the net-negative interest rates continue, we might have a chance to avoid a debt bomb from the 4 TRILLION in stimulus cash that currently doesn't get considered as part of the US debt/deficit.
Re:Inflation? by scatbomb · 2018-01-17 09:32 · Score: 1

With all that money coming home to roost due to tax "reform," won't the burgeoning money supply lead to rapid inflation? Or is there something I'm overlooking?
350 billion over 5 years is a drop in the bucket. GDP is ~18T/y. 350B/5y=70B/y. 70/18,000 = 0.389%. Is this enough to move the needle? Probably not in any significant or detectable way by itself.

Re: That's not quite half... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 08:51 · Score: 0

You do realize that these are profits on international sales, not domestic sales where Apple has already paid billions in taxes to the US.

So as a US company how much should they have to pay to the US gov to have that priviledge versus say Samsung who pays next to nothing to the US in taxes?

Sigh, yet another non-businessman to school by SuperKendall · 2018-01-17 09:09 · Score: 2

If a project costs 1 billion but generates 11 billion revenue, now the company gets to keep 79% instead of 65%

Yes that is correct, taxes are taxes on profits.

If that project generated 1 billion in revenue they could still keep 0 profit.

Yes that is also correct, etc.

The result is that ZERO new business opportunities are now profitable.

That's pretty speedy! Correct to utterly wrong in under a second.

Keeping more of profit they do earn means a company has more income to spend on R&D for new product. That is one way.

Furthermore you overlook that companies getting to keep more of the profit they earn, means that they can reduce margin to offer cheaper products while still making more overall than they were before. That in turn means that parts and materials may fall in price for other companies, like the one that was just breaking even, so suddenly that product that was making zero profit is now turning a small profit. HUH!

Then of course it follows that parts that were too expensive to make a product profitable before may now be reduced in price enough that new products can be made at a profit (or at least not much of a loss).

You portray yet another myth of conservative "economics"

I portray simply "economics", a subject you apparently know nothing about beyond some slim surface understanding, without even considering second-order effects.

I think though your more basic problem is not that you don't understand economics (or history for that matter), it's more a lack of imagination and planning. My guess is you've never actually run a business...

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley

Re:Sigh, yet another non-businessman to school by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 13:25 · Score: 0

>
Or, it could mean bigger executive bonuses.
>
Perhaps, but what I usually see is companies selling as high as the market will bear unless there is real competition. Why would you sell for a lower price if you don't have to?
Re:Sigh, yet another non-businessman to school by plague911 · 2018-01-18 05:05 · Score: 1

I am more than glad to admit many economic theories break down in the real world. Since you are so unread
http://www.economicsdiscussion...
"This tax takes the form of a percentage on the net profit of the firm. The effects of a profits tax are the same with those of a lump-sum tax. The profits tax, while reducing the profits (by adding to the cash expenses of the firm), will not affect its MC. Hence in the short run the equilibrium of the firm and the industry will not change. However, in the long run, exit of firms will be inevitable if in the pre-tax period firms were earning just normal profits. In the long run the supply in the market would shift to the left and a new equilibrium would be reached with a higher price, a lower quantity produced and a smaller number of firms."
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/031815/why-are-there-no-profits-perfectly-competitive-market.asp
sooo in a perfect market there would be no profit and thus no change in equilibrium.
That IS the economic theory.
Current conservative dogma is that markets are to be made perfect and as such a profit tax would have zero impact in product production. If you have a problem with the logical conclusion of what I am guessing is your own dogma, good I am glad and recommend you change adapt a "markets are inherently imperfect dogma", which is more realistic.

Not Enough Workers by Sweettoother · 2018-01-17 09:52 · Score: 1

So they're going to create tech jobs in a country that has been so chronically short on qualified tech workers, that they've had to import workers and open offices in other countries. I'll bet that a significant amount of those new jobs will go unfilled, or cause currently-filled jobs (either at Apple or other companies) to become vacant, depending on how many of those new jobs will require technical skills. And the politicians and media will fall for it. Unbelievable.

Re:Not Enough Workers by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 13:45 · Score: 0

Good catch. To be fair they didn't say what kind of jobs will be created. My guess is they will be marketing and retail jobs i.e. advertising, Apple re-sellers.

Time for a boycott by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 10:10 · Score: 0

Time to boycott Apple. Voluntarily bringing so much money to a rogue state should not go unpunished.

More Apple hate by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 10:46 · Score: 0

Brought to you by Slashdot's worst editor, msmash.

Thanks for adding the scare quotes to the word contribute. So clever.

I still hate Trump! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 11:01 · Score: 0

Says slashdot. But hey, you're all young, there's still time to learn about capitalism and all it's benefits in spite of your teachers pounding socialism and globalism into you. Sometimes the best way to learn is by your own enlightenment.

And those that wake up will profit so much they'll be able to enjoy the finer things in life while helping those less fortunate.

Re: I still hate Trump! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 15:06 · Score: 0

So true! In fact I'm planning on retiring from my 9-5. Made a ton off the stock market in 2016, now getting into house flipping in previously marginal areas and employing a bunch of people. So surreal, thanks Don!

Where was that "deep commitment" while they by mark_reh · 2018-01-17 11:18 · Score: 1

were amassing all that money overseas?

This is like the airlines periodically announcing they are increasing space between seats because "they care about passenger comfort". Where was the concern for passenger comfort while they were making the spacing narrower?

SOS, different day...

The irony by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 11:42 · Score: 0

is that most of the people who goto work at these apple jobs will be democrats who hate trump and have benefited from his tax reform.

Identifying the iPhone users... by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 12:47 · Score: 0

> IÃ(TM)m on an iPhone

Yes, we can tell...

Excellent News There by Ferretman · 2018-01-17 13:29 · Score: 1

Well done Mister President!

Apple bringing back some of their $$$ is a start, at least....

Ferret

--
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc

Better than in the government's pocket by RogueWarrior65 · 2018-01-17 14:24 · Score: 1

Clearly, the potential for tax dollars getting pissed away is very high. Depending on which side of the political fence you're on, money gets pissed away on lousy emergency management software, poorly trained personnel, and passwords written on Post-It notes OR you get a wall. People should be happy that Apple is spending it instead of a government.

Wait, I'm confused? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-17 14:28 · Score: 0

Wait, didn't Nancy Pelosi say that the tax bill was "apocalyptic, monumental, brazen theft"? Didn't Chuckie Schumer describe the bill as "one of the darkest black-letter days in the long history of this Senate"? Didn't CNN report their words as gospel for weeks if not months?

Hhhmm....Perhaps 'fake news' does exist after all...

Not really overseas by SoftwareArtist · 2018-01-17 14:30 · Score: 1

When they say the money was kept "overseas" and now they're "bringing it to the US", that doesn't mean what you think it does. In fact that "overseas" money was being kept in bank accounts in New York and managed by an Apple subsidiary in Reno. It's only "overseas" in a completely fictional sense invented by accountants. No new money is going to be entering the US. There won't be any investment boom. The money's already here and they've already been investing it. Now congress has given them a huge tax cut, so to say thank you they're pretending it will magically create jobs. They have to pretend it will somehow help regular people, not just their shareholders.

--
"I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."

Actually they are by rsilvergun · 2018-01-17 14:53 · Score: 1

students have been routinely forced to work for Apple during crunch time to get enough iPhones out.

I don't think we really want them to have better conditions either. I don't think we want them to be worse either, if by 'We' you mean consumers in first world nations. We're largely indifferent.

But as for their working conditions, there's no shortages of less than uplifting stories about them. Also, these are masses of Factory workers. They're primed for Unionization but they never seem to do much of it. You probably don't want to think about what the Chinese government does to keep that under wraps. Any more than you want to think about what things were like in America before Unions...

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/

Wording by Anonymous Coward · 2018-01-18 05:12 · Score: 0

I will 'acquiesce' to use an iPhone, if Apple gives one to me. For free.

Slashdot Mirror

Apple Says It Will 'Contribute' $350 Billion in the US Economy Over the Next 5 Years (cnbc.com)

164 comments