Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brussels..

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

joG said:

And what in heaven is wrong with that? One should hope they would act like that.

Click to expand...

I believe we can safely put Manc Skipper in the Socialist of Amerika Partei (SAP) membership.

I'd like to know one thing from Manc... Sanders or Hillary?

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

zimmer said:

Tax deals are not subsidies.

Click to expand...

Unless held across the whole, they are subsidies. If one company gets tax breaks over another company, then it is a subsidy. It's money the tax base would have received, but instead it's "credited" back. If it's equal across the board, then it's just the tax rate.

zimmer said:

And I look forward to the disintegration of the EUSSR.

I've got a vote in a Brexitish country that I'll be happily using.

Click to expand...

We'll see if the EU breaks up...it may. It was rather ambitious endeavor that I think may come in time but at this point, even the countries of Europe are far too divided in people, culture, language, economy, etc. to be united under one government.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

Ikari said:

It's a subsidy. Everyone pays the same, no one is special. That's it.

Apple is free to do what it wants, it can always set up shop in commie China if it wants. But this is the EU and their tax laws, of which Ireland agreed to when it joined the EU. And they are free to enforce their rules as well.

Companies have some amount of economic might, but the government ultimately owns the guns. You can push for some amount of time, but if government doesn't get paid they're eventually going to come for you.

Click to expand...

Is it a flat tax system they use there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

Ikari said:

They do, but they pay in the end. And any amount they pay that is less than they would normally pay by nominal rules is a subsidy. But they are going to pay something, government is generally lax so long as it gets paid. And if you make a tax deal with Germany, it's going to have to be in line with the rules and regulations of the EU. I think the contention in this case has been that Ireland did not follow the rules in the tax deals it gave to Apple.

Click to expand...

If that's the case shouldn't the eu be going after Ireland. Apple simply made a deal with them how are they liable for Ireland cutting a deal it was not allowed to make?

To be honest it looks like the right is making a money grab by trying to bully Apple into something they did not agree to


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

trouble13 said:

If that's the case shouldn't the eu be going after Ireland. Apple simply made a deal with them how are they liable for Ireland cutting a deal it was not allowed to make?

To be honest it looks like the right is making a money grab by trying to bully Apple into something they did not agree to


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I don't really know how that all works with the EU. It seems that from there perspective there is some cost, X, associated with doing business within a EU state. Ireland gave them a much lower cost, Y, which did not meet the requirements of the EU, and thus EU is looking to recoup X-Y. I guess they'd see it as Apple has done business within the EU, Ireland wasn't authorized to give them the deal they had, and as such they now owe the EU the difference. But as I said, I'm not really sure how this goes down in the EU.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

Ikari said:

I don't really know how that all works with the EU. It seems that from there perspective there is some cost, X, associated with doing business within a EU state. Ireland gave them a much lower cost, Y, which did not meet the requirements of the EU, and thus EU is looking to recoup X-Y. I guess they'd see it as Apple has done business within the EU, Ireland wasn't authorized to give them the deal they had, and as such they now owe the EU the difference. But as I said, I'm not really sure how this goes down in the EU.

Click to expand...

I'm not all that versed in it either it just sounds fishy from a common sense view point. It seems like there has to be more to the story


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

Ikari said:

It's a subsidy. Everyone pays the same, no one is special. That's it.

Click to expand...

It isn't a subsidy. Unless you believe that the money was never apples and that all money belongs to the government not the people that possess it.

Apple is free to do what it wants, it can always set up shop in commie China if it wants. But this is the EU and their tax laws, of which Ireland agreed to when it joined the EU. And they are free to enforce their rules as well.

Click to expand...

Which means Germany and other countries have also violated those so called laws by negotiating tax incentives to attract businesses.

Companies have some amount of economic might, but the government ultimately owns the guns. You can push for some amount of time, but if government doesn't get paid they're eventually going to come for you.

Click to expand...

well when they pull out they won't have to worry about getting paid.
and apple was paying in a deal they agreed to with Iceland.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

joG said:

And didn't know the content of the treaties they had signed? Didn't know they were no longer sovereign? Did not know what they were doing? Didn't know they could not make the commitments they told the world they could?
But, considering this is the EU.....

What do you say? Are they criminal?

Click to expand...

You do understand how the European Union works right?

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

joG said:

And didn't know the content of the treaties they had signed? Didn't know they were no longer sovereign? Did not know what they were doing? Didn't know they could not make the commitments they told the world they could?
But, considering this is the EU.....

What do you say? Are they criminal?

Click to expand...

We can talk about the principles of the agreements to form the EU and the EU's power all we want. But when it comes down to it the EU has a certain amount of economics power over certain policies of those states who have agreed to join it and these are one of those...

zimmer said:

Negotiating tax rates is not aid. It's business.

###

Click to expand...

Except when its a tax break it is....

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

zimmer said:

LOL... How you are so consistently wrong is amazing. Then again... Not... You're a Socialist.

The Government of Ireland is fighting for Apple.

Click to expand...

No, the government of Ireland is fighting for the principle of being allowed to give Apple such a deal... not Apple it self.

"Full damage control"... ROTFLOL... People aren't going to stop buying Apple products because they are wise business people. Au contraire!!! A few folks just might find this company more appealing.

Click to expand...

Listen.. Apple has screengate going on. It is pointing to a massive lawsuit against Apple by iPhone 6 and 6S owners. They have this scandal.. and in a week they release a new phone, which by all accounts will be an absolute dud. Apple is hurting..

Apple are not tax cheats, they are business people who aren't stupid. When a sovereign nation offers you low tax rates, you'd be dumb to say no.

Click to expand...

You have not really read the accusations have you? Do you even understand how the cheating was done?

Apple funneled all profits from Europe, Middle East, Africa and India to Ireland. They should pay taxes on that no? 12.5%.. but a previous Irish government agreed to allow Apple then to funnel this profit to an "internal legal entity" that is not registered anywhere in the world and according to Irish law... outside the jurisdiction of Ireland (and anyone else).

As for the US... If you read the article (which you haven't), they warned the EU against going after US companies. Why? LOL... It's their money ROTFLOL.

Click to expand...

LOL, that is rich considering the amount of fines the US has thrown on European companies over the last decade...

Written from an iPad Pro with Logi keyboard.

Click to expand...

What.. why did you not buy the Apple keyboard... Why are you supporting an European company with that Logitech keyboard?

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

TheDemSocialist said:

You do understand how the European Union works right?

Click to expand...

Quite well, in fact. I have worked professionally with most of the major treaties that concerned finance and with the EU Constitution now Lisbon Treaty for various reasons from the Convent with Giscard on through to the wordings of the Bundesverfassungsgerichts rulings.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

TheDemSocialist said:

We can talk about the principles of the agreements to form the EU and the EU's power all we want. But when it comes down to it the EU has a certain amount of economics power over certain policies of those states who have agreed to join it and these are one of those...



Except when its a tax break it is....

Click to expand...

That is exactly the question. How much power does the EU have to interfere with sovereign decisions of the members. This concerns the legislative, executive and judiciary of the countries.

This is relatively limited, if the Bundesverfassungsgericht is deemed correct.
Among many other things, it found that the treaties were only legal by German law, if it was assumed that the freedom of decisions of the legislative especially concerning the budget were not impaired in a major way.
Furthermore the court of final decisions on German all affairs the Bundesverfassungsgericht. Its decisions overrule European courts.

So here we have a decision that obviously stands against the interpretation of a number of EU member countries. But that is not the issue at this time. Here at least two member states depend almost existentially on the industries that derive from the understanding that taxes are a sovereign right of the member state and that it can negotiate taxes as it wants. At least two further countries use taxes extensively in the same way. Now the question you ask seems pertinent. Did all these governments not know the content of the treaties they signed or were they willfully deceiving their citizens and defrauding international investors?

In any case, the situation is a typical EU dodgy and certainly an attempted power grab circumventing members' domestic constitutional courts or small furtive steps that constitutional courts might just be able to accept. This has been the way since the EU Constitution was blocked by referendums. The main achievement the EU now seeks is probably the precedent that the EU transferred sovereignty in the area of negotiated taxes away from nation states. This is important in a regional way, as the EU is trying to usurp sovereignty without the populations rising against the process.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

joG said:

That is exactly the question. How much power does the EU have to interfere with sovereign decisions of the members. This concerns the legislative, executive and judiciary of the countries.

Click to expand...

As much as agreed to in treaties when joining the EU.

This is relatively limited, if the Bundesverfassungsgericht is deemed correct.
Among many other things, it found that the treaties were only legal by German law, if it was assumed that the freedom of decisions of the legislative especially concerning the budget were not impaired in a major way.
Furthermore the court of final decisions on German all affairs the Bundesverfassungsgericht. Its decisions overrule European courts.

So here we have a decision that obviously stands against the interpretation of a number of EU member countries. But that is not the issue at this time. Here at least two member states depend almost existentially on the industries that derive from the understanding that taxes are a sovereign right of the member state and that it can negotiate taxes as it wants. At least two further countries use taxes extensively in the same way. Now the question you ask seems pertinent. Did all these governments not know the content of the treaties they signed or were they willfully deceiving their citizens and defrauding international investors?

In any case, the situation is a typical EU dodgy and certainly an attempted power grab circumventing members' domestic constitutional courts or small furtive steps that constitutional courts might just be able to accept. This has been the way since the EU Constitution was blocked by referendums. The main achievement the EU now seeks is probably the precedent that the EU transferred sovereignty in the area of negotiated taxes away from nation states. This is important in a regional way, as the EU is trying to usurp sovereignty without the populations rising against the process.

Click to expand...

Here is a quick explainer:

"Ireland is a member of the European Union, which operates something known as the single market, allowing companies based anywhere in the EU to seamlessly sell goods and services to other countries in the EU. This single market means that many regulatory issues and other important government functions are handled at the EU-level, through the Union’s permanent bureaucracy in Brussels... The European Union does not have a unified taxing authority. But it does have a unified anti-trust agency, run by the competition commissioner. This is a very important agency because, by tradition, busting up national monopolies and ensuring continent-wide competition was one of the primary missions of the European Union. As part of that, the EU attempts to restrict member states from subsidizing particular companies. The specific fear was that the government of, say, France would direct subsidies to France-based automobile companies like Peugeot, thus unfairly disadvantaging Fiat unless Italy also stepped up with subsidies. Consequently, this kind of state assistance to firms is considered anti-competitive under EU law. But in recent years, Vestager and her competition commission have interpreted favorable corporate income tax deals as a form of illegal subsidy. She says that due to its arrangement with the Irish government, “Apple only paid an effective corporate tax rate that declined from 1% in 2003 to 0.005% in 2014 on the profits of Apple Sales International.” This, she says, is “illegal under EU state aid rules, because it gives Apple a significant advantage over other businesses that are subject to the same national taxation rules.” Why Europe is ordering Apple to pay Ireland $14.5 billion in taxes Ireland doesn’t want - Vox

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

TheDemSocialist said:

As much as agreed to in treaties when joining the EU.



Here is a quick explainer:

"Ireland is a member of the European Union, which operates something known as the single market, allowing companies based anywhere in the EU to seamlessly sell goods and services to other countries in the EU. This single market means that many regulatory issues and other important government functions are handled at the EU-level, through the Union’s permanent bureaucracy in Brussels... The European Union does not have a unified taxing authority. But it does have a unified anti-trust agency, run by the competition commissioner. This is a very important agency because, by tradition, busting up national monopolies and ensuring continent-wide competition was one of the primary missions of the European Union. As part of that, the EU attempts to restrict member states from subsidizing particular companies. The specific fear was that the government of, say, France would direct subsidies to France-based automobile companies like Peugeot, thus unfairly disadvantaging Fiat unless Italy also stepped up with subsidies. Consequently, this kind of state assistance to firms is considered anti-competitive under EU law. But in recent years, Vestager and her competition commission have interpreted favorable corporate income tax deals as a form of illegal subsidy. She says that due to its arrangement with the Irish government, “Apple only paid an effective corporate tax rate that declined from 1% in 2003 to 0.005% in 2014 on the profits of Apple Sales International.” This, she says, is “illegal under EU state aid rules, because it gives Apple a significant advantage over other businesses that are subject to the same national taxation rules.” Why Europe is ordering Apple to pay Ireland $14.5 billion in taxes Ireland doesn’t want - Vox

Click to expand...

So you believe that the governments did not understand, what the treaties meant, when they signed them? That is one way to see it and, though illegal, it is the more optimistic view. The key sentence then is: "But in recent years, Vestager and her competition commission have interpreted favorable corporate income tax deals as a form of illegal subsidy."

In other words, the Commission is "reinterpreting" the treaty to mean something it did not, when when parliaments voted on it and High Courts ruled on it. The matter was not one of sovereign surrender it was said, but is now to be so interpreted? So interpreted it would mean that it is a renegotiation of the treaties and would require a reconfirmation by the various parliaments. Vestager is really moving on a knife's edge there. But the EU wants the sovereignty, I guess, whether by deceit or foul play.
That is a very realpolitik approach or illegal, if one is more the rule of law type. In any event, it is interesting to see that the EU Commission is taking the bet and is whipping the unity onward in this dubious way.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

joG said:

So you believe that the governments did not understand, what the treaties meant, when they signed them? That is one way to see it and, though illegal, it is the more optimistic view.

Click to expand...

No I think they totally understood what they were doing. Ireland gets to artificially inflate its revenue while Apple gets out of some of its EU taxes while artificially reducing its revenue.

The key sentence then is: "But in recent years, Vestager and her competition commission have interpreted favorable corporate income tax deals as a form of illegal subsidy."

Click to expand...

That is their job. To interpret the law.

In other words, the Commission is "reinterpreting" the treaty to mean something it did not, when when parliaments voted on it and High Courts ruled on it. The matter was not one of sovereign surrender it was said, but is now to be so interpreted? So interpreted it would mean that it is a renegotiation of the treaties and would require a reconfirmation by the various parliaments. Vestager is really moving on a knife's edge there.

Click to expand...

Do you know if the law is being maliciously "reinterpreted" or if the commission is acting illegal?

But the EU wants the sovereignty, I guess, whether by deceit or foul play.

Click to expand...

:roll:

That is a very realpolitik approach or illegal, if one is more the rule of law type. In any event, it is interesting to see that the EU Commission is taking the bet and is whipping the unity onward in this dubious way.

Click to expand...

"Technically speaking, the EU ruling on the Apple matter doesn’t prevent Ireland from continuing to make tax competition the basis of its economic strategy. But the broad implication is that the EU is looking at using competition law as a basis for forcing member states to begin applying corporate tax law in a more uniform way. That’s a clear and present danger to Ireland’s overall economic approach, so the Irish are pushing back."

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

TheDemSocialist said:

1. No I think they totally understood what they were doing. Ireland gets to artificially inflate its revenue while Apple gets out of some of its EU taxes while artificially reducing its revenue.


2. That is their job. To interpret the law.


3. Do you know if the law is being maliciously "reinterpreted" or if the commission is acting illegal?


:roll:


"Technically speaking, the EU ruling on the Apple matter doesn’t prevent Ireland from continuing to make tax competition the basis of its economic strategy. But the broad implication is that the EU is looking at using competition law as a basis for forcing member states to begin applying corporate tax law in a more uniform way. That’s a clear and present danger to Ireland’s overall economic approach, so the Irish are pushing back."

Click to expand...

1. Maybe. You would have to explain your meaning, though.
2. No. It is to apply law. And here in simplified terms the law is that it has no say on tax codes.
3. It would be illegal in either case. Like in the case of Greece before its entry into the Euro. Was it malicious interpretation of the conditions of entry that made the finance ministry forbid the Bundesbank from checking the books though it knew they were not correct or was it merely acting illegally?
4. Technically it would make it impossible to negotiate taxes to fit the requirements. This the EU is not allowed to do by treaty. That is why it has chosen to try to apply a different type of regulation, where it does have a mandate. By doing so it would circumvent the treaties (i.e. EU Constitution) that required -and would require for alteration- parliamentary decisions in each member state and in some a referendum. As far as I remember but am not quite sure, Ireland is one of the countries that requires a referendum for changes in the Lisbon Treaty, which would be quite funny in itself.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

The bottom line is that Apple commited tax fraud by creating shell corporations and allocating profits to a fictional headquarters. I don't pity them for the EU'a decision to drop the hammer on them for it.

Re: Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU after Brusse

My understanding is that Apple would easily win an appeal, because the Commission doesn't really have the power its claiming.

But it's a very difficult argument for a weak Irish government to stand behind at a high level "we don't want 13bn". Never mind that money wouldn't go to the Irish exchequer, given the Commissions vague ruling that anyone could cash in at Apples expense.