“Megadeals from Apple Inc. and from Oracle Corp., which just completed a $10 billion bond sale on Monday, helped push the number of debt sales by highly rated companies in the U.S. to record levels in the first half of the year,” Mike Cherney reports for The Wall Street Journal.
“These companies sold about $642 billion of debt, according to data provider Dealogic, which has records going back to 1995,” Cherney reports. “That is more than the $560 billion sold in the first half of last year and outstrips the previous record set in 2009, when $612 billion of bonds was sold.”
“Apple’s $12 billion bond sale in April was the largest U.S. investment-grade offering in the first half of this year,” Cherney reports. “In April 2013, the technology giant sold $17 billion in debt, which at the time was the largest corporate bond deal on record.”
Read more in the full article here.
I’m wildly guessing that a lot of those sales went to China. Perhaps it might help offset the imbalance…
Unlike the uncollateralised speculative debt obligations sold in 2008, this one is extremely solid, low-risk and highly rated.
Ashamed of yourself yet, #MyStupidGovernment? Apple’s debt would be zero if not for the unacceptable US tax rate on foreign made profits.
Meanwhile: More phony money in the form of debt has been created to inflate the global economic bubble again. It all sounds so ENRON.
Not quite. This type of debt stimulates economy. Unlike banks, who sold loans to people who couldn’t pay for them, then leveraged those loans to sell credit default swaps and other similar instruments, Apple is sure to repay on these bonds, making it a perfectly good way of putting more money out of parking and into circulation.
A better perspective than mine. 😀
Derek, business (like life) will find a way. If necessary, business will create a way. In some cases (e.g., several U.S. economic crises over the past few decades), that creativity crosses over into the absurd and even illegal, putting everyone at risk.
Personally, I believe that it is a mistake to focus blame on one aspect of a complex system. In general, you need to assess and address the entire system (or, at least, major parts of it) in order to achieve worthwhile positive and balanced change for the long term. The U.S. tax system has many flaws, some of which have become increasingly evident in the modern world of enormous, multi-national corporations. But the tax code needs to be evolved intelligently as a whole, not by reacting individually to a variety of concerns.
A comprehensive U.S. tax overhaul would be fantastic. If I were in charge, I would establish a ground rule that the new tax system should be design to generate roughly the same amount of total tax revenue as the current system. That would satisfy neither the “raise tax” or the “lower tax” factions, but it would provide some degree of stability during the transition. After allowing the impacts of the tax code changes to damp down, we would then attack the deficit – again in a balanced manner. The deficit arises as the result of both spending and taxation. Attempting to resolve it solely on the basis of one or the other is doomed to failure because it is always easier to lower taxes and raise spending than the opposite.
Common sense, reasoned debate, and compromise are needed to make this happen. That is why we seen no progress since the mid-1990s.
One more thought – the hashtag that you used points right back at you. We are all part of the government of this country. If “government” is stupid, then it follow that…
I know #MyStupidGovernment points right back to me since I started it. NO, at this point in time We The People are NOT part of the government in my country, no matter which party we vote to elect. That is my consistent message.
I entirely disagree about focusing one’s efforts. I actually see no point at all in going abstract and addressing ‘the whole system’ specifically because it forces only abstract discussion, resulting entirely in NO solution to ANYTHING. Sorry. Been there, done that. It doesn’t work.
Successful work is direct, targeted, solution oriented, as specific as possible. You then join together OTHER specific solutions and work from that base. You do NOT start at the abstract level and expect anything to be solved. First hand experience will help explain this situation.
I’m speaking as a “Producer” personality, the people who get things done. This approach is not accepted by “Relational” personalities, the folks who talk about issues, and talk about issues, and talk about issues. Relational personalities find the direct, solve it approach outright offensive most often and will plant themselves in the way to stop it. And nothing will be solved. I know this situation intimately.
So it comes down to:
1) Solve it
OR
2) Talk talk talk, don’t solve it.