“This week the U.S. Senate brought Apple executives before one of its publicly held sub-committee hearings,” Mark Reschke writes for T-GAAP. “The topic was Apple using Ireland and other techniques to avoid paying U.S. taxes on products and services sold off-shore.”
“Among all the Congressional hubris that took place, one big fallacy remains: Corporations do not pay taxes, we do,” Reschke writes. “For every dollar or tens of dollars taxed and regulated onto companies, whether it be Apple, Coke or Bob’s Deli, we pay those costs.”
Reschke writes, “In reality, companies pay zero taxes, as they simply pass those costs down the line to the consumers of their products. Thus, we pay every dime of every regulation and tax bestowed onto corporations, every – single – dime.”
Much more in the full article here.
Related articles:
Don’t tax Apple, tax its shareholders – May 24, 2013
If Apple paid more tax, we might pay less or something – May 22, 2013
Apple CEO Tim Cook pounds another nail into the Keynesian coffin – May 22, 2013
Apple CEO Cook makes no apology for company’s tax strategy – May 22, 2013
Apple CEO Tim Cook charms Capitol Hill – May 22, 2013
Rush Limbaugh: ‘High-tech lynching: Senate attempts to crucify Apple’ – May 21, 2013
Nobody on U.S. Senate committee laid a glove on Apple CEO Tim Cook – May 21, 2013
Senator Rand Paul: Senate committee ‘should apologize to Apple for bullying one of America’s greatest success stories’ (with video) – May 21, 2013
Ireland: We have no special tax rate deal with Apple – May 21, 2013
Apple prepares for Washington onslaught: CEO Tim Cook isn’t taking any chances with senators looking to grandstand – May 21, 2013
Watch Apple CEO Tim Cook’s live testimony before U.S. Senate, starting at 9:30am EDT – May 21, 2013
U.S. Senate investigation found no evidence that Apple did anything illegal in avoiding taxes – May 20, 2013
In fact we pay more than that cause Apple has to hire tax layer, accountants and has other expenses because of those taxes and we pay ever penny of that.
Then, we pay taxes again when we purchase Apple products.
Then, we have to pay taxes again on dividends and whatever profits AAPL generated for us.
A 10% tax at every movement/sale of goods/products would solve every tax problem. The drug dealers/bling buyers would also pay their ‘Fair Share’. No other taxes.
with this news, I am sure more will sell AAPL off
If you are an investor and this artlcle is news to you… you should be selling off all of your stock not just aapl.
So lets do away with production taxes (as our foreign export competitors have done), and adopt consumption taxes (as our foreign export competitors have done).
Doing has little, if any impact on domestically produced goods, purchased domestically, but lowers the price of those goods in Japan, Korea, China, Canada, South America, the Middle East and the EU.
At the same time it increases the price of goods produced in those countries and sold in the US.
Abolishing production taxes and establishing a consumption tax is most beneficial to US production, and by extension the US worker, without raising domestic taxation.
More US workers means more US consumption. It’s a nice circular benefit.
Your comments are what the FairTax is all about. Check it out fairtax.org
Well, as an independent small-business owner, I might disagree with that a bit. It might be true of larger corporate entities that have stockholders and boards of directors, but for those businesses where the owner comes in in the morning and opens the door, and works right along side with his employees, it is not so easy to just pass along costs of any sort, taxes included.
Yep, it depends on what the demand is for what you are selling. Apple obviously has no problem with demand.
He has to if he wants to stay in business, if you’ll notice hamburgers are no longer 25 cents apiece.
Lets just end all taxes. After all, when we tax your paycheck, we are just raising the cost of your labor. When we tax your consumption, you just demand higher wages to compensate.
When we tax nothing, we can just leap right to abolishing all police, fire departments and roads. Then lets go right to ending public education. After all, taxes pay for teachers and schools.
And those teachers don’t pay taxes on that income. Or on their purchases. Or their houses, which makes jobs, which employees people.. Wait… It’s a circle of life! D’oh!
taxes that are paid from salaries paid by taxes = zero.
So every restaurant owner selling food to public employees isn’t making money? Their wages magically don’t exist because taxes pay them? How about soldiers? We can just eliminate all taxes and stop paying trillions for an army. Which will end all those defense department jobs, that taxes are paying for. Which will kill millions of small businesses that serve those employees of those defense contractors. Can yo do the math?
Taxes aren’t any different than fees or charges we pay for anything else. Just because its paid to a government body doesn’t make it good or bad. We pay for our defense. I’ve never once in 39 years heard a conservative bitch about paying $2 million for a single goddamn missile. But tell him that $2 million is being spent to educate his kids and he demands teachers work for free and get off the public dole!
The hypocrisy is astounding. For 8 years, there was no tea party screaming about us spending $9B a month in Iraq alone. Did that money just magically appear somehow?
Taxes are just usage fees. We use everything from the goddamn roads to emergency services to 911. A company pays taxes to support these things, and its not somehow magically paid by everyone else anymore than you demand higher pay just to account for having to eat and pay rent.
you did not read what I wrote. Let me put it to you in musical terms: “Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.” – Billy Preston
It’s not easy, but you do. Otherwise you lose money with each sale and are not long for this world.
correcto mundo el grandé….remember this the next time Obama Messiah & Congress taxes you more for an “economic stimulus.”
Right…another asinine statement by botvinnik. What is going on under the current administration is little different than actions taken under previous administrations, Republican and Democrat alike.
When Bush cut taxes using borrowed money, that was stimulus. And he did it several times. So cut the bullshit “messiah” talk and contribute something worthwhile. If you cannot manage to do so, then don’t bother posting anything at all.
Melvin, give it a rest..you are ALWAYS wrong. You’re beginning to embarrass yourself.
No one is always wrong, botvinnik. That is exactly the type of asinine, extremist statement that undermines any shred of credibility that you might hope to have on this forum. The sad part is that you are too clueless to be embarrassed.
I will never back down from refuting your BS. Live with it or leave.
wrong again, Melvin.
hey! that rhymes!
So does, “Who’s a dick? botvinnik!” What of it?
lol, Hey Mel! You smell!
I’m going to type this one more time for you Melvin, because I know you have such a difficult time with comprehension: “THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE POLICIES OF OBAMA MESSIAH, DUBYA, BILLY BOY or CIA GEORGE.” ya got it now?
rhetoric, yes…policy, no.
PS I hope we can remain the bestest MDN online pals, you stupid fuck.
Bullshit. Absolute nonsense.
Give it up Jay. He is the biggest jerk on this forum. Potty mouthed and stupid. Probably 13 year old. Uses LOL like my 9 nine year old daughter. Pity him, but never respond. He will come back nasty.
lol.
what’s absolute nonsense is a grown man named twice.
Best regards,
Bot Bot Vinnik
There are differences in their policies, botvinnik…very important differences. You desire to mash it all together into some amorphous blob so that you can blame the ‘government’ is sad. You are on neurotic road headed towards paranoiaville.
“THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE POLICIES OF OBAMA MESSIAH, DUBYA, BILLY BOY or CIA GEORGE.”
Except, for that for that little bit where Bush:
Created massive deficits for 6 years.
Cut taxes twice without paying for it.
Exploded the national debt more than anyone else combined.
Went to war without raising some sort of revenue to pay for it (first time in US history).
Knowing used false info (the Nigerian letter) saying Iraq had yellow cake uranium to go to war.
Had a top level member of white house “Scooter” convicted of interfering with investigation of the release of secret agent name to the press.
Pardon “Scooter” before he actually went to jail.
Changed the criteria for the Iraq war once WMD were never found.
Allowed Osama to escape after Bush partially pulled out of Afghanistan to go to Iraq.
Families of soldiers had to raise money through bake sells to buy equipment to send to their families fighting in Iraq.
Never allowed caskets of dead soldiers arriving to be televised as did his father.
Used the national guard to fight the Iraq war because as Rumsfeld said, they’re cheaper.
Left the US economy in a wreck after leaving office with high and rasing unemployment, failing banks that required a massive bailout before he left and took another massive bailout after he left office.
• 60% of U.S. Military Deaths in Afghanistan Have Occurred Since Obama Was Inaugurated in 2009.
• During Obama’s first term, the federal government accumulated more debt than it did under the first 42 U.S presidents combined.
• The United States has fallen in the global economic competitiveness rankings compiled by the World Economic Forum for four years in a row.
• There are less Americans working in manufacturing today than there was in 1950 even though the population of the country has more than doubled since then.
• Today, more than a million public school students in the United States are homeless. This is the first time that has ever happened in our history.
• When Barack Obama first entered the White House, about 32 million Americans were on food stamps. Now, more than 47 million Americans are on food stamps.
• When NAFTA was pushed through Congress in 1993, the United States had a trade surplus with Mexico of 1.6 billion dollars. By 2010, we had a trade deficit with Mexico of 61.6 billion dollars.
etc, etc, ad nauseam…like I said: “THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE POLICIES OF OBAMA MESSIAH, DUBYA, BILLY BOY or CIA GEORGE.”
further, there would be no policy difference had any of their opponents had been elected. (with the singular exception of Ron Paul.)
Right, says the man who’s head is buried so deep that it will take a week for him to see daylight.
Afghanistan, nice try, Obama came into power in 2009, the generals ran the war, Bush started the war, Bush pulled out resources from Afghanistan to go to Iraq, the US put forces back into Afghan when fighting increased due to US pulling out of Afghan, but it’s Obama’s fault.
The Afghan and Iraq war were not on the books (fed budget) at about a trillion dollars at that time, nor was the $50 billion US auto loan bailout and the $700 billion dollar bank bailout under Bush. When Obama came into office in 2009 he passed a $800 billion dollar stimulus to keep the US from into a depression as well as giving additional bail out to the US auto ind not to mention increasing benefits for all those millions that lost their jobs during the Bush era.
That’s the free enterprise, capitalist market for you. They first move manufacturing jobs overseas, followed by white collar jobs where the only jobs left are those were you have to be behind something, behind a desk, a counter, a register, a shovel, a stove etc. After this the US companies fight against having workers get minimal wage, benefits or safety nets. The capitalist system at work.
Poverty in the US today has increased. A new president inherits everything from the old. You just cant’s start the clock over from zero. The US economy under Bush went from 5% to almost 8% unemployment and rising in less the a year. The banks collapsed and many people lost their homes. With all this economic catastrophe the US had to provided for it’s citizens.
The difference between a dem and rep is that a dem can make a mistake and admit to it and attempt to corrected. A rep never makes mistakes, therefore there is nothing to correct. You worry about the trade deficit but the the US deficit under Bush.
nonetheless, that is the data regarding Afghanistan, Mr. Ostrich.
Of the 858 U.S. deaths since Obama’s inauguration, 791 have been combat-related. This means that for the 1,241 combat-related deaths that occurred since the Afghanistan war began in October 2001, about 64 percent happened in the two years since Obama took office.
Last year was the deadliest for U.S. forces in Afghanistan, with 497 combat and non-combat fatalities. Improvised explosive devices (IEDs), or homemade bombs, continue to be the number one killer of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan.
You can’t rebut my points so you continue going on about going about Afghan as if there is a fault for Obama. But nothing on iraq? What about them WMD’s?
your points don’t require a rebuttal, your basic premise is false. Now, hush up and don’t interrupt us grown folks anymore.
“your points don’t require a rebuttal, your basic premise is false. Now, hush up and don’t interrupt us grown folks anymore.”
Yep, for republicans it’s, truth get yee behind me. No facts or reality needed at republican camp. That’s why they were silent when the rich white man (Bush) was wrecking everything.
Enter the black man and all of a sudden Obama wrecked the economy and Bush never existed. That’s what republicans call being an “adult”.
Obama Messiah has been in office since January of 2009, at what future date (if any) do you stop attributing his failures to his predecessor?
incidentally, as you are a new troll here, I am neither a republican nor a democrat.
Please, name some of these failures, certainly not:
Iraq/Afghan wars – inherited by Obama
High unemployment – inherited by Obama – economy under Obama creating jobs.
Wall Street losing half it’s value – inherited by Obama -Wall Street sets new records under Obama.
US auto industry going bankrupt (indirectly caused by bad economy under Bush)- inherited by Obama – today US industry is alive and well.
Massive deficits that climb every year – inherited by Obama – now deficits are reducing despite counter actions by republicans.
US had AAA credit rating – inherited by Obama – US lost AAA rating under Obama only after the republican congress failed to raise the US dedt ceiling as they had done for Bush at least 6 times, about the same amount of time as for Reagan.
apparently you haven’t read my responses to your inane, juvenile messiah-worship. I’m done with you.
one more time: There is absolutely no difference between the policies of Obama Messiah, Dubya, Billy Boy or CIA George. rhetoric: yes, policy: no.
You are a republican regardless what you call yourself. A rose by any other name…
well, then Thomas Jefferson and JFK were republicans by your analysis of my views.
“well, then Thomas Jefferson and JFK were republicans by your analysis of my views.”
Your views are what people like Rush, Beck and like plant in your head to make you hate and do their bidding as in voting for republicans that are actually taking away your rights all the while screaming that the dems are doing so.
“Obama came into power in 2009, the generals ran the war…”
Bjr, I know you had difficulty in middle school civics class, but who is the Commander-In-Chief of American military forces anywhere in the world? Furthermore, how do reconcile the increase of military combat deaths in Afghanistan since Obama Messiah was elected Commander-In-Chief with your incredibly ignorant statement, “the US put forces back into Afghan when fighting increased due to US pulling out of Afghan, but it’s Obama’s fault.”? You need to stay at the shallow end of the pool with the other eighth grade girls: Melvin and Jay Jay. Remember…no splashing!
Civics, please; you were a sleep in civics class, even today. You forgot to blame Obama for the Ft Hood shooting. Never mind the State Dept, Pentagon DOD or even the base commander at Ft Hood. It was all Obama’s fault just because he is the president, yea.
MDN = retribution against different points of view.
At first, I just thought you were just another idiot. However, after this last flurry of bizarre dogma, I am beginning to suspect mental illness.
You’ve only proven through your lack of rebuttal, use of crude language and personal attacks that, well that’s all you have to offer. You are the typical reader here at MDN as your high positive ratings for your comments show. Most probable the reason why MDN first implemented such a system in the first place. You and your brethren have found a new home at MDN.
MDN = an unenlightened source.
adios, BJ…the lovely Carol Merrill has these parting gifts for you: a “Yes, we can’t” straitjacket with matching butterfly net.
kingmel, don’t bother with botvinnik and crew. They have no interest in dialog, only in mindlessly parroting talking points. I’m still trying to figure out whether theyWhen even the brightest mind in our world has been trained up from childhood in a superstition of any kind, it will never be possible for that mind, in its maturity, to examine sincerely, dispassionately, and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition.’re knee deep in willful ignorance or whether it’s just simple intellectual dishonesty. Either way, there’s nothing to gain from trying to engage them. Mark Twain said, “”
It is a conundrum. On the one hand, I feel compelled to speak out against the type of BS that botvinnik and Fwhatever and the rest spout. On the other hand, you are correct that they have no interest in true dialog. They post to hear themselves speak, then revel in any response as justification that their thoughts are worthy of attention.
It is not in my nature to sit back and accept their BS. But it is not productive to feed the polititrolls, either.
I know what you mean. Every so often I feel compelled to respond, too, even though I know it’s wasting the bits and bandwidth. It’s curious and a pity that no amount of data or logic will ever convince them that their extreme positions are based on emotion and distortions rather than facts.
I’d like to see them struggle through the simple formulas:
1+∞ < ∞+1
and
∞×∞ = ∞
😆
It isn’t as if everything that they say is wrong. Some bits of it have merit. But even those pieces are bundled with other extremist BS that ruins the whole.
The Greeks had it right. Moderation is generally the best course.
wish you two would quit masturbating each other, it’s pretty gross.
Poor botvinnik. Did we offend your tender sensibilities by being nice to each other, you fscking ass? (There did that make you feel better?)
yes, I am a delicate flower…perhaps you could take your mutual sycophancy and be on Ellen or somethin’.
Ah, yes; I thought I detected the delicate aroma of Cleomes in your posts… 😆
If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. ~Ronald Reagan
Ain’t that the truth?
This. Exactly. A simple truth lost on the sheeple. “Go get big oil! Why is gas so high?”
Gas was high before the clamors of getting more taxes from the oil companies. They say they haven’t been gouging us and it’s all supply and demand. If that were the case, their profits would have remained steady or gone up a modest amount each year. Instead, they make record profits that just keep increasing. No, that’s not gouging.
No. It isn’t. The “gas” companies receive less than 50¢ on the dollar for each gallon sold. The majority of that dollar goes to State, Federal taxes, transportation and the station operator.
Don’t complain about the price of gas (in the US) until you have driven in Europe or Asia (I have). Government taxes of gas are twice what they are in the US.
There is currently a grapph out there on the Internet that shows the proportion of taxes paid by all parties. Certainly with a little research one can verify this from multiple sources. It shows that over the years we have been taxing labor more and more, and taxing corporations and investments less and less.
This is precisely why the middle class is shrinking and our society is increasing polarized.
Without a prosperous middle-class economy itself withers. The middle class is the backbone upon which the rich get their handouts and the poor get theirs.
The USA is sliding towards a third world country of have and have nots. It is bad for democracy, and unfair and immoral.
Those making less than $50,000/year (half of the US) pay virtually no federal taxes. Period.
The top 2% of taxpayers (the wealthiest) pay 80% of all taxes paid.
The myth, perpetrated by liberals (Obama is their chief overlord) is that the “rich” aren’t paying their “fair” share. The myth works because the believers never bother to check it against reality.
I don’t know what orifice you pull your numbers from, but the CBO says that the average tax rate for a single filer with $50k income is about 10%.
Not every dollar a company makes is from the end consumer.
This is the stupidest fucking article.
Bullshit we pay every tax. Corporate law 101. A corporation is treated more or less like a person. That corporation pays taxes, not us. It pays taxes, generally, only on its profits and it’s called corporate tax. It’s comes after all of your other costs are deducted.
It’s very hard for many companies to know how much tax they’re going to have to pay at the end of the year unless you’ve been in business for a while and have good data to go off of.
That said, it’s hard to know how much to roll into the price of your products. Markets bad for the year? Then your corporate taxes will be low and expenses high… Expenses ended up being much lower in the latter half of the year… corporate taxes higher… You can imagine making assumptions for the year and slightly inflating your prices. But the more profit you make, the higher your taxes will be. That’s a huge problem.
But even if you do have solid ideas of what you’re going to pay on your corporate profits, nobody gives a shit because the market doesn’t care. It’s called competitive pricing. Less and less margins. Therefore, there’s no rule or formula that enables you to roll corporate income tax into your product. All it’ll do is increase the cost of your product and depending on your market, it might kill you off or increase the amount of tax you have to pay.
That’s why you price your products based on direct and indirect costs. You try to put out the absolute cheapest retail price you can and achieve the highest margins to get the most profit.
Again, corporate income tax comes off after all other expenses (direct and indirect costs). It’s not part of the costs of your product and literally impossible to say it’s a direct/indirect expense of doing business.
Corporate income tax is simply the government coming in after you’ve paid all of your expenses and sold all of your product and saying, “Ok, time to give us some. Pay up.”
This guy oversimplifies this, but like so many Internet idiots and hack journalists, it’s just another day on this fucking planet.
sfgh, you hit the nail on the head.
I am amazed how many people don’t understand that individuals are taxed on income/revenue and corporations are taxed on profits. A 35% individual tax rate is way higher than a 35% corporate tax rate. Imagine how great it would be to get a paycheck with no taxes taken out, pay all your bills and expenses and then pay taxes on what’s leftover. This is what corporations do.
Corporations can pay less in taxes by finding more expenses. If they invest more in R&D, factories, employees, etc… they lower their profit and tax payments but their investments will pay off long term. With low corporate taxes most corporations will not invest in their company. Instead they will pay the low tax and claim a higher profit. This makes the executives look good and they just give themselves higher bonuses. This is what is happening today with all these “record” profits.
Yep, you got it.
Profits are kinda of a misnomer. If your CEO is making a $50 million salary, employees over $100 k each, and you’ve got a ton of money rolled up into R&D, then your taxable income is low (high expenses) but people do well.
I think the nature of profit and how people look at it has changed. Why give the government money when you can spread it around a company in a way where more people benefit NOW but you ensure a bright future for the business?
Of course what Apple has done is kinda shot themselves in the foot because it’s a bitch to repatriate your money and value. I knew this in the end would be the problem and I’ve been reluctant of using tax havens.
Corporations do not pay taxes. People pay taxes. Any and all taxes paid by a corporation ultimately get passed on to their customers. In the end, it is always people who pay taxes.
Corporations pay taxes I can assure you. No, there is no guarantee a corporation will ever be able to pass on its corporate income tax to consumers. You can have a good year profit wise, pay a ton of corporate income tax, and then the next year tank and go bankrupt. This shit happens all the time.
But anyway, suck up whatever junk the Internet spits out for the day.
We truly live in the most glib of times.
“Never in our history have so many understood to little about so much”.
Welcome to the information age. A bunch of Internet drones and armchair critics.
Somebody fucking end this insanity, please.
There have been so many Ronald reagan quotes lately. So I thought I mind remind people of one that has not yet been quoted…
“The worlds Acid Rain problem can be resolved by simply reducing the number of trees in the Amazon”. Ronald Reagan
He gave us so many:
• “I am not worried about the deficit. It is big enough to take care of itself.”
• “Facts are stupid things.” (at the 1988 Republican National Convention)
• “Well, I learned a lot….I went down to (Latin America) to find out from them and their views. You’d be surprised. They’re all individual countries”
But Mark Twain can be best:
The radical invents views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them.
Oh, fuck off.
A corporation which does not build in its costs for taxes into the prices of its products and services is a corporation which won’t be around very long, because those taxes will be paid out of the capital of the business.
“No,” you say, “they will pay their taxes out of their profits.” Guess what, folks? That means that they BUILT IN THE EXPENSES FOR TAXES INTO THE PRICE OF THE PRODUCT!
Let me repeat: to make a profit, ANY business must build ALL of its expenses into the pricing of its products and services, or it will lose money (i.e., the expenses will be paid out of the pockets of the owners) and eventually go under.
If you don’t understand this simple fact about business, kindly work for someone else, and hire an accountant to take care of your personal finances, since you’re simply not qualified.
Basic economics. If the government taxes a corporation more, they can do two things. They can either let it cut into their profit margins, or they can increase the price of their products (if the market will let them sell their products at a higher price).
Likewise, if the government cuts a corporation’s taxes they have the same two options in reverse. They can lower the price of their products, or they can let their profit margins increase.
Since markets (supply and demand) usually dictate prices, taxes usually affect profit margins more than anything else.
“Since markets (supply and demand) usually dictate prices, taxes usually affect profit margins more than anything else.”
Bullshit. Talk about an oversimplification. The first part of the above is true, but the second part is bullshit. For starters, it’s what the other guys are doing that affects you. It’s all relative.
Imagine if nobody sold diet soda. But you did. You wouldn’t give a fuck what your competition was charging because you don’t have any. Then you constrain your pricing based on what the market is willing to bear. But higher prices means inflation and that carries over to people’s earnings, minimum wage, etc. So it’s a push pull thing. You can get away with charging a bit more because you know this to be true. As soon as competition comes around, you might not be able to charge as much.
In other words, you didn’t factor in how much you’d pay in corporate taxes. You just took into consideration what the market will bear, the fact you have no competition, and the idea that you can contribute to driving up people’s salaries and minimum wage through higher prices.
So you don’t give a shit about corporate taxes because you’re greedy and you know you have options to hide the profits: pay people more, invest it, tie it up in things that take away from the corporations taxable earnings, etc.
In other words, you’ve oversimplified it and that’s why basic economics is bullshit because people’s theories fail to take into account the multitude of options and variables that exist around business and people on planet earth today.
Case in point: Apple and many other companies continue to demonstrate that you can pay very little taxes and still have huge profit margins. So the idea that companies’ profit margins are heavily influenced as a function of a corporate tax rate X is bullshit.
Brain much? A tax is a tax. All passed on to customers. The govt acts like all companies are profitable. Everything has competition. if a tax cuts into profit margin and a competitor from Korea has the advantage the why even be in business. You can never think it is only greedy corporations. I’m a corporation with 2 employees. I have competition. All taxes hurt my bottom line and influence the decision to even be in business. When did paying taxes become cool? Who fights for taxes?? Especially when the govt wastes so much money. Only govt has no competition. They have no clue why to be efficient. As sure as anything investors will put their money in a more profitable situation. Overtax anything and it will die. Obama has never run a lemonade stand. Just a big go t tool The government is your “partner” when you make money with YOUR money. The govt does nothing for you if the business fails. Even when they make it fail.
Put your business in a tax haven and shut the fuck up.
Custom
Corporations do not pass on corporate tax to customers. The tax is assessed on profits, long after the product has been sold. Corporate tax reduces a corporation’s cash reserves, reducing the amount which could be reinvested or distributed as a dividend. Unless you own Apple shares you will not pay extra for an Apple product irrespective of the rate of tax paid.
This article makes as much sense as “if you lower taxes then prices will drop” or “of you lower taxes them it will create jobs”
I can’t find evidence that either of these statements are true.
Assuming I can spell
Of course we pay taxes… and we’ll have to if we want a society to exist.
Now, of course, the question of having necessarily a “society” to exist can be matter of discussion…
Of course if taxes are lower you can drop prices. Idiot. You can be more competative. You an the hire more with the increased demand and need to satisfy it. As for taxing to build society. Please don’t put the. Ash in the hands of democrats. Look what a fine job they done with Detroit Baltimore new Orleans I can go on. And can apple put friggin cursor key on this damn keyboard. Christ. Much to be desired.
Can you site evidence where this has happened?
If you lower tax, then this would presumably apply to all. So price competitiveness is irrelevant. No one would need to drop prices.
Presumably consumers would have more money to buy the products at the higher price, and the company would make more profits.
So, again, site ANY evidence you can find where a tax cut was followed buy a drop in the consumer price index.
Any evidence…please…show me.
Some of the comments here make it clear why we get some of the policies from government that we do. If someone can not understand that all costs (ALL) are passed on to the consumer from any company or corporation, then we deserve what we get. The consumer ultimately pays for everything in a well functioning society. Even those who get something for nothing will ultimately pay, or their offspring will. As Margaret Thatcher said. ” The problem with socialism is that pretty soon you run out of other people’s money.”
Yeah and some people think those nice lovely companies out there that have my best interests at heart will drop prices if a taxes were reduced. Any exec would simply give themselves a raise, or pay off some loans. And build a new pool it take a corporate trip to Thailand.
Hi Pedro:
Shut the fuck up you blabbering fool.
Regards,
sfgh
You really should take economics before spouting off nonsense. Or study up on price elasticity.
Gosh, Apple is sooo evil! No other company makes customers pay taxes! This article, and most comments, is so far beyond the bounds of human logic, it is pathetic!
well,… an interesting discussion, all in all.
i do have to wonder though about those who assert that corporations functionally pay no taxes – and in fact should not have to pay any taxes at all – because they simply pass along the cost of those taxes to the consumer through higher prices.
so, are we to assume then that if a corporation, say mr. apple for instance, had to pay no taxes whatsoever, that they would then automatically lower their prices, or might we reasonably assume that they would most likely use the lack of taxes to increase their profit margins and thus increase their bulging bag of plunder held off-shore?
although i shouldn’t like to be thought of as harboring an overly suspicious turn of mind, my guess would be the latter.
for those of you who assume the former, may i suggest that you are engaging in magical thinking ? because if that is what you believe, you might also be prone to the notion that the rise and former flourishing middle class, which was brought to us courtesy of the unionization process, resulted not from the sacrifices of those who risked, and in many cases, lost both their livlihood and their lives in the struggle for workers rights, but rather stemmed directly from the beneficence of our industrial titans, instead.
yes that is right, it wasn’t really the “socialists” and “progressives” that first proposed and then won us the 40 hour week, negotiated raises in wages, health benefits and paid vacations.
no actually it all resulted from one snowy night when john d rockefeller, henry ford, e.h. harriman, george pullman, andrew carnegie, mr. peabody the coal magnate and a number of other gentlemen of means all retired to the mr. rockefeller’s drawing room, after a sumptous dinner, to enjoy a few bottles of port and some fine cuban cigars.
“well boys,” says john d. says he, “we are all richer than croesus, we have more money than we know what to do with. whaddya say we give our worker a raise, cut back their work week from 12 hours a day 6 days a week to something more manageable. and while were at it, lets give them some paid vacation time as well. they have made us wealthy beyond our dreams, it’s time we shared some of that bounty with them”
and by god, that is exactly how it came to be.
the point of the tale is that no, corporations generally have no interests beyond increasing their profitability, and yes corporations should and must pay taxes. for in the process of making those profits they use much of the energy and travel infrastructure of america that we as taxpayers funded the construction of. they have obligations, as american corporations to both the nation and the citizens of this nation. we pay taxes they must pay taxes too.
This is a stupid comment. You could say this about ANY tax. You could say that individuals never pay tax. I don’t pay income tax, the company that hired me pays it, because they could hire me for less if I didn’t need to pay the tax before leaving enough for me to live. That’s rather disingenuous.
Furthermore, even if we assumed the “companies don’t pay tax” nonsense, there is still a reason to tax them: which is that one can potentially get a better equitable tax by doing so. Let’s say taxes are passed onto consumers. OK fine, but they are passed onto different consumers than the ones you might otherwise have taxed to make up the shortfall from not taxing the company. For example, those consumers might be overseas and beyond the reach of other taxes.
In other words, stupid article.
Companies cannot simply “pass it along.” This is a common conservative faliacy. Consumers are proce sensitive. They can “pass it along” righ out of business.
This argument basically states that corporations are all powerful, and we are all their helpless minions.
If we eliminated loopholes, there would be a federal surplus this year. Then we might not buy smartphones as often, but we might not have bridges collapsing underneath us.
This is an ignorant argument. Consumers are price sensitive, and it just doesn’t work that way.
If this is true, why is Apple’s profit margin shrinking? Are they just being nice to us? Do they not want to earn as much money as before? Why don’t the just pass those costs along to us?
“why is Apple’s profit margin shrinking?”
they just got outta the pool?
Not in Australia.
Total Apple turnover in Australia $6 BILLION AUD PA made up of ..
Apple Australia $1 BILLION AUD
Total tax paid $28 MILLION
Apple stores online and retail (100% American owned) $5 BILLION AUD
Total tax paid NIL
Total tax paid all up $28 MILLION AUD 0.466%
So, exactly where is the tax “we” supposedly pay when Apple pays next to nil due to transfer pricing and bogus royalty charges?