Rand Paul ruins the liberals' Apple show-trial (video)

[editec]

IF the money was made offshore by Apple's offshore subsidiary IRISH corporation, I fail to understand

1. Why it would be subject to US taxes in the first place, and

2. Why it is NOT subject ti Irish taxation.

Now I KNOW damned well that Apple used to manufacture products in Ireland, and I am assuming that they still do which would explain how that money was made in Ireland.

The problem, I suppose, is the IRISH Corporation is a legal fiction. (probably why Ireland doesn't tax the profits?)

It is not a stand-alone corp, IF it is a wholly owned subsidiary of an AMERICAN corporation this money exists in a LEGAL LIMBO, where it is NOT taxed by any nation?

If you or I owned that legal fiction and its profits --profits that are impervious to repatriation and taxation -- would EITHER Of US move it?

Apple did nothing wrong here, far as I can tell.

 

[Sallow]

IF the money was made offshore by Apple's offshore subsidiary IRISH corporation, I fail to understand

1. Why it would be subject to US taxes in the first place, and

2. Why it is NOT subject ti Irish taxation.

Now I KNOW damned well that Apple used to manufacture products in Ireland, and I am assuming that they still do which would explain how that money was made in Ireland.

The problem, I suppose, is the IRISH Corporation is a legal fiction. (probably why Ireland doesn't tax the profits?)

It is not a stand-alone corp, IF it is a wholly owned subsidiary of an AMERICAN corporation this money exists in a LEGAL LIMBO, where it is NOT taxed by any nation?

If you or I owned that legal fiction and its profits --profits that are impervious to repatriation and taxation -- would EITHER Of US move it?

Apple did nothing wrong here, far as I can tell.

I don't think they are trying to come up with wrong doing here.

I think they are illustrating how screwed up the law is..

 

[dblack]

IF the money was made offshore by Apple's offshore subsidiary IRISH corporation, I fail to understand

1. Why it would be subject to US taxes in the first place, and

2. Why it is NOT subject ti Irish taxation.

Now I KNOW damned well that Apple used to manufacture products in Ireland, and I am assuming that they still do which would explain how that money was made in Ireland.

The problem, I suppose, is the IRISH Corporation is a legal fiction. (probably why Ireland doesn't tax the profits?)

It is not a stand-alone corp, IF it is a wholly owned subsidiary of an AMERICAN corporation this money exists in a LEGAL LIMBO, where it is NOT taxed by any nation?

If you or I owned that legal fiction and its profits --profits that are impervious to repatriation and taxation -- would EITHER Of US move it?

Apple did nothing wrong here, far as I can tell.

I don't think they are trying to come up with wrong doing here.

I think they are illustrating how screwed up the law is..

Really? You don't think there's an element of brow beating and intimidation involved?

I honestly hope you're right. I hope this episode leads to revamping the tax code and ripping out all the crazy loopholes. But I'm not naive enough to think any of the fuckers orchestrating this mess has that in mind. Are you?

 

[PaulS1950]

The congressional hear attendees admitted that Apple had done nothing illegal.
Why would it be necessary to have a hearing about LEGAL activity?
Why waste our tax dollars on this hearing on a company that has done nothing illegal?
If they don't like companies and private citizens using the tax law as it is written to get out of paying a portion of the taxes on profit then why not pass legislation that closes the loopholes?

Could it be that those offisers themselves are also using the same loopholes to avoid paying taxes?

Naw, that would never happen......... well, maybe not "never" since even Obama's portfolio take advantage of some of those same loopholes.

 

[Jarlaxle]

We need more like him.

We need 534 more like him!

You mean a guy that uses Republican talking points against Democrats when the Republicans wrote and pushed the laws through that allow off-shore investments?

Your name fits. The human race could not POSSIBLY have more than 1% of its members as stupid as you!

 

[Mertex]

The congressional hear attendees admitted that Apple had done nothing illegal.
Why would it be necessary to have a hearing about LEGAL activity?
Why waste our tax dollars on this hearing on a company that has done nothing illegal?
If they don't like companies and private citizens using the tax law as it is written to get out of paying a portion of the taxes on profit then why not pass legislation that closes the loopholes?
And FYI, Republicans in Congress are the same ones that insist on keeping the loopholes. That's the reason we went into sequestration.

Could it be that those offisers themselves are also using the same loopholes to avoid paying taxes?

Naw, that would never happen......... well, maybe not "never" since even Obama's portfolio take advantage of some of those same loopholes.

It doesn't have to be illegal to be unethical. What Apple is doing is cleverly manipulating the system with bogus offshore companies. While it is not illegal, it is unethical and should be a wake-up call to Congress that the tax codes need to be changed. It's criminal that these large corporations, raking in billions are getting off tax free while middle-class Americans are carrying the tax load.

But any "Patriot" would not be cheering a company that is putting the screws to the country, instead, he should be working with Congress to change it.

Subcommittee staffers did not accuse Apple of illegal actions during a briefing Monday, but said they have never seen another corporate tax-avoidance setup like Apple’s offshore efforts. Apple’s use of “invisible” offshore companies was surprising to the subcommittee staff, they said.

Apple avoids paying taxes by shifting intellectual property largely developed in the U.S. to Irish subsidiaries, which pay far less than it’s worth, said Senator Carl Levin, the subcommittee chairman and a Michigan Democrat.

“Apple wasn’t satisfied with shifting its profits to a low-tax offshore tax haven,” Levin said Monday. “Apple sought the Holy Grail of tax avoidance. It has created offshore entities holding tens of billions of dollars, while claiming to be tax resident nowhere.”

Apple is one of the largest corporate tax avoiders in the U.S., added Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican. He called Apple’s offshore effects an “egregious and really outrageous scheme.”
http://www.macworld.com/article/2039299/senate-report-apple-claims-subsidiaries-with-no-taxing-jurisdiction.html

 

[dblack]

The congressional hear attendees admitted that Apple had done nothing illegal.
Why would it be necessary to have a hearing about LEGAL activity?
Why waste our tax dollars on this hearing on a company that has done nothing illegal?
If they don't like companies and private citizens using the tax law as it is written to get out of paying a portion of the taxes on profit then why not pass legislation that closes the loopholes?
And FYI, Republicans in Congress are the same ones that insist on keeping the loopholes. That's the reason we went into sequestration.

Could it be that those offisers themselves are also using the same loopholes to avoid paying taxes?

Naw, that would never happen......... well, maybe not "never" since even Obama's portfolio take advantage of some of those same loopholes.

It doesn't have to be illegal to be unethical. What Apple is doing is cleverly manipulating the system with bogus offshore companies. While it is not illegal, it is unethical and should be a wake-up call to Congress that the tax codes need to be changed. It's criminal that these large corporations, raking in billions are getting off tax free while middle-class Americans are carrying the tax load.

But any "Patriot" would not be cheering a company that is putting the screws to the country, instead, he should be working with Congress to change it.

What IS unethical, and should be criminal in my view, is the fact that Congress has turned the taxation power into a game of arm-twisting and favor-granting. They deliberately maintain these loopholes and discriminatory taxation schemes to enhance their own power. Publicly shaming Apple gives the profit-haters a warm fuzzy, and it's easy, but it doesn't address the real problem - something they have NO intention of doing. They're not about to give up the leverage and power that the convoluted tax code affords them

 

[Mertex]

The congressional hear attendees admitted that Apple had done nothing illegal.
Why would it be necessary to have a hearing about LEGAL activity?
Why waste our tax dollars on this hearing on a company that has done nothing illegal?
If they don't like companies and private citizens using the tax law as it is written to get out of paying a portion of the taxes on profit then why not pass legislation that closes the loopholes?
And FYI, Republicans in Congress are the same ones that insist on keeping the loopholes. That's the reason we went into sequestration.

Could it be that those offisers themselves are also using the same loopholes to avoid paying taxes?

Naw, that would never happen......... well, maybe not "never" since even Obama's portfolio take advantage of some of those same loopholes.

It doesn't have to be illegal to be unethical. What Apple is doing is cleverly manipulating the system with bogus offshore companies. While it is not illegal, it is unethical and should be a wake-up call to Congress that the tax codes need to be changed. It's criminal that these large corporations, raking in billions are getting off tax free while middle-class Americans are carrying the tax load.

But any "Patriot" would not be cheering a company that is putting the screws to the country, instead, he should be working with Congress to change it.

What IS unethical, and should be criminal in my view, is the fact that Congress has turned the taxation power into a game of arm-twisting and favor-granting. They deliberately maintain these loopholes and discriminatory taxation schemes to enhance their own power. Publicly shaming Apple gives the profit-haters a warm fuzzy, and it's easy, but it doesn't address the real problem - something they have NO intention of doing. They're not about to give up the leverage and power that the convoluted tax code affords them

That too, but who are the "profit haters"? I don't think anybody begrudges that a company is successful and rakes in a lot of money. That's good, but a corporation going to that much trouble to skirt their civil duty does not endear them to me and others who think it's a darn rotten scam.

 

[Katzndogz]

Congress likes to get some CEO up there and act like congressional fools. What did congress do to Toyota? Then found out the few accidents were the fault of stupid drivers.

 

[dblack]

It doesn't have to be illegal to be unethical. What Apple is doing is cleverly manipulating the system with bogus offshore companies. While it is not illegal, it is unethical and should be a wake-up call to Congress that the tax codes need to be changed. It's criminal that these large corporations, raking in billions are getting off tax free while middle-class Americans are carrying the tax load.

But any "Patriot" would not be cheering a company that is putting the screws to the country, instead, he should be working with Congress to change it.

What IS unethical, and should be criminal in my view, is the fact that Congress has turned the taxation power into a game of arm-twisting and favor-granting. They deliberately maintain these loopholes and discriminatory taxation schemes to enhance their own power. Publicly shaming Apple gives the profit-haters a warm fuzzy, and it's easy, but it doesn't address the real problem - something they have NO intention of doing. They're not about to give up the leverage and power that the convoluted tax code affords them

That too, but who are the "profit haters"? I don't think anybody begrudges that a company is successful and rakes in a lot of money.

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's an unfair stereotype. But it does seem there are those who think of 'profiting' from an endeavor as something inherently unscrupulous. And it seems to me the orchestrated theater is playing just that POV.

 

[Mertex]

What IS unethical, and should be criminal in my view, is the fact that Congress has turned the taxation power into a game of arm-twisting and favor-granting. They deliberately maintain these loopholes and discriminatory taxation schemes to enhance their own power. Publicly shaming Apple gives the profit-haters a warm fuzzy, and it's easy, but it doesn't address the real problem - something they have NO intention of doing. They're not about to give up the leverage and power that the convoluted tax code affords them

That too, but who are the "profit haters"? I don't think anybody begrudges that a company is successful and rakes in a lot of money.

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's an unfair stereotype. But it does seem there are those who think of 'profiting' from an endeavor as something inherently unscrupulous. And it seems to me the orchestrated theater is playing just that POV.

I don't know anyone who feels that way. What may be considered unscrupulous is the fact that corporations get subsidies and corporate welfare yet all you ever hear is the bemoaning of social welfare, which if compared in $$ value, is a drop in the bucket.

 

[dblack]

That too, but who are the "profit haters"? I don't think anybody begrudges that a company is successful and rakes in a lot of money.

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's an unfair stereotype. But it does seem there are those who think of 'profiting' from an endeavor as something inherently unscrupulous. And it seems to me the orchestrated theater is playing just that POV.

I don't know anyone who feels that way. What may be considered unscrupulous is the fact that corporations get subsidies and corporate welfare yet all you ever hear is the bemoaning of social welfare, which if compared in $$ value, is a drop in the bucket.

Absolutely. I'm totally with you on that. But the thing is, the precedent established by social welfare (that it's right and proper for the state to intervene in the economy on behalf of certain interest groups) get used for corporate welfare. When you invite the government to control the economy, those with the most to gain and lose WILL find a way to influence that process.

 

[dblack]

That too, but who are the "profit haters"? I don't think anybody begrudges that a company is successful and rakes in a lot of money.

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's an unfair stereotype. But it does seem there are those who think of 'profiting' from an endeavor as something inherently unscrupulous. And it seems to me the orchestrated theater is playing just that POV.

I don't know anyone who feels that way.

I certainly hear this view expressed in the healthcare debate with fair frequency.

 

[Mertex]

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's an unfair stereotype. But it does seem there are those who think of 'profiting' from an endeavor as something inherently unscrupulous. And it seems to me the orchestrated theater is playing just that POV.

I don't know anyone who feels that way. What may be considered unscrupulous is the fact that corporations get subsidies and corporate welfare yet all you ever hear is the bemoaning of social welfare, which if compared in $$ value, is a drop in the bucket.

Absolutely. I'm totally with you on that. But the thing is, the precedent established by social welfare (that it's right and proper for the state to intervene in the economy on behalf of certain interest groups) get used for corporate welfare. When you invite the government to control the economy, those with the most to gain and lose WILL find a way to influence that process.

I'm not sure what you mean "right and proper for the state to intervene in the economy on behalf of certain interest groups".
That stricter rules need to be enforced in social welfare is understood, but we can't just ignore poor people, and a certain amount of incentive needs to go to companies, too, but there needs to be a better balance than what we have now.

I believe in a certain amount of government intervention because many people/companies tend to get greedy the more money they make, and those of us on the receiving end would be the ones to suffer if there weren't some controls in place.

 

[Mertex]

Maybe you're right. Maybe it's an unfair stereotype. But it does seem there are those who think of 'profiting' from an endeavor as something inherently unscrupulous. And it seems to me the orchestrated theater is playing just that POV.

I don't know anyone who feels that way.

I certainly hear this view expressed in the healthcare debate with fair frequency.

You hear that some think "profiting" is unscrupulous as in the insurance companies, the caregivers, or who?

 

[dblack]

I don't know anyone who feels that way.

I certainly hear this view expressed in the healthcare debate with fair frequency.

You hear that some think "profiting" is unscrupulous as in the insurance companies, the caregivers, or who?

I've seen the claim, repeatedly, that profit has "no place" in health care. Presumably they think it should all be a matter of charity and altruism.

But the point I'm making isn't that some people are irrational - but that Congress has no genuine intent to change things. They're just putting on a show - nothing better than righteous indignation to fire up the electorate.

 

[Mertex]

I certainly hear this view expressed in the healthcare debate with fair frequency.

You hear that some think "profiting" is unscrupulous as in the insurance companies, the caregivers, or who?

I've seen the claim, repeatedly, that profit has "no place" in health care. Presumably they think it should all be a matter of charity and altruism.

That would be unreasonable, as there are expenses to be met in healthcare. But, it shouldn't be a "get filthy rich quick" type of deal, either, although there are unscrupulous people out there. I experienced that with a new dentist in my neighborhood, who was wanting to do work that was not necessary.

But the point I'm making isn't that some people are irrational - but that Congress has no genuine intent to change things. They're just putting on a show - nothing better than righteous indignation to fire up the electorate.

Oh, I don't know about that. The only ones that have no genuine intent to change things are the Republicans. It's hard to imagine that they think it's okay for companies to stick it to the country using devious means such as Apple has.

Many Democrats complain that the government is missing out on billions of dollars because companies are stashing profits abroad and avoiding taxes. Republicans want to cut the corporate tax rate of 35 percent and ease the tax burden on money that U.S. companies make abroad. They say the move would encourage companies to invest at home and thus spur the economy and job market.
Senate Panel Says Apple Uses Firms Outside the U.S. to Avoid Taxes | TIME.com

 

[dblack]

But the point I'm making isn't that some people are irrational - but that Congress has no genuine intent to change things. They're just putting on a show - nothing better than righteous indignation to fire up the electorate.

Oh, I don't know about that. The only ones that have no genuine intent to change things are the Republicans. It's hard to imagine that they think it's okay for companies to stick it to the country using devious means such as Apple has.

Do you really think Democrats would change it if they could? Why haven't they?

The issue reminds of the right wingers who want to shame welfare recipients for not abiding by their vision of a virtuous life. If Congress doesn't like the results of their stupid rules, they should change their stupid rules. Finger wagging at the people or companies following those rules is an embarrassment.

 

[Mertex]

But the point I'm making isn't that some people are irrational - but that Congress has no genuine intent to change things. They're just putting on a show - nothing better than righteous indignation to fire up the electorate.

Oh, I don't know about that. The only ones that have no genuine intent to change things are the Republicans. It's hard to imagine that they think it's okay for companies to stick it to the country using devious means such as Apple has.

Do you really think Democrats would change it if they could? Why haven't they?

Well, for one thing, Republicans control the House, so it would never get out of the House if Republicans are against it.

The issue reminds of the right wingers who want to shame welfare recipients for not abiding by their vision of a virtuous life. If Congress doesn't like the results of their stupid rules, they should change their stupid rules. Finger wagging at the people or companies following those rules is an embarrassment.

But Congress is made up of members with different ideas and values, and they all have to come together in order to accomplish anything - and they're having a hard time doing so.

 

[dblack]

Oh, I don't know about that. The only ones that have no genuine intent to change things are the Republicans. It's hard to imagine that they think it's okay for companies to stick it to the country using devious means such as Apple has.

Do you really think Democrats would change it if they could? Why haven't they?

Well, for one thing, Republicans control the House, so it would never get out of the House if Republicans are against it.

Democrats controlled it previously. Did they make any meaningful efforts to reform the tax code then?

Sorry, I just can't abide partisan cheerleading, or excuse-making for that matter. The Democrats aren't the stalwart defenders of the working man, and the Republicans aren't champions for free markets. The leadership of both parties is dominated by corporatists.