corndog wrote:
You're taking a flawed route with that argument because it essentially implies than anything legal is good, or okay. Small experiment: go drive the speed limit in the fast lane and see how society reacts.
If Apple broke the law, then bring them up on charges and jail Tim Cook. If Apple followed the law, then shut the hell up.
anthonysemone wrote:
Near as I can tell, rattymouse, they broke no laws, but who am I but just an ordinary citizen, and I'm sure there's a whole bunch of legal beagles out there who know more, and if Apple did, then there'll be a big to do, full of sound and fury, which ultimately will signify nothing. Why? Because Apple's just smart enough and have enough money to know how to work the system. Sorta like Exxon and other mega corporations who have been pulling these acts for time in memoriam. That capability however ignites the animosity of those folks not similarly positioned, so they invoke the "well, it may be legal, but it's not moral," as if "morality" played any role in issues such as these ...Show more →
Do you take tax breaks? Why?
Should I not claim my mortgage interest against my tax bill? If yes, why?
If the law allows Apple tax breaks, it would be STUPID for them not to take it.
If the tax breaks are unjust, then yell at the congress that writes tax laws.
If Apple broke tax laws, then file charges against them.
borderlight wrote:
Rattymouse: You're right, technically. There's no need to continue to audition for the Donald Trump part. Get off the stump and claim your pelt.
rattymouse wrote:
If Apple broke the law, then bring them up on charges and jail Tim Cook. If Apple followed the law, then shut the hell up.
Whoa whoa whoa, didn't know this was such seriouz buzinezz. You live by a set of rules, like a robot, that's fine, but it makes for a painful existence.
corndog wrote:
Whoa whoa whoa, didn't know this was such seriouz buzinezz. You live by a set of rules, like a robot, that's fine, but it makes for a painful existence.
Your personal attack shows how utterly bankrupt you are for ideas.
It's not a personal attack, don't be sssso sssenssssitive.
I suggest that those who are unable to understand an undocumented world in which one would need to operate in their existence without a very specific procedure is, indeed, a 'robot'. Those who must exist through detailed policies and procedures do not live, except within their prison sized room.
corndog wrote:
It's not a personal attack, don't be sssso sssenssssitive.
I suggest that those who are unable to understand an undocumented world in which one would need to operate in their existence without a very specific procedure is, indeed, a 'robot'. Those who must exist through detailed policies and procedures do not live, except within their prison sized room.
Pure nonsense. There are laws on how much tax to pay. If you fail to pay those taxes you risk criminal charges. If you follow the law you are OK. Apple is not under indictment or being accused of any wrong doings.
borderlight wrote:
"The internet tax personally affects me."
It could affect everybody. The big difference is it is proposed legislation, not finalized and faces an uphill battle in the House. The Apple tax dodge is happening now. Votes not needed. Maybe for some another cry for why a camera store didn't get their stuff to them on time using FM as the blunt instrument is more important.
"Apple income out of the US - Good for Apple - I wish I was able to do this."
Then I guess you are cool with Adobe renting you their software too.
Read the posting before you comment. What does Adobe have to do with this discussion, NOTHING.
rattymouse wrote:
Pure nonsense. There are laws on how much tax to pay. If you fail to pay those taxes you risk criminal charges. If you follow the law you are OK. Apple is not under indictment or being accused of any wrong doings.
You simply have no case, nor logic, whatsoever.
Vitriol wonderfully wrapped with the guise of 'logic', with a nice little bow, it's that for meeee?? Haha, anyway, I think the part that frustrates people is that us ants have no way of escaping our taxation, but those who make ungodly amounts have many more options for saving significant percentages. The average person working for a company receiving a salary has no control over how his funds are routed to himself and no realistic method of writing off applicable expenses, not to mention the fact that most people would have to spend so much in write offs that it would be counter-productive to the savings in taxes.
Apple certainly does have something to do with it. They manufacture products that have touched nearly everyone, yet look what they're doing to avoid heavy corporate taxation. When banks route their funds to offshore accounts, everyone hates them. When Apple does it, well that just might bring the corporate taxation issue to light in such a way that it gains more public support for bringing manufacturing and money back into the US. They also touch on the complexity of the US tax code, which is a real issue. Once I received funds from my employer which were outside the normal salary, that's been an incredible mess. I discovered taxation I've never heard of! I can't wait to go back to a 1040EZ (wonderfully simple). That's an issue many people can relate to, but who will listen to the little man? Oh, but who will listen to Apple?
You come off as so arrogant and full of anger, yet you complain about personal attacks while suggesting I/we "shut the hell up". Do you see any logic in that? Logically speaking, how good of a tool is anger in a discussion? You seem to have some sort of brain lock and are unable to discuss any aspect beyond law, is that a logical approach to communication? Is anger a rational and logical reaction to an insignificant posting on the internet? Has my point been made yet? You're standing on a pedestal of proclaimed logic while simultaneously chopping away at it. Go outside and take some photos,
I fail to see why it's somehow verboten to have a discussion about whether what Apple does is right or wrong, just because it's not illegal.
Just because the law does not require it, does not mean that the law is correct, or that Apple - or any other large organization that does this - should be earning huge profits in the US but not paying taxes on those profits.
The implication that it somehow couldn't be wrong just because Apple is following the letter of the law is boardering on the absurd.
This is actually a complex topic and a problem for governments the world over, and there are a lot of red herrings and very real reasons for suspecting Apple has taken advantage of their great success and essentially skirted taxes around the globe.
Most agree that even the most successful should pay their share of taxes.
According to an article in the ny times.
...about two-thirds of Apple's global pretax income in 2011 was recorded in Ireland, yet only 4 percent of its employees and 1 percent of its customers were located there.
Apple isn’t alone in this kind of use of tax laws. According to a study cited in the article above 30 of the largest American multinationals, “with more than $160 billion in profits, paid nothing in federal income taxes over a recent three-year period. Zero.”
The issue is how to revise these loopholes that permit this. Not just in the USA. I’m sure every government would like to get a percentage of the revenue they can for things sold in their country.
A bigger issue for some is the reality of some businesses having far more assets than many governments. As a result of this, these businesses will successfully promote laws that may not necessarily in the best interest of the people living in the country.
Our government doesn't have the best interest of the people living in the country, so that's no different. It's more like a balance of squeezing as much nectar as possible from a plant without killing it.
corndog wrote:
Vitriol wonderfully wrapped with the guise of 'logic', with a nice little bow, it's that for meeee?? Haha, anyway, I think the part that frustrates people is that us ants have no way of escaping our taxation, but those who make ungodly amounts have many more options for saving significant percentages. The average person working for a company receiving a salary has no control over how his funds are routed to himself and no realistic method of writing off applicable expenses, not to mention the fact that most people would have to spend so much in write offs that it would be counter-productive to the savings in taxes.
Apple certainly does have something to do with it. They manufacture products that have touched nearly everyone, yet look what they're doing to avoid heavy corporate taxation. When banks route their funds to offshore accounts, everyone hates them. When Apple does it, well that just might bring the corporate taxation issue to light in such a way that it gains more public support for bringing manufacturing and money back into the US. They also touch on the complexity of the US tax code, which is a real issue. Once I received funds from my employer which were outside the normal salary, that's been an incredible mess. I discovered taxation I've never heard of! I can't wait to go back to a 1040EZ (wonderfully simple). That's an issue many people can relate to, but who will listen to the little man? Oh, but who will listen to Apple?
You come off as so arrogant and full of anger, yet you complain about personal attacks while suggesting I/we "shut the hell up". Do you see any logic in that? Logically speaking, how good of a tool is anger in a discussion? You seem to have some sort of brain lock and are unable to discuss any aspect beyond law, is that a logical approach to communication? Is anger a rational and logical reaction to an insignificant posting on the internet? Has my point been made yet? You're standing on a pedestal of proclaimed logic while simultaneously chopping away at it. Go outside and take some photos,
