Ireland Government intend to appeal EU/Apples Tax Ruling

[HalGameGuru]

8 minutes ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

-snip-

State's rights and constitutionality is a very nuanced discussion, it would take us a while to go over the specifics.

 

But the future isn't globalism or one world government, the future is stateless "nation as a service" pushes like BITNation. Some european nations are already consulting with experts to ease the transition to a decentralized governance model. There are some interesting people to follow online if anyone is interested in the movement. Removing the territorial monopoly of the nation-state to a voluntary, elective, and competitive model for organization and governance.

[2FA]

49 minutes ago, HalGameGuru said:

State's rights and constitutionality is a very nuanced discussion, it would take us a while to go over the specifics.

 

But the future isn't globalism or one world government, the future is stateless "nation as a service" pushes like BITNation. Some european nations are already consulting with experts to ease the transition to a decentralized governance model. There are some interesting people to follow online if anyone is interested in the movement. Removing the territorial monopoly of the nation-state to a voluntary, elective, and competitive model for organization and governance.

My answer to that model is good luck with inherent human nature.

[Tomsen]

6 hours ago, AresKrieger said:

I'll repeat my point

 

Apple would have never come there if Ireland didn't make the deal, and they are not the only company with an arrangement with Ireland like this. Ergo if they try to back out of the deal or if the EU destroys the deal the other companies would see that as an issue and go somewhere else.

 

Thus going against the EU is in their best interest in this case as they will likely lose more money overall in the long term.

Where would apple then go? Still needs to be within EU to conduct business in the EU.
 

Ireland would still be the best place for taxes and convenience.

[HalGameGuru]

1 hour ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

My answer to that model is good luck with inherent human nature.

How often do you assault, thieve, rape, or defraud in a day? Do you ONLY not do it because the state threatens you? Voluntary and decentralized governance is what most of us reflect in our daily lives. Human nature is pretty awesome once you remove the presumptions of coercion and authoritarianism. 

 

 

[2FA]

9 minutes ago, HalGameGuru said:

How often do you assault, thieve, rape, or defraud in a day? Do you ONLY not do it because the state threatens you? Voluntary and decentralized governance is what most of us reflect in our daily lives. Human nature is pretty awesome once you remove the presumptions of coercion and authoritarianism. 

 

 

Sorry but I don't believe libertarianism/borderline anarchism works on a large scale. Mob rule is a very real issue and is subject reactionary tendencies. Pure capitalism doesn't work and neither does pure socialism. A balance between the two is necessary for the good of all. I will say no more as we are derailing the thread. 

 

Back on topic, the reason the EU handed down this ruling is that almost all of their profit coming into the Ireland HQ is from other EU nations with much higher tax rates and not Ireland itself.

 

EDIT: PM me if you want to discuss more.

[AresKrieger]

1 hour ago, Tomsen said:

Where would apple then go? Still needs to be within EU to conduct business in the EU.
 

Ireland would still be the best place for taxes and convenience.

Why would it need to be within the EU to conduct business with the EU, granted I will admit it makes it easier but plenty of companies sell things in the EU without actually being based there

[Nineshadow]

8 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

I think that Ireland are happy with it simply because Apple employ lots of people in Ireland so while they're not taking tax from Apple directly Apple are paying a lot of wages to Irish citizens and if Apple left Ireland it would have a huge impact the Irish economy. 

More because since the 1980s successive Irish governments have made low corporate tax and other tax-avoidance measures a key part of their sales pitch to woo foreign firms to Ireland. You can only imagine what this would do to their image.

[Nineshadow]

8 hours ago, Deli said:

Tax evasion is nothing wrong. That's new for me.

I know someone who got a 3 year sentence for practicing tax evasion amounted to ~400 EUR.

So...yeah.

[IrishFeangol]

The Dáil would likely not have agreed to appeal this if they knew it was a losing battle from the get-go. I'm pretty sure they provided anything the EU asked for during the investigation as well.

The EU Parliament have been trying to get Ireland to increase the corporate tax for ages and this could be a way to get a foothold.

Ireland was made agree to use any additional revenue gains to reduce its national debt in 2016 and 2017, which essentially means if Apple pays up, the money will go straight to the EU exchequer. 

To be honest, I don't care who done what, as long as it doesn't affect jobs, as they're worth more to the people in the current economy.

[patrickjp93]

8 hours ago, RikvE said:

I don't get how people approve of this deal. This is more tax exemption than tax reduction.

Because it provides the Irish plenty of jobs and it forces the Irish government to be efficient and compete. That is a good thing. The U.S. could learn a lot from this.

[Kobathor]

11 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

Because it provides the Irish plenty of jobs and it forces the Irish government to be efficient and compete. That is a good thing. The U.S. could learn a lot from this.

we borrow trillions of dollars per year. we would need this tax money.

[patrickjp93]

Just now, Kobathor said:

we borrow trillions of dollars per year. we would need this tax money.

No, we need to spend less. Stop subsidizing Chinese-made steel, stop overpaying for military equipment; stop just handing money to Lockheed without a solid, working prototype, stop with incentivizing remaining poor with taxes that make it more expensive to work than to take welfare, end this stupid Affordable Care Act farce, cut out the pork, and end this idiotic federal minimum wage. Stop paying for things you can't afford. That fixes 90% of the problems.

[Kobathor]

4 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

No, we need to spend less. Stop subsidizing Chinese-made steel, stop overpaying for military equipment; stop just handing money to Lockheed without a solid, working prototype, stop with incentivizing remaining poor with taxes that make it more expensive to work than to take welfare, end this stupid Affordable Care Act farce, cut out the pork, and end this idiotic federal minimum wage. Stop paying for things you can't afford. That fixes 90% of the problems.

I agree! But try telling that to the government. Hint: They don't want to hear it.

Trump wants to fix a lot of these problems. He's also pretty nutty. Oh-so conveniently, his opponent is a crazy chick that can't remember any briefings she had as Secretary of State after she suffered concussions, and can't remember most of the briefings before she suffered said concussions. God help us.

[Citadelen]

19 minutes ago, patrickjp93 said:

-snip-

The Chinese steel tariff is up to the EU and not the Irish government I believe; about military equipment I really don't think Ireland needs a proper army anyway. Also wages haven't risen with inflation that's why people are bettor off on benefits at the moment, I find it slightly funny that you don't agree with unemployment benefits yet call a minimum wage idiotic, if a business can't afford to pay it's workers then the business should either suffer or the government takes responsibility and pay the extra so the workers don't suffer. Are you referring to state health care? If you are then wow, just wow. Insurance provided health care is unforgiving and vicious, for profit companies can't be trusted to put people's well being first, one needs only look at the US.

[Tomsen]

1 hour ago, AresKrieger said:

Why would it need to be within the EU to conduct business with the EU, granted I will admit it makes it easier but plenty of companies sell things in the EU without actually being based there

Because that is the basic laws of conducting business in the EU.

Those companies most likely use a daugther company based in the EU for it.

[patrickjp93]

55 minutes ago, Citadelen said:

The Chinese steel tariff is up to the EU and not the Irish government I believe; about military equipment I really don't think Ireland needs a proper army anyway. Also wages haven't risen with inflation that's why people are bettor off on benefits at the moment, I find it slightly funny that you don't agree with unemployment benefits yet call a minimum wage idiotic, if a business can't afford to pay it's workers then the business should either suffer or the government takes responsibility and pay the extra so the workers don't suffer. Are you referring to state health care? If you are then wow, just wow. Insurance provided health care is unforgiving and vicious, for profit companies can't be trusted to put people's well being first, one needs only look at the US.

We were referring to the U.S. in that last reply pair, but no worries.

 

No, I'm consistent. Minimum wages only stagnate the economy. You are competing for job slots, and the more you impress a minimum wage upon an economy, the more jobs you lose to automation, outsourcing, and the like. Having a minimum wage is stupid. It lets people sit on their laurels in unskilled jobs that will just be lost to them anyway. As wages push toward zero for unskilled work, people will work to get skills for higher-paying, higher-worth jobs.

 

The insurance-provided system is the most robust in the world and doesn't risk collapse of a government goes bankrupt. The problem is lack of competition and a lack of tort reform. You handle those two and insurance-based care is cheaper and better than any government-provided system.

 

They don't. They put profit first, but they have to earn your business. The exchange is voluntary. They compete based on coverage and cost, and that works in the consumers' favor, period.

[HalGameGuru]

2 hours ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

-snip-

Agree to disagree, depending on your definitions that's what we have now, that's what a state is.

 

As for the EU, I can understand their stance on the legality, and wanting to ensure an even playing field across the EU, but this seems a little invasive to national sovereignty on an internal action. It did not effect anything, so far as I can see, between IRE and the rest of the EU, taxes and costs were still accounted for externally. The EU is supposed to be something like the American Federal government, each EU nation is an american state equivalent, granted the foundations are different and the enumerated powers I am sure are, I have never read the EU charter or their "constitution" but I would doubt any of the nations would have agreed to such a wholesale reduction in their sovereign powers. Although I wouldnt put it past the EU to overstep just as the US does.

[2FA]

18 minutes ago, HalGameGuru said:

Agree to disagree, depending on your definitions that's what we have now, that's what a state is.

 

As for the EU, I can understand their stance on the legality, and wanting to ensure an even playing field across the EU, but this seems a little invasive to national sovereignty on an internal action. It did not effect anything, so far as I can see, between IRE and the rest of the EU, taxes and costs were still accounted for externally. The EU is supposed to be something like the American Federal government, each EU nation is an american state equivalent, granted the foundations are different and the enumerated powers I am sure are, I have never read the EU charter or their "constitution" but I would doubt any of the nations would have agreed to such a wholesale reduction in their sovereign powers. Although I wouldnt put it past the EU to overstep just as the US does.

The EU charter is sort of in between what the Articles of Confederation were and what the Constitution is now in regards to granting power to the EU. It doesn't have full authority over members but does have laws and regulations that have to be followed.

[HalGameGuru]

5 minutes ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

The EU charter is sort of in between what the Articles of Confederation were and what the Constitution is now in regards to granting power to the EU. It doesn't have full authority over members but does have laws and regulations that have to be followed.

If its between the two it should only really have a say in issues between the member nations and EU edicts that are applicable to all states equally, it shouldn't really have a say in how a state administers its own internal taxation and bureaucracy. It would be one thing if it was an EU tax that was shirked rather than an IRE specific tax

[abazigal]

14 hours ago, Nicholatian said:

Why should I give a fuck about Apple’s money? Why do any of us have a stake in the outcome for them? They don’t care about us. They’re not at our beck and call. I don’t care about Apple, and I find the amount of tax they have negotiated to pay to be appalling. If I were to make a successful startup under an LLC, an entire quarter of my income would go to the US Government. While that’s not really a bad thing, what is horrifying is that, ignoring percentages, I flat out pay more taxes dollar for dollar than they do per million.

 

Don’t you see anything wrong with that?

Whether you think Apple is paying too little tax is besides the point. The point is that the EU is flat out telling a company to pay taxes that they didn't owe, under some ambiguous "it just feels right" rationale. That's not how the law works. 

 

Imagine if someone came up to you and told you "I think you have been paying too little car insurance these past 10 years. Time to make up the difference." and expects you to pay up there and then. How is that fair? 

 

If the EU thinks that Ireland's corporate tax rates are too low, have them raised, and proceed to tax Apple from the next financial year onwards. Apple has broken no laws (much as some people feel that their low tax rates is morally and ethically reprehensible), and if this case ever made it to the courts, I honestly can't see the EU winning. 

[patrickjp93]

16 hours ago, SirRoderick said:

This IS Capitalism. The thing you are currently cheering is the most Capitalist thing imaginable. They made an illegal tax deal to grant Apple basically a total exemption from taxes in the EU. That is including proceeds from your own region, because they get funneled through Ireland.

No, it's cronyism. Capitalism is a free market with competition purely on merit, a complete lack of government intervention. Taxation is not considered intervention as long as it is uniform.

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, Nicholatian said:

What’s fair isn’t based purely off of what’s legal. I understand that legally they’re in the clear, but that doesn’t mean that it’s acceptable for them to be paying less tax flat-out dollar for dollar than I do.

 

If the EU finds it necessary they should raise taxes and levy them. It’s stupid that it was ever legal for them to be levying so little tax to begin with. Ireland should not have to appeal this, Apple should be paying more, and just because the law states that they only pay $5K on the million does not mean that it is acceptable or right for them to be doing so.

 

I know you’ll probably counter this by disclaiming your moral stake in this situation. That’s really typical of the type of people who benefit from corrupt systems like this… and I don’t mean just businessmen. University professors, investors, and others who are profitting off of cheats like this aren’t going to want to acknowledge that it’s wrong six ways from Sunday.

 

So yeah, if you’re just going to dismiss and ignore what is central to this issue… save it for your kin please.

It's not stupid. This is how governments compete to get better conditions for their own people. Having a low tax rate necessitates wise spending on only what is necessary and making governments efficient.

 

It's not up to you to decide whether Apple should pay more or not. It's up to the Irish government and by proxy, the people of Ireland as a whole. Now, the Irish government should tax people and firms uniformly from a moral perspective, but on the whole, this is not your decision to make and it's not the EU's. Ireland is either a sovereign state or it isn't.

[patrickjp93]

2 minutes ago, Nicholatian said:

And capitalism wouldn’t leave the doors wide open for cronyism if people weren’t human.

Socialism and government intervention introduces cronyism, not capitalism. In capitalism, the government is a non-entity, as it should be. It's only when the government gets involved that suddenly governments can be bought for the benefit of businesses.

[laminutederire]

22 hours ago, Deli said:

Tax evasion is nothing wrong. That's new for me.

Tax evasion is wrong. It's taking the money away from people who actually need it. Principle of taxes are to ensure the states can run they non profit branches such as education or health, and to ensure money is better distributed. 

[laminutederire]

5 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

It's not stupid. This is how governments compete to get better conditions for their own people. Having a low tax rate necessitates wise spending on only what is necessary and making governments efficient.

 

It's not up to you to decide whether Apple should pay more or not. It's up to the Irish government and by proxy, the people of Ireland as a whole. Now, the Irish government should tax people and firms uniformly from a moral perspective, but on the whole, this is not your decision to make and it's not the EU's. Ireland is either a sovereign state or it isn't.

That doesn't apply to the EU. Ireland gets money from the EU so the EU has a say. You can't ask for money someone if you don't make sure you get all the money you should elsewhere.