Trump’s tax reform and the EU’s tax demand on Apple

A little comment by Ben S has triggered a thought.

The EU’s tax demand on Apple in Ireland was based upon he idea that no tax was being paid anywhere. Verstaeger herself has said this. That if Apple paid US tax then that would change the Irish tax case.

One point would be that this shows what bollocks the tax case was in the first place. The other is that apple has just announced that it will be remitting that money into the US nd will be paying US corporate income tax upon it.

Collapse of EU tax case concerning Apple and Ireland, no?

I wonder what Spud is going to say about this? Especially since it pulls the rug from under the feet of most of the whining about tech giant taxes…..

12 thoughts on “Trump’s tax reform and the EU’s tax demand on Apple”

  1. Solid Steve 2: Squirrels of The Patriots

    I’m sure The Guardian and WaPo will congratulate Dr. President Trump on the yuge tax windfall and squillions of investment in America his new legislation has secured.

  2. I’m sure he will claim that it is solely and entirely down to his brave, noble, selfless campaigning, and that he should get a gong for his fearless service of the MOAR TAX agenda

  3. And it was so simple.

    The previous rate of tax was a rip off. The new rate makes it worthwhile to repatriate profits (on which local tax HAS been paid).

    Everybody benefits.

    Trump strikes again. A lower rate collects more tax( and how!)

  4. At the risk of stating the obvious, there’s a difference between the reason a case is looked into vs the actual legal merits of the case.

    Apple (and the other cases) attracted attention between they were paying zero tax on some profits. Actually, to be more accurate, they attracted attention because they were paying zero tax on MORE profits than others, by utilising more aggressive tactics.

    However, now the EU looked, the only question to be answered is whether State Aid was granted by the countries involved. It’s got nothing to do with whether the companies involved actually paid tax to a non-EU country, it’s about whether they were offered a beneficial tax treatment that wasn’t available to others.

  5. ‘A lower rate collects more tax’

    But the professor constantly reminds us there is no Laffer curve.

    Neoliberalismistic sophistrism surely ?

  6. Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi attempts to explain why this is all a BAD THING. Again.

    In other news, Donald Trump has eaten a few too many Big Macs over the course of his life and is GOING TO DIE.

  7. “no Laffer curve”

    My Democrat golfing buddy admits that there is a Laffer curve. But explains that we are way on the other side of it, so tax cuts won’t increase revenues.

    Yada, yada.

  8. He has turned the US into just another tax haven, stealing taxes/wealth from the hardworking economies where all their customers are. Tax haven governments are class traitors, providing an escape route for the wealthy mega-corporations to subvert other government’s attempts to fix inequality. With less tax incident on the shareholders, more of the burden necessarily falls on the customers and employees, who work hard and pay tax to fund it only to see the benefits of their sacrifices siphoned off abroad, spent not for their benefit, but for the benefit of the citizens of a country who don’t have to work for it. Candidly, tax havens are a great evil, and this supports the need to unify tax rates and regulations across international borders, to stop these silly tax avoidance games, and enable governments to have control over their own economy.

    Something like that?

  9. We need to make sure big companies pay a fair share of tax, to support public services and the poor and middle class.
    My new slogan.
    Win for Winfrey 2020.
    Dump the Trump

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *