The agenda of the hearings is not really about Apple alone, but instead as a way to educate the public about how terrible the tax code is and to build up political pressure to change it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Jon Stewart Takes on Apple's Appearance in Front of Senate Committee
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The real irony, if you examine GWB's presidency, he actually had more social welfare programs than Clinton. I fell off my chair when I read that. I'll have to dig for the sources.
Other first world nations are presently living better than the average American, I'll take healthcare and a better education system over 50% of our tax dollars going to our military budget. We outspend North Korea 75 to 1 in our spending. Those who claim Obama is a "socialist" make me laugh. Socialism is not Communism. Visit North Korea, then return and claim Obama is their definition of a "socialist". Oh, that's right, you can't. Let's eliminate our police force, firemen, teachers, et al as "socialism" is fascism. :roll eyes:
Last edited by a moderator:
If you're in the UK you can watch it on Comedy Central. Stuart records 2 shows - the US one and an International one. It'll likely be on tomorrows International one.
Ireland is the corporate office for Facebook in the European Union. Under the EU rules, Facebook can set up their corporate office anywhere in the EU and Ireland is the sweet spot for favorable tax treatment.
Facebook still has corporate headquarters in Silicon Valley.
Facebook users, however, have a contract with "Facebook Ireland Limited" that helps Facebook avoid paying local taxes throughout the world and keep their tax rate under 2% (i.e., the double Irish arrangement).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook,_Inc.#Offices
FYI, these "mom and pops" were registered as non-profit social welfare groups which are strictly prohibited from getting involved in political campaigns. And they did.
See, everyone loves to play the victim. Even you.
You have either knowingly stated an outright lie, or you do not know of what you speak.. They did nothing illegal. These were 501 (c) (4) organizations, which are perfectly within their right to be political, as long as their primary function is promoting social welfare.
Apple set up its Irish sub in the 1980's by entering into an R&D sharing agreement. Under its terms the Irish sub paid one-half of Apple's R&D costs which were incurred in the U.S. and which contributed to the U.S. economy. In return, the Irish sub received the right to license the product of the R&D, intellectual property, which it sold to sales organizations doing business throughout the world other than in the Americas. An ignorant public and comedians can lash back all it wants, but Apple has absolutely nothing to apologize for. Nor does Congress. There is no fair tax law that can subject profits from operations outside the U.S. to U.S. taxes. Remember, Apple has already paid taxes in all these countries, including their much higher employment taxes and obligations. Unless the profits inure to the benefit of some U.S. domiciled company, which they do not, there is no nexus to the U.S. that justifies American taxation. Since Apple sells twice as much outside the U.S. than inside it, it should be no surprise that its U.S. tax bill is not based on its worldwide GAAP income.
Remember that Apple did not sell or transfer IP to its Irish sub, as is common, and part of the tax management strategy employed by Microsoft; Ireland earned its right to charge royalties on Apple R&D by taking the risk of paying for R&D that may never have produced anything worthwhile. Apple famously flirted with bankruptcy after Ireland had been paying R&D expenses for years. That Apple recovered and generated billions in sales outside the Americas was fortunate for Apple and fortunate for its Irish sub.
Uniformed, uneducated, and unsophisticated senators, comedians, and posters can criticize Apple all they like, but it doesn't make them right.
You're the third person in this forum that has incorrectly stated the law. Read the damn code.
You want to see the truth? If you can handle the truth.
501(c)(4): Working definition changed
501(c)(4) fundraising: Tea party groups complain about something they don't even need to apply for
Cheating: How to cheat on your taxes if you have an international subsidiary
More cheating: Import/export? Export your US tax burden too
The 'Fair Tax' replacement scheme: You actually want to pay between 25% and 31% federal sales tax?
Who is paying more taxes?: You are, and the corporations aren't!
More truth on these beleaguered tax free 'social welfare' organizations: A gift to the ultra wealthy: our elections
The system is rigged, and 'we the people' always seem to lose...
501(c)(4): Working definition changed
501(c)(4) fundraising: Tea party groups complain about something they don't even need to apply for
Cheating: How to cheat on your taxes if you have an international subsidiary
More cheating: Import/export? Export your US tax burden too
The 'Fair Tax' replacement scheme: You actually want to pay between 25% and 31% federal sales tax?
Who is paying more taxes?: You are, and the corporations aren't!
More truth on these beleaguered tax free 'social welfare' organizations: A gift to the ultra wealthy: our elections
The system is rigged, and 'we the people' always seem to lose...
Last edited:
I want some details of that "persecution" before I believe it. Remember, we're quarreling about whether the setting-up of partisan political groups -- is the Tea Party anything else but GOP RED LABEL? Now, they might be set up by Mom & Pop, but just get some old white-shoe Republican primaried, and a lot of anonymous money can pour in there to vote for some crazy and very political extremist. I know, loaded word. Well, just wrong about everything. What I refer to as a Gohmert.
What's more, I'm getting the feeling that Stewart just doesn't understand. This is what? Poor, victimized right wingers, being senselessly and cruelly separated from their tax-free and anonymous billionaire friends? Colbert's the one to watch on this subject. Stewart started taking himself too seriously. He actually thinks there's some there there. He's lost his comic perspective. He's NOT the best newsman in the world, he's a comedian who's getting serious for a second, people. Yet his sharp mind just leaves him. Colbert went into what frauds these things-- these financial instruments called 901(c)(4)'s are -- they're like putting up signs, "anonymous donors pay no taxes on the money they give here." The 901(c)(4) used to be for a charity, or a real non-profit. A hospital or an old age home gets built for some generous rich guys. Fine, great! Some crazy old coots whose political parentage is the John Flipping Birch Society want to do without all regulations. In pulp and paper, dirty water, and cancers. Figures it's the noble capitalist's due for creating jobs. To me, this is lunacy. Should people be able to speak and organize freely? Yes. But I pay tax on my political donations. Why shouldn't the Koch Brothers and al their pals? So start a Tea Party chapter! Now, its only so-called limitation, as Colbert showed, is that you can't pay for ads for one particular candidate. Yeah, but you can legally give your tax-free bucks to an organization that does. Anonymity and tax breaks still there. Well, I know, the poor billionaires of this land don't already own us lock, stock and barrel already. And They Know Better because Evolution Which I Don't Believe In Made the Better People Rich.
Yeah, but Corporations don't pass bills; Congress does. In this situation it's the voters who are bad for reelecting corrupt politicians who create the mess, not the companies taking advantage of voter stupidity.
The link just worked o.k. from here...
But then his show is AFAIK nowhere to be seen on German TV.
Except that somebody who doesn't have the money won't win because they won't get their message out there as well. It's just how it is. If you see one person with 400 ads and another with 40, you'll remember the guy with 400 because they had 400 ads.
Wow.. wait a minute. There is an international version of Jon Stewart? Where can I watch that?
We're moving a bit off topic here. The other person was grossly inaccurate regarding 501(c)(4)s. I even sourced the details. Even if the IRS flagged those filing in the most partisan manner possible rather than just by what appeared to be politically motivated, his first amendment claim there was baseless nonsense written by someone who clearly doesn't understand his own words.
I don't want to pull this further off topic, even though I agree with you including the part about Stewart taking himself too seriously. My point was to refute the other FUD as it's still FUD even if you assume scandal (as I showed). I don't know if you caught his clips on Apple last night. Most of them were of senators praising Apple rather than the questions over Apple's IP holding companies, transfer pricing, and trying to identify what constitutes an arm's length transaction. I watched part of the initial recording, so I know it was more mixed than that.
.
Very funny. He sure knows how to drive home his point and make these politicians and corporate drones look like the weasels they really are.
----------
You can watch the clip concerned on 9to5Mac. I'm in the UK and it played ok for me.
----------
You can watch the clip concerned on 9to5Mac. I'm in the UK and it played ok for me.
Of course they do! what do you think Citizens United is all about?
Your naiveté is just lovable... and sad.
C
champ01
Guest
Finally someone that understands how politics works.
(well of course politics never works but ok that another story)
This link should work in the UK and Ireland at least:
http://www.comedycentral.co.uk/shows/featured/the-daily-show/videos/tax-men-the-daily-show-911559/
http://www.comedycentral.co.uk/shows/featured/the-daily-show/videos/tax-men-the-daily-show-911559/