Not going to click the link, but it's probably safe to bet the essence of the article is:
Both sides are bad, so vote Republican.

Apple is left wing?

Republicans are currently the leading assholes in America today.

Lord_Baull: Not going to click the link, but it's probably safe to bet the essence of the article is:
Both sides are bad, so vote Republican.

No, not even close.

how is apple a "left wing" corporation?

Apple doesn't have a 9.8% tax rate. It has a 9.8% tax rate *in the US*.

I despise Apple as much as anyone sane, but global companies have a tax web across the entire globe, and that has to be taken into account.

If you want to tax foreign companies when they operate in the US, you can't object to US companies having a portion of their tax burden elsewhere when they operate globally.

I hope Sen. Levin told Coburn "Sorry, but we're going to oppose everything any repub Senator proposes on principle. If you win control of the Senate in November better make sure you have 61 votes because in terms of filibuster threats, cloture votes and secret holds on legislation, you ain't seen nuthin' yet!"

Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

As much as I hate to agree with Tom Coburn he's right about corporations like Apple using their foreign subsidiaries to dump profits into in order to pay less in taxes.

The fact that they pioneered some of the tax dodging schemes and are now encouraging other American based multi-national corporations to do the same thing does make them a fair target.

Somehow I find it hard to believe that anyone on the GOP is ever gonna actually do anything about it but the discussion is certainly useful and timely.

Hasn't Apple been audited in the past? Probably many times. Sounds like if they were doing something illegal it would have been found out long before now.

Bungles: Apple doesn't have a 9.8% tax rate. It has a 9.8% tax rate *in the US*.

I despise Apple as much as anyone sane, but global companies have a tax web across the entire globe, and that has to be taken into account.

If you want to tax foreign companies when they operate in the US, you can't object to US companies having a portion of their tax burden elsewhere when they operate globally.

That Apple pays foreign taxes on its foreign income has no real bearing on calculating it's effective tax rate in the US. Or on the discussion of whether it's a reasonable or sustainable amount for a multi-billion dollar company to pay.

jules_siegel: Apple is left wing?

This

/F Apple

If that traitor 0bama hadn't instituted all these tax breaks to benefit the corporations that dump millions into his campaign, the GOP wouldn't be complaining. I mean, really, 0bama gives them so much ammunition.

I blame Obama, the facist, socialist, nazi-loving enemy of the US.

jules_siegel: Apple is left wing?

EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

How many direct subsidies does apple receive? How much government money and land has gone into creating a supply chain for Apple?

And who's arguing apple shouldn't pay more in taxes? Probably not the people arguing ending oil subsidies and tax breaks.

EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

As disingenuous as this post is, you do have a point. Apple could obviously lower its prices one everything significantly because their profit margin indicates their costs of business are really low relative to what they charge their customers.

However, the tax code itself does not target individual companies so you can't have a punitive "Apple Tax" because they were smart enough to construct some kind super image in customers minds to make them want to pay very premium prices for their products.

Here is another reason why that fails: People aren't talking about going after Exxon because its going to balance the budget, people are talking about ending oil subsidies because with the record profits they are pulling in they are no longer necessary. The question is, why In this budget environment are we propping up an industry through subsidies that is pulling in record breaking amounts of profits?

There is another element of hypocrisy as well in that a big argument used against alternative energy sometimes is that it would require lots of subsides for them to be adopted. Well, the amount of subsidies received by oil companies and traditional energy corporations far dwarfs the amounts received by their alternative brethren.

Also, Exxon as you identified produces energy. A significant part of their products is gasoline. Gas prices are one of the huge red button issues for many Americans. When gas prices are already considered very high by many and you tell them that on top of fleecing their wallet several times a month these same people are helped by the US government one should expect the potential for an emotional response.

EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

Yea, it's an either/or situation.

Oh, and the oil companies aren't going to sleep with you.

Wooly Bully

karnal: Hasn't Apple been audited in the past? Probably many times. Sounds like if they were doing something illegal it would have been found out long before now.

Look up "loophole", moron. It doesn't mean "illegal".


I didn't say it was illegal, Dim.....I said if it was illegal it would have come out long ago. Learn to read and comprehend.

Deneb81: Bungles: Apple doesn't have a 9.8% tax rate. It has a 9.8% tax rate *in the US*.

I despise Apple as much as anyone sane, but global companies have a tax web across the entire globe, and that has to be taken into account.

If you want to tax foreign companies when they operate in the US, you can't object to US companies having a portion of their tax burden elsewhere when they operate globally.

That Apple pays foreign taxes on its foreign income has no real bearing on calculating it's effective tax rate in the US. Or on the discussion of whether it's a reasonable or sustainable amount for a multi-billion dollar company to pay.



It has every bearing, because we have a global marketplace where companies are free to headquarter specific slices of their organisations wherever they please.

"Apple" is to "left wing" as "Saturn V rocket" is to "a house"

I believe we are seeing a new species of bullshiat: The "Strawmanus Rex". This is a HUGE strawman. NOBODY is saying that companies like Apple shouldn't be paying a higher tax rate and be prevented from exploiting tax loopholes. However, people like this idiot defend "their side" by pointing out "Hey, look over there, go attack that company, they are just as bad!!!! AND they are NOT an oil company, so they MUST be a left 'left wing' corporation, get 'em!!!!!!" The classic strawman, just taken to a ridiculous extreme by making shiat up...

jules_siegel: Apple is left wing?

Bungles: Deneb81: Bungles: Apple doesn't have a 9.8% tax rate. It has a 9.8% tax rate *in the US*.

I despise Apple as much as anyone sane, but global companies have a tax web across the entire globe, and that has to be taken into account.

If you want to tax foreign companies when they operate in the US, you can't object to US companies having a portion of their tax burden elsewhere when they operate globally.

That Apple pays foreign taxes on its foreign income has no real bearing on calculating it's effective tax rate in the US. Or on the discussion of whether it's a reasonable or sustainable amount for a multi-billion dollar company to pay.



It has every bearing, because we have a global marketplace where companies are free to headquarter specific slices of their organisations wherever they please.

And that has zero to do on what their effective tax rate should be on domestic income and income used to produce/promote/import products for domestic sale.

If the money was made in the US it should be taxed in the US at a reasonable and sustainable level. What Cambodia charges for domestic sales is irrelevant to US tax discussions.

Exxon's 2010 US taxes:

U.S. federal: -$156 million
U.S. state and local: $110 million

Total US taxes -$46 million

Wooly Bully: Lord_Baull: Not going to click the link, but it's probably safe to bet the essence of the article is:
Both sides are bad, so vote Republican.

That was a good guess, but no, it was actually a decent piece.

Apple, Google, Microsoft and many others have been playing this game for a long time. Good to see that people are starting to pay attention.

major pharma companies also play the same game with transfer pricing

its the sole reason for Ireland's relevance in the global economy at this point.

Deneb81: EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

How many direct subsidies does apple receive? How much government money and land has gone into creating a supply chain for Apple?

And who's arguing apple shouldn't pay more in taxes? Probably not the people arguing ending oil subsidies and tax breaks.

Sigh. There aren't oil subsidies. I wish people would stop using that term. They get tax breaks, the majority of which Apple gets as well. There are 4 main tax breaks that big oil gets. Domestic manufacturing tax deduction, Percentage depletion allowance, Foreign tax credit, and Intangible drilling costs. Of the four, the only one that is unique to drilling industries is the fourth one, which also happens to be the smallest of the four it gets. It equals up to about $750 million a year for the oil industry. Or enough to run the federal government for about 2 hours.

At the end of the day, Exxon's effective tax rate was 13%, compared to Apple's 9.8%. So if we are really calling tax breaks subsidies now, Apple is getting a hell of a lot more.

Allow me to interpret into Congresscritterlese:

Dear Apple,

The protection money is a little light. CISPA? Thank you in advance for the campaign 'contribution'.

Hugs and Kisses,
Both Sides

theknuckler_33: EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

Yea, it's an either/or situation.

Oh, and the oil companies aren't going to sleep with you.

Except we don't go after Apple...

EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

Why don't we go after both of them?

EWreckedSean: theknuckler_33: EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

Yea, it's an either/or situation.

Oh, and the oil companies aren't going to sleep with you.

Except we don't go after Apple...

How are we 'going after' the oil companies?

theknuckler_33: EWreckedSean: theknuckler_33: EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

Yea, it's an either/or situation.

Oh, and the oil companies aren't going to sleep with you.

Except we don't go after Apple...

How are we 'going after' the oil companies?

Oh.. and Link

proteus_b: how is apple a "left wing" corporation?

They recognize same-sex partners for spousal benefits. Plus, have you seen their logo?

"Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: How are we 'going after' the oil companies?

You are arguing with a guy who, just yesterday, revealed to the world that he doesn't understand how progressive taxation works.

Oh, I know. It's kind of fun making them paint themselves into a corner. Kinda like a magnifying glass with ants thing.

/I never actually did that
//or did I?

EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

Last I checked, I don't purchase 540 iPods, iPhones or iPads a year. In fact, I'm pretty sure no individual does.

Profit Margin =/= Profit, you disingenuous twat.

/540 = approximate gallons of gas purchased annually by me
//One more time because I find it to be fun to think/say/type: disingenuous twat.

Lost Thought 00: proteus_b: how is apple a "left wing" corporation?

They recognize same-sex partners for spousal benefits. Plus, have you seen their logo?
[kyleabaker.com image 50x50]

Not only that, but they have that leftie Al Gore on their board of directors.

EWreckedSean: Remember kids, let's go after big oil. I mean, Exxon has a 7.6% profit margin and produces energy. Apple has a 29.6% profit margin and produces cell phones and tablets. It's obvious who we need to go after here to solve our revenue problem.

Maybe you should take a refresher course on how taxes work before you start a discussion on taxes. Actually all Teapublicans should.

Deneb81: Bungles: Deneb81: Bungles: Apple doesn't have a 9.8% tax rate. It has a 9.8% tax rate *in the US*.

I despise Apple as much as anyone sane, but global companies have a tax web across the entire globe, and that has to be taken into account.

If you want to tax foreign companies when they operate in the US, you can't object to US companies having a portion of their tax burden elsewhere when they operate globally.

That Apple pays foreign taxes on its foreign income has no real bearing on calculating it's effective tax rate in the US. Or on the discussion of whether it's a reasonable or sustainable amount for a multi-billion dollar company to pay.



It has every bearing, because we have a global marketplace where companies are free to headquarter specific slices of their organisations wherever they please.

And that has zero to do on what their effective tax rate should be on domestic income and income used to produce/promote/import products for domestic sale.

If the money was made in the US it should be taxed in the US at a reasonable and sustainable level. What Cambodia charges for domestic sales is irrelevant to US tax discussions.



That's just not how it works. If company X has itself headquatered in country A, where all decisions occur, and wholly owns a fulfilment company acting entirely dependently on those decisions in country B, than the vast bulk of the profits are actually generated in country A, and that's where the bulk of there profits subject to corporation tax.


This model is used by thousands of global companies. If that company structure is genuine and all decisions do genuinely occur in country A (which exactly the issue that "tax investigations" are focused on), how exactly would you fix it? Declare an entire company's profits be taxed in the US? Well, you've just lost claim to corpoation tax of hundreds of thousands of foreign owned companies operating in the US. You can't have it both ways.

AiryAnne: ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL
BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.