Does Apple Cheat on their taxes like Google's 31B?

[Mountainbikermark]

Put a flat tax on any transaction, profitable or not, and the revenue would increase, waste would go way down in order to ensure a profit, and all those unemployed accountants and tax agents could become financial advisors for the corporations to invest their profits into R&D
Put a flat tax on salaries ,eliminate gas taxes, phone taxes, fees on phone taxes and taxes on fees for phone taxes and those former accountants could become financial advisors for the average citizen to invest their windfall into while revenues would increase into the government due to more people being employed to make all the techno junk we will suddenly have more money to buy them with.
Don't believe the politicians who say corporate taxes are too high. In theory yes but there are soooo many loopholes it's actually pretty low after all the deductions. Don't believe the politicians who say if elected they'll make the fat cats pay their fair share. Who do you think is buying the ads where the politicians say they will fix the system? What do they get for backing the candidate? More loopholes.
Google is just one example, GE would be another. They made billions in profit, kept it offshore and on legal paper look like they lost money. Many corporations not only don't pay any taxes but get bailouts, refunds,grants, you name it, even though they made millions or billions in NET profit. BP, EXXON, SHELL, etc are few examples of that. BP will write off the cost of cleaning up their mess in the gulf, bet on it.
For you former military ; THANK YOU TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES. YOUR SACRIFICE WAS NOT IN VAIN


Support Our Troops!
This post was Tapatalk approved
Sent from my iPad

 

[tzimisce]

You will not win this one; Google and Apple do not cheat, period.

Bob

Where have I said that Google or Apple cheat?

And I don't understand your point: married couples with kids have children's expenses that single, childless people don't. If the law includes certain provisions for people in different situations, then that's how it's structured. If that gives you a sense of injustice, maybe you should talk to your local govt representative and make your views known.

 

[SweetPoison]

I have learned a lot in this thread ~ but let's simmer down a bit, Okay?

 

[Prasius]

And I don't understand your point: married couples with kids have children's expenses that single, childless people don't. If the law includes certain provisions for people in different situations, then that's how it's structured. If that gives you a sense of injustice, maybe you should talk to your local govt representative and make your views known.

...and the law makes certain provisions for certain companies in different positions. The principle of it is exactly the same; companies change their situations in order to make financial sense. The same way as there are plenty of people out there who change their situation to make financial sense to them.

Things like sales tax and tax on fuel are considered to be a tax of choice, you choose to buy those items and therefore pay the tax.

Now, I, and I'm fairly sure the poster above - consider having children to be a similar choice. You don't HAVE to have children, and frankly, it's not really my problem that they're expensive. In the same way that I doubt you'd have much sympathy if I went and bought a Ferrari and then complained about the running costs. It's a lifestyle choice. (waits for the emotional outcry from parents about their offspring being the MOST precious little darlings in the world.. *yawn* ). I'd love a supercar more.

So its actually very similar to Google choosing to base it's headquaters somewhere with considerably lower tax - tax avoidance (where you avoid paying tax by legitimate meants - ever bought something duty free on holiday? - tax avoidance) is a very different thing to tax evasion (fail to pay tax which you are obligated to pay by law).

 

[Bob Maxey]

You will not win this one; Google and Apple do not cheat, period.

Bob

Where have I said that Google or Apple cheat?

And I don't understand your point: married couples with kids have children's expenses that single, childless people don't. If the law includes certain provisions for people in different situations, then that's how it's structured. If that gives you a sense of injustice, maybe you should talk to your local govt representative and make your views known.

For the record, I have no problem with the deductions most of you can take. Like deductions related to home ownership or children. If the deduction is available, certainly, you should take advantage.

But to complain because Google or Apple takes advantage of the law requires that you also complain about home owners and families with children taking deductions. There is no difference; you, Apple, and Google are using the existing tax code to save money.

So deduct away and if you can get your taxes to near zero, go for it.

Bob

 

[Shawnlarson]

Here in Australia, income tax can reach a whopping 30-40%, so you'd be foolish not to find all the legal loopholes to avoid getting slugged for the full amount. Even getting an accountant to do your returns for a few hundred dollars, so that he or she can save you thousands by knowing what you can get tax exemptions for and structuring the way you file your returns is being smart (from individuals to corporations.)

True that!

 

[Prasius]

True that!

...and in the UK - I think I'm going to blow the 40% tax barrier this year.. /

 

[tzimisce]

But to complain because Google or Apple takes advantage of the law requires that you also complain about home owners and families with children taking deductions. There is no difference; you, Apple, and Google are using the existing tax code to save money.

Bob

I certainly have not complained about Apple or Google, so maybe you've confused someone else's arguments for mine.