Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
It's Great In The Eu Isn't It?
30 Answers
http://
Nice bit of EU meddling!
Nice bit of EU meddling!
Answers
Whilst Apple have $230billion in the bank and can afford to pay, this is indeed EU meddling. Ireland have made a deal with Apple to get them to set up in Ireland rather than France or Germany. The is not a sham EU address of convenience, they have warehouses and offices and employ lots of Irish citizens. Apple has paid ALL the taxes that Ireland requires of it. So...
12:21 Tue 30th Aug 2016
thanks for your support in this gromit. Many of the socialist persuasion cannot see past the corporation tax argument and just see that apple have avoided it. They never look at the thousands of jobs and the money that pumps into the country concerned. This is one of many reasons I voted to leave the EU. It gives the country the flexibility to do deals with large potential employers, reducing the benefits bill and pumping huge amounts into the economy and taxation.
apple pays someone in Bermuda ( apple perhaps ) a huge licence fee to be apple
that knocks off a huge amount against tax
https:/
that knocks off a huge amount against tax
https:/
// The is not a sham EU address of convenience, they have warehouses and offices and employ lots of Irish citizens.//
haha ! 6000 people isnt it - half what Sir Pip Green has just thrown onto the street at BHS ( 11 000 )
I love to see the usual Brexiters ( righto! ) discussing EU tax law in their usual Brexit chavvy fashion
haha ! 6000 people isnt it - half what Sir Pip Green has just thrown onto the street at BHS ( 11 000 )
I love to see the usual Brexiters ( righto! ) discussing EU tax law in their usual Brexit chavvy fashion
What are the actual mechanics of this?
As far as I can tell, the EU is instructing Ireland that it must go after Apple for the money (rather than, for example, the EU instructing Apple to pay Ireland or the EU), and Ireland is reticent ...
It's not clear what the outcome would be if Ireland said "No, we're not chasing Apple for that money." The implication of the Telegraph article is that EU state aid would be withdrawn from Ireland in those circumstances.
As far as I can tell, the EU is instructing Ireland that it must go after Apple for the money (rather than, for example, the EU instructing Apple to pay Ireland or the EU), and Ireland is reticent ...
It's not clear what the outcome would be if Ireland said "No, we're not chasing Apple for that money." The implication of the Telegraph article is that EU state aid would be withdrawn from Ireland in those circumstances.
The Irish Fiancee Minister has issued a statement
// "I disagree profoundly with the Commission," Noonan said in a statement. "The decision leaves me with no choice but to seek cabinet approval to appeal. This is necessary to defend the integrity of our tax system; to provide tax certainty to business; and to challenge the encroachment of EU state aid rules into the sovereign member state competence of taxation." //
http://
// "I disagree profoundly with the Commission," Noonan said in a statement. "The decision leaves me with no choice but to seek cabinet approval to appeal. This is necessary to defend the integrity of our tax system; to provide tax certainty to business; and to challenge the encroachment of EU state aid rules into the sovereign member state competence of taxation." //
http://
It is inevitable when you have what is becoming a single group with a single aim. In the club one region (aka country) should not unfairly undercut another region by not demanding the normal tax, but giving preferential treatment to a commercial company. The EU is not acting on behalf of either Ireland or Apple, but for it's members as a whole who might otherwise have attracted the investment through, what is considered, fair means. If folk do not like the restriction of not being allowed to, well effectively bribe I suppose, a company to invest with them at the expense of other club members, then I'd suggest that the answer is to exit the club.
“We've reached a pretty pathetic state of affairs if people are genuinely going on about how sad it is that Apple now has to, you know, pay tax.”
They’ve already paid what’s been asked of them, Jim.
To reiterate what Gromit has already highlighted, this passage from Apple’s letter was telling:
“The Commission’s move is unprecedented and it has serious, wide-reaching implications. It is effectively proposing to replace Irish tax laws with a view of what the Commission thinks the law should have been. This would strike a devastating blow to the sovereignty of EU member states over their own tax matters, and to the principle of certainty of law in Europe.”
Quite so. Once again the sovereignty of member nations is being challenged by the EU. The tax laws for Ireland and the implementation of them is a matter for the Irish government. To take this action under the guise of “unfair State support” is highly questionable.
“apple pays someone in Bermuda ( apple perhaps ) a huge licence fee to be apple
that knocks off a huge amount against tax”
Perfectly legitimate business practice, Peter. “Dame” Vivienne Westwood does exactly the same. The only difference is that she shifts her cash to her licencing company in Luxembourg. The Grand Duchy is quite adept at hosting such schemes. Income from them sanctioned under, among others, its previous Prime Minister, one Jean-Claude Juncker has helped Luxembourg to become (far and away) the richest nation per capita in the EU. (Mr Juncker, of course, is now one of the five “Presidents” that the EU feels the need to have).
Companies (and individuals for that matter) have a duty to minimise the amount they pay in tax. They must do this so as to reduce to a minimum the amount politicians have to waste on frivolous projects (such as er…contributions to the EU budget which enables them to pay five presidents).
It would be interesting to know what President Obama now thinks of the EU he implored us to remain part of. One of the USA's most succcessful companies has paid all the tax required of it by the Irish taxman but the EU thinks otherwise. Perhaps he should advise the EU to go to the back of the queue.
They’ve already paid what’s been asked of them, Jim.
To reiterate what Gromit has already highlighted, this passage from Apple’s letter was telling:
“The Commission’s move is unprecedented and it has serious, wide-reaching implications. It is effectively proposing to replace Irish tax laws with a view of what the Commission thinks the law should have been. This would strike a devastating blow to the sovereignty of EU member states over their own tax matters, and to the principle of certainty of law in Europe.”
Quite so. Once again the sovereignty of member nations is being challenged by the EU. The tax laws for Ireland and the implementation of them is a matter for the Irish government. To take this action under the guise of “unfair State support” is highly questionable.
“apple pays someone in Bermuda ( apple perhaps ) a huge licence fee to be apple
that knocks off a huge amount against tax”
Perfectly legitimate business practice, Peter. “Dame” Vivienne Westwood does exactly the same. The only difference is that she shifts her cash to her licencing company in Luxembourg. The Grand Duchy is quite adept at hosting such schemes. Income from them sanctioned under, among others, its previous Prime Minister, one Jean-Claude Juncker has helped Luxembourg to become (far and away) the richest nation per capita in the EU. (Mr Juncker, of course, is now one of the five “Presidents” that the EU feels the need to have).
Companies (and individuals for that matter) have a duty to minimise the amount they pay in tax. They must do this so as to reduce to a minimum the amount politicians have to waste on frivolous projects (such as er…contributions to the EU budget which enables them to pay five presidents).
It would be interesting to know what President Obama now thinks of the EU he implored us to remain part of. One of the USA's most succcessful companies has paid all the tax required of it by the Irish taxman but the EU thinks otherwise. Perhaps he should advise the EU to go to the back of the queue.
