

Apple Isn’t a Financial Mastermind, They're Only Following the Law - msomers
http://behindcompanies.com/2013/05/apple-isnt-a-financial-mastermind-they-follow-the-law/

======
Sven7
That is besides the point. The main point highlighted by the committee is that
companies like Apple, large companies that operate across the world have a
choice in how much tax they can pay.

Your small start up or your uncle's deli does not have that choice. Apple
decides it will pay tax on profits generated in Mexico, Canada and Brazil in
the US (~6 Billion) but profits generated in the rest of the world just sit in
Ireland collecting dust.

So tomorrow Apple can easily decide to move profits from Mexico, Brazil and
Canada to Ireland too. Which is all fine. Just means less US tax revenue. Less
kids get STEM scholarships and more H1B visas.

Apple and the rest of the MNC's are never going to admit this has a cost to
America but it does. All they are saying is we have a legal right to do it.

Sort of like a son telling the father thanks for paying for my upbringing and
college now I am moving to China and dont look at me if your need anything in
you old age cause I dont have any legal obligations.

~~~
mullingitover
>Apple and the rest of the MNC's are never going to admit this has a cost to
America but it does. All they are saying is we have a legal right to do it.

And if they have a legal right to maximize their profits under the law in this
way, one could argue that they have a duty to their shareholders to do it. The
problem (for society) is that corporations' primary duty is to maximize
shareholder value, and not to benefit society. If a corporation has a choice
between doubling their investors' money or curing cancer, they have a duty to
choose the former.

~~~
Sven7
And that is wrong.

Just as medical insurance companies cannot deny you insurance and lets you die
just because it dents their profit. Lots of people had to stand up and say
that is wrong for the law to change.

Just as Switzerland has changed its laws to stop protecting personal income
tax evaders. Why did they do it after decades of benefiting from it? Because
lots of people stood up and said it was wrong. Public opinion about the swiss
swayed the debate.

This debate is hardly about Apple. Its about something much bigger. It's about
making people think about what is right and wrong. If you allow people to just
hide behind what is currently acceptable they will happily never make that
choice.

~~~
mullingitover
It seems reasonable on paper, but good luck getting entrenched powers to agree
to eliminate fiduciary duty for officers of the corporation. It's one of the
fundamentals of modern business. The argument against will be simple:
investors are free to use the profits from the corporation for whatever
charitable purposes they see fit, and it's not the officers' place to
determine what the 'positive social impact' should be.

------
Avitas
I do not know what type of fiscal policies Apple follows. I know other
corporations have found ways (i.e., sometimes legal, sometimes gray area,
sometimes blatantly illegal) to shift profits, losses, non-cash assets, cash
and other financial items from one country to another.

I would think that any question and/or answer to these potentially complex
issues should include disclosure of any type of transfer to and/or from
different countries.

