
Apple: You can have taxes or you can have jobs, but you can't have both - abduhl
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-eu-tax-ruling-profound-harmful-effect-investment-job-creation-2016-8
======
heisenbit
Apple is not creating jobs for the sake of doing something good but since
there is work to be done. Where the work is done is driven by complex factors
- financial, legal, logistical, global balancing and other strategic
considerations all play a role.

Ireland had an absurd allocation profits and in the past it made sense to
allocate all the cost there too. In the future part of these profits will be
recorded elsewhere. Ireland will not be such an Apple job growth story but
still has a lot of momentum. It would be not surprising if in the medium term
Apple may branch other more to other European countries.

------
devopsproject
Seems like other companies with far less money are able to do both.

~~~
adventured
The issue primarily is that the only reason Apple set up such a large presence
in Ireland, was for the advantageous tax arrangement. It's the same reason so
many pharma companies have moved to Ireland, for tax haven purposes. Those
pharma companies are typically owned by US capital, they do most of their
research in the US, they gouge consumers in the US, they have most of their
operations in the US, but they hide from taxes via Ireland. This ruling is
likely to crush Ireland's economy by reversing the tax shelter flow.

~~~
hga
_they recover the cost of their drug development from consumers in the US_

Fixed it for you.

End that, and you end new drug development (fortunately karma will be enforced
on those advocating it, for they or some of their loved ones will almost
certainly suffer and/or die from something a new drug would have treated, if
we were still in the business of doing that).

(If I was, ahem, the next president, I'd force other countries that
"negotiate" prices barely above the cost of production and distribution to pay
the portion of their fair share they can afford, and do nasty things to
countries that in turn violate patents to get around such.)

~~~
run4yourlives2
>End that, and you end new drug development

To be fair, most of the "new drug development" that is needed is not what is
most profitable. I'm not sure if 30 versions of ED medicine really translate
to a better social outcome for us all, really.

Similarly, there hasn't been a lot of new development from Mylar on the epi-
pen that connects it to its recent 67% price hike, has there?

I'm not naive enough to think it immoral that drug companies investing in R&D
should be fairly compensated, however being willfully ignorant of what is
happening in Pharma R&D in the US doesn't really help matters.

The simple reality is that taxpayers fund a good deal of pharmaceutical R&D,
drug prices have little to no relationship to their actual cost, and these
companies do a very good job of exploiting loopholes to pay as little tax back
into the system as possible. There are a lot of issues there, but at the end
of the day, the only reason drug prices are so high in the US is that
consumers aren't protected from hikes in the same way they are by other
countries that view affordable health care as a part of their mandate. I think
you'd probably get a lot more benefit overall in reverting the US to a model
similar to the rest of the world, rather than forcing the rest of the world to
abandon their previous positions in Trump-like bluster. The US isn't as
isolated as some of its citizens think it is.

~~~
hga
_The simple reality is that taxpayers fund a good deal of pharmaceutical R &D_

And how much of the very most expensive clinical trials, and applications to
the FDA? Not to mention marketing, so busy doctors actually know of their
existence?

Upfront drug discovery is very easy compared to that, as well illustrated by
this XKCD cartoon: [https://xkcd.com/1217/](https://xkcd.com/1217/)

 _drug prices have little to no relationship to their actual cost_

Which is Marketing 101. And also demonstrably not true for the particularly
expensive ones to produce (I'm thinking in particular of the HIV antiviral
with 3 chiral centers).

And while Mylan has certainly been raping a population that depends on Epi-
Pens for their lives (including my 2nd oldest nephew ... and speaking of
family, it's good to be the daughter of a US Senator), anything liquid is
inherently more expensive for a whole bunch of reasons.

And as far as I can tell, there are exactly 4 different ED drugs approved by
the FDA in 5 formulations, and what's with the misandry?

 _and these companies do a very good job of exploiting loopholes to pay as
little tax back into the system as possible._

Which is endorsed by no less of a moral authority than the US Supreme Court,
and makes them no different that any other well run industry.

~~~
EliRivers
"And while Mylan has certainly been raping a population that depends on Epi-
Pens for their lives ... anything liquid is inherently more expensive for a
whole bunch of reasons."

It certainly is true that the cost of liquids did go up a lot recently, so
what you say does make sense.

I apologise for that; that was passive aggressive bullshit mixed with sarcasm,
and I shouldn't do it. What I meant to say was that liquids being expensive
for "a whole bunch of reasons" is completely irrelevant to recent price rises.

~~~
hga
Apology accepted.

I'd add that "and sterile and pure enough for IM injection or IV
administration" drives the costs up even higher. I use a couple of nasal
sprays to keep sinus infections at bay, and they're expensive enough without
also having to be that sterile.

There's in fact been a now fairly long running crisis in such drugs, most are
generic so companies don't get very much for them, but that doesn't make the
proper manufacturing any cheaper. Look at this current list:
[http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/drugshortages/default....](http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/drugshortages/default.cfm)

~~~
EliRivers
You've wandered way off-topic now and said nothing to address anyone's
counter-points, so the usefulness of your contributions is at an end.

Are you aware that you deliver a monologue that has nothing to do with what
people say in response, and that you aren't addressing the issues raised at
all? That you just continue spouting repeats of what you already said. I
genuinely suspect you're not. I'm just a line of text on the internet and have
nothing to gain from telling you this, so why not consider it before
dismissing it out of hand.

~~~
hga
_so why not consider it before dismissing it out of hand_

The multiple upvotes I've received for these postings suggest that, yes, I
could well be justified dismissing your latest comment out of hand.

And I probably ought to withdraw my apology acceptance, unless someone else
has taken over your account for the moment.

------
BatFastard
The first shot in the multinationals vs nations war has been fired.

Its been predicted for years, I think I am still pulling for the nations to
win, gods know the corporations have no heart.

~~~
gjolund
Lol and nations do?

You can always choose not to buy a product.

~~~
BatFastard
Not always true, how do you not buy Monsanto? or DuPont?

~~~
gjolund
It requires product research, but it is not impossible or illegal.

------
g8oz
What self-serving nonsense. Big business plays jurisdictional arbitrage and
we're foolish for even questioning much less acting against it? Give me a
break.

