Apple may owe Ireland 10 YEARS of back-taxes. Notice dickhead CEO isn't wearing jeans here!!

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 23:51:27 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , sid
wrote:

if you request a total from the irs, they won't include the various
deductions, so the total will be higher than what it should be. only a
moron would go that route.

Only a moron would have got this far in an unnecessary explanation after
misunderstanding the point of the post he was replying to.

i did not misunderstand anything.

Yes it is scammy, moving your hq to an island on the other side of the
Atlantic to take advantage of a dodgy governments tax loop holes and pay
net to zero tax, yes that's scammy. You can't do that can you?

apple does not pay net zero tax. you're wrong yet again. in fact, they
are among the companies who pay the *most* taxes of any usa
corporation, if not the most.

That should be "next to zero." I'm not in USA, they don't pay their fair
share here either. And you didn't even answer the question.

it's not next to zero and i did.

by the way, google did what you accuse apple of doing:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...revenues-shelt
ered-in-no-tax-bermuda-soar-to-10-billion
Google Inc. avoided about $2 billion in worldwide income taxes in
2011 by shifting $9.8 billion in revenues into a Bermuda shell
company, almost double the total from three years before, filings
show.

Why does how Google behave have anything to do with what Apple do. It's that
two wrong things thing again isn't it?

because you're singling out apple and giving a free pass to everyone
else.

apple has long had a presence in ireland, including having a factory
there.

Well that's fine then isn't it.

it's rather different than opening up a shell company for the sole
purpose of offshoring money.

Apple uses lotsa shell companies including:
http://thehill.com/policy/technology...to-dodge-taxes
or http://tinyurl.com/myab32h
.... and this one will interest no spam http://tinyurl.com/myab32h
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 23:51:26 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Does "nobody" mention GE and tax avoidance or not? Or, is it just
here in a photography group where GE isn't mentioned?

if you want to discuss tax avoidance, then ge is on topic.

however, the the topic is not tax avoidance, it's apple-bashing.

Nope. it's Apple's tax avoidance. More to the point it's the
extraordinary statement made by Tim Cook.

what extraordinary statement?

About wanting to pay more tax.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 01:47:02 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Definition of lip-service: an avowal of advocacy, adherence, or
allegiance expressed in words but not backed by deeds

it takes quite a bit more than apple asking to change the tax code for
the tax code to change.

Right. And Mr Cook understands that. He can claim he advocates it,
but he knows that it makes him sound like a good guy to his acolytes,
but it doesn't mean jack-**** in the real world. It's lip-service.

you're all talk. you can pretend it's nothing more than an empty claim,
but as usual, you have zero evidence to back that up. you're just
spewing nonsense.

meanwhile, you don't see any other companies pushing for changes, do
you? nope.

The result of making a PR announcement and the result of doing nothing
have the same result: nothing.

it's not a pr announcement. he actually gave a proposal, which is much
more than you've done.

he wants the tax code completely overhauled because it's a convoluted
mess. it's 7500+ pages long and nobody, not even you, understands all
of it.

That makes sense but it's not the same thing as saying that he wants
Apple to pay more tax.

How many lobbyists has he funded to get changes made?

you tell me. you claim to know everything.

hint: it's 0.

and since you brought it up, lobbying is yet another thing that needs
to end. it's one of the main reasons, if not the biggest reason, that
the system is as corrupt as it is.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

"PeterN" wrote in message
...
On 10/29/2015 10:24 AM, PAS wrote:
"PeterN" wrote in message
...
On 10/28/2015 3:40 PM, sid wrote:
nospam wrote:

In article
,
RichA wrote:

http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/30/tech...reland/?iid=EL


I guess the rebel, anti-corporate facade is pretty much gone from
Apple?

the only dickhead is you.

Who is the bigger dickhead? The one that posts the troll in the
first
place
or the one that follows up to the troll with another post
exclaiming how
fair and just his object of adulation is?

that link is six months old and it's yet another one of your
moronic
anti-apple trolls.

not only is what they're doing *completely legal*, but minimizing
taxes
is *expected* and *encouraged*.

Only by the morally bankrupt and greedy.

numerous other companies do essentially the same thing, including
google, yahoo, cisco and amazon.

It's amazing how often you seem to think two wrongs make a right.

even ordinary taxpayers, including yourself, pays as little tax as
possible.

Ordinary tax payers get told how much they have to pay and that's
that.
Multi national corporations have unimaginable amounts of money to
spend on
tax dodgers to work the best scams they can. Not really comparable.

unlike the other companies, however, apple wants to change the the
tax
laws so that they're more fair, where they can repatriate the
money.
that means they will pay *more* taxes than they currently are,
just not
the absurd amounts that the current tax law requires.

If they actually gave two ****s for anything other than the amount
of
money
they can accumulate they would already be paying taxes at the same
rate as
all the other honest companies in the countries in which they
extract
exorbitant amounts of money from their customer base.


Tax laws are a judicially approved method implementing economic
policy. think retirement plans, think international trade, etc. It's
easy to criticize with a bumper sticker political slogan It's much
harder to implement in real life. There are many loopholes that
perhaps shouldn't be there, but that doesn't negate the whole
system.

Tax laws are also used for social engineering. It's time for a flat
tax, no deductions. Everyone pays the same rate, including the
bottom
50% of earners who pay virtually no income tax at all and some of
them
still get tax credits. As Joe Biden said, paying your taxes "is the
patriotic thing to do". Everyone should have some skin in the game.

The notion of a flat tax in inherently unfair to lower income people.
For references look the publication, Statistics Of Income.

https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-SOI-Bulletins

Then tell us how much of a flat tax can be paid, after lower income
people pay for their absolute necessities. You and I have differed for
years on political, economic and religious matters. I leave the
reading and interpretation to your good faith interpretation. If you
want to carry this further, I will be in your neighborhood in a few
weeks. We can talk then.

I don't think it's unfair to expect every citizen to pay income taxes.
What is unfair is that some who don't pay any tax still receive tax
credits. How can that be justified?

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

he wants the tax code completely overhauled because it's a convoluted
mess. it's 7500+ pages long and nobody, not even you, understands all
of it.

That makes sense but it's not the same thing as saying that he wants
Apple to pay more tax.

it is the same thing, because overhauling the tax code will likely
result in them paying more tax.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Does "nobody" mention GE and tax avoidance or not? Or, is it just
here in a photography group where GE isn't mentioned?

if you want to discuss tax avoidance, then ge is on topic.

however, the the topic is not tax avoidance, it's apple-bashing.

Nope. it's Apple's tax avoidance. More to the point it's the
extraordinary statement made by Tim Cook.

what extraordinary statement?

About wanting to pay more tax.

he wants tax reform so that it's fair, which may result in more tax.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

apple has long had a presence in ireland, including having a factory
there.

Well that's fine then isn't it.

it's rather different than opening up a shell company for the sole
purpose of offshoring money.

Apple uses lotsa shell companies including:

http://thehill.com/policy/technology...s-apple-of-usi
ng-shell-companies-to-dodge-taxes
or http://tinyurl.com/myab32h
... and this one will interest no spam http://tinyurl.com/myab32h

all that says is that they're accused of using a shell company.

apple used to have a factory in ireland. that's not a shell company.

however, apple does use shell companies to maintain secrecy on future
product development, but that's a very, very different matter. people
notice when apple buys stuff. people don't notice when sam's research
llc buys stuff. only after the fact do people figure out that sam's llc
was really apple.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Definition of lip-service: an avowal of advocacy, adherence, or
allegiance expressed in words but not backed by deeds

it takes quite a bit more than apple asking to change the tax code for
the tax code to change.

Right. And Mr Cook understands that. He can claim he advocates it,
but he knows that it makes him sound like a good guy to his acolytes,
but it doesn't mean jack-**** in the real world. It's lip-service.

you're all talk. you can pretend it's nothing more than an empty claim,
but as usual, you have zero evidence to back that up. you're just
spewing nonsense.

What evidence do you have that it's more than lip-service?

because i know how apple works and you do not.

they do things differently, something you refuse to understand.

meanwhile, you don't see any other companies pushing for changes, do
you? nope.

The result of making a PR announcement and the result of doing nothing
have the same result: nothing.

it's not a pr announcement. he actually gave a proposal, which is much
more than you've done.

Of course it's more than I've done, and it's certainly more than
you've done. Neither of us has a income of over $50 bn that we
represent. What they'd get from us wouldn't buy donuts for Orin
Hatch's Senate Finance Committee meetings.

As for a "proposal", Carson, Huckabee, and Paul have "proposals". None
of them hold water.

bad comparison.

tim cook is not a corrupt politician trying to win an election. he
doesn't need to lie, something politicians do any time they make a
sound or otherwise communicate with the world.

he wants the tax code completely overhauled because it's a convoluted
mess. it's 7500+ pages long and nobody, not even you, understands all
of it.

Of course he does. Apple's overhead costs to prepare their taxes runs
in the millions. A simpler tax code would increase Apple's bottom
line. That could more than offset paying "a little more" in taxes.

Do you think Apple's using TurboTax?

it might reduce their accounting costs but it will probably result in
paying more taxes. you're making a lot of assumptions.

How many lobbyists has he funded to get changes made?

you tell me. you claim to know everything.

hint: it's 0.

Then he isn't doing anything to change things.

wrong, but he's facing an uphill battle.

and since you brought it up, lobbying is yet another thing that needs
to end. it's one of the main reasons, if not the biggest reason, that
the system is as corrupt as it is.

Yes, but if you want change in the tax code that's the route you have
to go. If you are a realist, you work the system.

for now they have to play the game, however, apple in general does not
lobby as much as other companies because the entire practice reeks of
corruption.

Cook has been pro-active in supporting LGBT rights and opposing the
so-called "Religious Freedom" laws (which are just another form of
bigotry), and I give him full credit for this. Also, he's ****ed off
Carly Fiorina and Rick Santorum and anyone who does that gets my
personal support.

carly is an incompetent idiot who ****ed up hp big time, so much so
that steve jobs even took advantage of her stupidity.

While he did appear before a Congressional committee and testify that
he is in favor of tax reform, and stated that maybe Apple would pay "a
little bit more", he's working from what he states as avoidance of
$13.8 bn in taxes. The right kind of reform would reduce Apple's
expenses and result in no net change to Apple's bottom line.

you don't get apple. you likely never will.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Clicks mean nothing to the person in this group who posts a link. If
I post a link, and 10 readers click on that link, there is no benefit
to me at all.

you clearly don't understand what linkbait is, and as usual, playing
word games to twist things into what i did not say.

You are not fooling anyone by snipping to twist and playing
revisionist.

good thing that's not what i'm doing, you lying sack of ****.

and you're not fooling anyone by pretending you know everything either.

You did not say anything about "linkbait" until this post. You said
"because mentioning apple gets the clicks." You are trying to revise
what you said and introduce a different term.

that's what linkbait is. it gets the clicks.

you once again demonstrate your ignorance and intent on arguing at
every turn.

"Linkbait" is entirely different.

nope.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/link_bait
2 (Internet marketing) Provocative headlines designed specifically
to persuade people to click or share by using loaded terminology
(e.g. incredible, secret, shocking, unbelievable), posing provocative
questions, or tying themselves in to hot topics.

Synonyms[edit]
€ clickbait

I'm not playing word games.

yes you most certainly are, as you always do.

I'm responding to the word *you* used.

in other words, you're playing word games.

Do you know how silly that makes you sound?

i'm not the one arguing over word usage. that makes you the silly one

usually you don't contradict yourself in the same line (split up for
the response), but this time you did.

this may come to you as a big surprise, but there can be more than one
word for something.

Sure, I know that. But the word "apple" does not also have the
meaning of "orange". "Click" does not have the meaning of "linkbait".

linkbait generates clicks. that's how it works.

If you aren't smart enough to know the right word, don't post.

i know the right words.

you do not, so by your own advice you should not post.

this isn't the first time you don't understand the terminology but
continue to argue pretending that you do.

you're wrong. it's that simple.

you really are an ignorant argumentative ****head.

You are laughable. A "click" is anyone who opens a link in this
newsgroup. All "clicks" are not linkbait. If you mean "linkbait",
say "linkbait".

But you don't. You say "clicks" and then later modify your statement
and say you mean "linkbait".

Saying "clicks", and then saying later you meant "linkbait" is the
very definition of playing word games.

If you had used "linkbait" in your original statement that started
this line of argument (and it takes two to do that, you know) I
wouldn't have responded.

bull****. if i said linkbait rather than gets the clicks, you'd have
found something else to argue about. it's all you do.

you're trying to weasel out of not understanding things, as you
normally do. you ain't fooling anyone.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

you don't get apple. you likely never will.

Statements like that don't advance your assumptions. It's just mud
slinging.

mud slinging is all you do, and now you blame me for that? that's
****ed up.

any time i make a post, you nitpick and twist what i say solely to bash
me, regardless of what it is.