€ 185,391,155,980
According to this. http://www.financedublin.com/debtclock.php
Although the tax issue is hardly concluded.
Should Ireland appeal the Apple ruling
- Thread starter cremeegg
- Start date
- Status
€ 185,391,155,980
According to this. http://www.financedublin.com/debtclock.php
Although the tax issue is hardly concluded.
Successive governments are to be commended for standing by Revenue and govt policy despite pressure over the years. This can only do irelands reputation and FDI prospects heart good.
I note from the court's press release that;
NOTE: An appeal, limited to points of law only, may be brought before the Court of Justice against the decision of the General Court within two months and ten days of notification of the decision.
As the decision appears to me to be based on the facts of the case rather than any point of law an appeal would seem unlikely to succeed. That's my 5 minute free opinion, it will be interesting to see what the expensive legal opinion will be. (Of course the lawyers will want an appeal).
The most interesting outstanding issue I would like to understand is where are the corresponding profits being taxed since the laws in question were changes in 2014.
I note from the court's press release that;
NOTE: An appeal, limited to points of law only, may be brought before the Court of Justice against the decision of the General Court within two months and ten days of notification of the decision.
As the decision appears to me to be based on the facts of the case rather than any point of law an appeal would seem unlikely to succeed. That's my 5 minute free opinion, it will be interesting to see what the expensive legal opinion will be. (Of course the lawyers will want an appeal).
The most interesting outstanding issue I would like to understand is where are the corresponding profits being taxed since the laws in question were changes in 2014.
Gordon Gekko
Registered User
- Messages
- 7,849
The costs are to be borne by the European Commission as per the ruling.
The monies have been taxed in the US since they reduced their rates (it was always tax deferral until then).
The monies have been taxed in the US since they reduced their rates (it was always tax deferral until then).
NoRegretsCoyote
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,766
As I understand it Apple on-shored a lot of the IP to Ireland even before the 2016 ruling.
Ireland's corporation tax take has more than doubled since 2014. Apple can't account for all or even a majority of this, but it certainly counts for a large amount.
Sophrosyne
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,577
Article by Seamus Coffey in today’s Irish Times
“Vestager grabbed the headlines with press-conference references to minuscule tax rates of 0.005 per cent and tax bills of €13 billion. But when the commission’s 130-page decision was published a few months later, it contained neither. They were provided for public consumption but were not part of the technical detail.”
Regarding yesterday’s ruling by the General Court of the European Union:-
“The key line of yesterday’s court ruling was that the commission’s state aid finding was done “without attempting to show that that income was representative of the value of the activities actually carried out by the [IRISH]branches themselves.”
From the outset, one of Ireland’s responses was that the only Apple profit that should be subject to tax in Ireland is profit that was actually generated in Ireland. The court has upheld that view.”
Regarding a possible appeal:-
“.. such was the overwhelming rejection of the commission’s case by the court that a successful appeal seems unlikely. The court left very few threads for the commission to cling on to.
Vestager issued a combative statement after the ruling was published, but it was hollow and noisy rather than making any substantive points.”
“Vestager grabbed the headlines with press-conference references to minuscule tax rates of 0.005 per cent and tax bills of €13 billion. But when the commission’s 130-page decision was published a few months later, it contained neither. They were provided for public consumption but were not part of the technical detail.”
Regarding yesterday’s ruling by the General Court of the European Union:-
“The key line of yesterday’s court ruling was that the commission’s state aid finding was done “without attempting to show that that income was representative of the value of the activities actually carried out by the [IRISH]branches themselves.”
From the outset, one of Ireland’s responses was that the only Apple profit that should be subject to tax in Ireland is profit that was actually generated in Ireland. The court has upheld that view.”
Regarding a possible appeal:-
“.. such was the overwhelming rejection of the commission’s case by the court that a successful appeal seems unlikely. The court left very few threads for the commission to cling on to.
Vestager issued a combative statement after the ruling was published, but it was hollow and noisy rather than making any substantive points.”
NoRegretsCoyote
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,766
State aid is a dead end for the Commission now on corporate tax.
FT is reporting that it may use other approaches:
Sophrosyne
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,577
Interesting article on EU moves to increase its taxation powers and create a more integrated, federalist Europe. This “loss of sovereignty” was one of the principal reasons for the UK’s departure from the EU.
“In the field of corporate tax, though, there is an increasing number of directives that harbour the sole objective of reducing tax competition between countries by preventing states from granting advantages to businesses.
This policy is dictated by the larger, more influential members of the EU – such as France and Germany – and imposed upon the smaller ones. Unlike France and Germany, countries such as Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Ireland can’t offer businesses access to a wide net of customers. As a result, they have always felt the need to attract foreign companies through tax advantages. These tax advantages are lawful so long as they are not selective – that is, providing they are equally accessible to all.”
“The EU has made a significant contribution to the prosperity of its inhabitants by increasing freedoms, particularly through the creation of a single market. In doing so, it has somewhat reduced the influence states can impose on their citizens.
But this has also restricted some freedoms. When the EU moved towards becoming a political authority, it began to regulate whole areas of the economy and people’s lives. It has itself become a power that is exercised – directly or indirectly – on businesses and individuals. By granting additional capabilities to the EU, at best, one only shifts the burden from individual states to a higher level. This means that the principle of subsidiarity – according to which, decisions must be taken as close to citizens as possible – will be further eroded.”
“In the field of corporate tax, though, there is an increasing number of directives that harbour the sole objective of reducing tax competition between countries by preventing states from granting advantages to businesses.
This policy is dictated by the larger, more influential members of the EU – such as France and Germany – and imposed upon the smaller ones. Unlike France and Germany, countries such as Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Ireland can’t offer businesses access to a wide net of customers. As a result, they have always felt the need to attract foreign companies through tax advantages. These tax advantages are lawful so long as they are not selective – that is, providing they are equally accessible to all.”
“The EU has made a significant contribution to the prosperity of its inhabitants by increasing freedoms, particularly through the creation of a single market. In doing so, it has somewhat reduced the influence states can impose on their citizens.
But this has also restricted some freedoms. When the EU moved towards becoming a political authority, it began to regulate whole areas of the economy and people’s lives. It has itself become a power that is exercised – directly or indirectly – on businesses and individuals. By granting additional capabilities to the EU, at best, one only shifts the burden from individual states to a higher level. This means that the principle of subsidiarity – according to which, decisions must be taken as close to citizens as possible – will be further eroded.”
A bad decision for Ireland.
No doubt Ursula's bestie, Margrethe Vestager, will be thrilled by this face-saving verdict.
Last edited:
I'm Nobody
Registered User
- Messages
- 47
The Irish government could spend €13 billion on upgrading computers for schools and the HSE etc and buy Apple products!
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 53,770
But is it a good decision for the World?
We are a rich country and we are taking tax from other countries who need it more than we do.
While we will get a lump of tax in the short-run, maybe it will stop this nonsense by multinationals putting profits through Ireland to avoid paying tax in other countries.
Brendan
The HSE could swallow up the money and no one would notice any improvement.
From a moral point of view it's absolutely the right decision but Ireland is not exactly a poster boy for doing the right thing. We are, broadly speaking, a parasitic entity.
Morality and national interest are seldom to be found on the same page. Just look at Israel if you seek a contemporary example.
I hear on the news that the €13.8bn gift from the European Courts probably won't be realisable until early next year. I really hope that the government doesn't squander any of this windfall in an attempt to purchase the coming General Election.
Last edited:
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,962
Like Germany and France?
They will be looking for their share of that taxation as the central argument is that tax should be paid at point of sale rather than where a multinational chooses to headquarter. It puts the whole strategy of moving IP from the US to Ireland in doubt now
charlie007
Registered User
- Messages
- 213
Are we really?
There is of course much wealth held by individuals in the country but The State has a debt of some €220Billion and the pension 'liability' could be double that.
You have on many occasions correctly contradicted the misnomer of us bailing out the banks.
Please stop saying we are such a rich country when our per capita debt is one of the biggest in the developed world?!
- Status