Apple Paid No Taxes in New Zealand For Decade But Made Over 4 BILLION Dollars.

W

WhatInThe

SF VIP
Apple apparently has paid no local taxes in New Zealand for a decade despite over 4 BILLION dollars in sales. That includes over 200,000 phones being sold. It's estimated that New Zealand would be owed about 356 million dollars. Taxes were paid to Australia since that's where that Apple was based.

Apparently this is another pay little or tax game from Apple. It's basically the result of a trade agreement and the G20

http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-new-zealand-is-paying-taxes-in-australia-report/

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11820240
 

Apple is probably the Biggest Tax Cheat in this nation....if Not the World. It moved its "corporate headquarters" to Ireland some years ago, and maintains a skeleton staff there so as to "legally" claim Ireland as its headquarters. Apple brings in 10's of billions every year, and pays little or no U.S. taxes. Some may like their products, but because of their Corporate Thievery, if someone Gave me an Apple product, the first thing I would do is to see how well it stands up to a blow from a sledgehammer.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/leesheppard/2013/05/28/how-does-apple-avoid-taxes/#489e7f7620a7
 
I really fail to see a problem.

To begin with all Apple products attract a sales tax where they are sold, employees pay taxes in the country that they reside, franchised outlets and their owners attract local taxes, so to claim that Apple pays no local taxes is hardly correct.

When it comes to the parent company to legally structure their finances in such a way as to be most tax efficient is simply good business sense and beneficial for stock holders, many of which are institutional stock holders that are insurance and pension funds, and enable research and new product introductions by the parent company.

The whole 'pay no taxes' attacks against large corporations is politically motivated, mendacious, and creates a totally wrong impression.

For my part I don't like any of the Apple range because IMO it's overpriced.
 

IMO it's a case of don't hate the player, hate the game.

If a company or an individual finds a legitimate hole in the tax laws and wiggles through it whose fault is it?

The good news is that Apple has generated enormous amounts of economic activity in the form of wages, dividends, capital gains, etc...
 
Two thoughts: 1) If a corporation is operating illegally, enforce the laws, if not - move on; 2) When you think about it, no corporation actually pays taxes, they are passed along to the consumer as a "cost of doing business just like labor or materials.
 
If it's legal it's the accountant's job to exploit the law to their clients advantage I get that. It may be legal but how did it get legal.

And that 356 million dollars seems to be missed/be an issue with New Zealand. I'm sure if Apple didn't set up shop another would have or be a more significant seller in that market and probably would've had to pay more taxes not wielding the influence of Apple.

Big international companies like Apple help fester and perpetuate monopolies in a market or product line/niche. A monopoly can pay out more lobby money to cater to their desires including local/regional tax law. This is a danger to local tax payers, customers and competitors.
 
Ray said:
Two thoughts: 1) If a corporation is operating illegally, enforce the laws, if not - move on; 2) When you think about it, no corporation actually pays taxes, they are passed along to the consumer as a "cost of doing business just like labor or materials.
Click to expand...

Your second statement may be true in a few situations but certainly not all. Sometimes the owners/shareholders take the hit for the taxes in the way of reduced profits. If they were always able to "pass along" the taxes, then why would they seek out lower tax solutions, such as relocating to Ireland, etc.
 
For once I agree with aeron.

If they are doing something wrong then prosecte them. If tey are not then change the law so that they they pay their fair share.

Either was the solution is not in Apple's hands.

They can no more be expected to pay more tax than they are required to by law than I can.
 
Hoot N Annie said:
Your second statement may be true in a few situations but certainly not all. Sometimes the owners/shareholders take the hit for the taxes in the way of reduced profits. If they were always able to "pass along" the taxes, then why would they seek out lower tax solutions, such as relocating to Ireland, etc.
Click to expand...

Because in a competitive market, any cost they can reduce allows them to offer a lower price.
 
Regarding Apple paying no taxes for a decade: Trump paid 35Million for 2015 taxes according to Rachael Maddow reporting for Fox, which was a fair percentage.
 
Well covered so far was the legality of tax payment or non payment as was the point. A point missed in post #1 was the mention of the G20 trade agreement. Trump bringing up trade agreements may not be so crazy after all.

The potential negative of Trump's proposal to lower corporate taxes so manufacturing will return to the states may impact New Zealand by closing production there. Pulling Corporate headquarters out of Australia certainly won't help with jobs there even if minimal jobs will be impacted.

Could be one of those careful for what you ask for situations.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top