Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Pay attention, Simpson and Bowles: There are some things in life worse than going into debt.
For Apple Inc., that worse thing is paying taxes: The company announced plans Tuesday evening to borrow money for the first time ever, despite having nearly $145 billion in cash. The problem is that $102 billion of that cash is parked overseas and would be taxed if Apple tried to use it in its plan to give money back to shareholders.
"We are continuing to generate significant cash offshore, and repatriating this cash would result in significant tax consequences under current U.S. tax law," Apple Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer said on a conference call discussing Apple's earnings for the quarter that ended in March.
Apple's earnings haven't exactly been setting the world on fire quite enough lately to satisfy finicky shareholders. So the company is under increasing pressure to give its shareholders a taste of its cash. It finally succumbed on Tuesday, saying it plans to pay out $100 billion by the end of 2015, in the form of stock buybacks and a higher dividend. That will amount to about $30 billion per year, according to Oppenheimer, which would just about take up all of Apple's "tax-free" cash flow, as he put it.
If Apple didn't borrow money, then it would have to, gasp, bring cash back home to help pay for its shareholder-greasing. And bringing Apple's offshore cash back home could result in a tax hit of up to $35 billion, assuming it pays the full statutory corporate tax rate (which doesn't happen very often). Analysts for months have been prodding Apple to borrow money to avoid the hit, and Apple has been listening, apparently.
Apple Would Rather Go Into Debt Than Bring Home $100 Billion In Offshore Cash
1). How about electing politicians who actually represent the people vs corporations?
2). How about stop buying their products?
3). So pouting is the least one can do, but any Nd everyone can do something to enact change and force Congress to correct this.
4). How about enforcing some laws that already on the books, like slapping an embargo tax on their products once they arrive into the U.S. for sale? Yes it would make their more expensive than it is already and less people would buy their product, thus losing that same amount or more in sales, thus forcing them to actually build their damn products here.
Really? Corporate taxes are the lowest (12.3 effective) in 42 years.
Yep... We should penalize companies like Apple even more, because it isn't like those penalties will ever get passed on to the consumer.
Really? Corporate taxes are the lowest (12.3 effective) in 42 years.
Really? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.
Perhaps you should have a clue what you are talking about before commenting? Just a thought...
Pay attention, Simpson and Bowles: There are some things in life worse than going into debt.
For Apple Inc., that worse thing is paying taxes: The company announced plans Tuesday evening to borrow money for the first time ever, despite having nearly $145 billion in cash. The problem is that $102 billion of that cash is parked overseas and would be taxed if Apple tried to use it in its plan to give money back to shareholders.
"We are continuing to generate significant cash offshore, and repatriating this cash would result in significant tax consequences under current U.S. tax law," Apple Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer said on a conference call discussing Apple's earnings for the quarter that ended in March.
Apple's earnings haven't exactly been setting the world on fire quite enough lately to satisfy finicky shareholders. So the company is under increasing pressure to give its shareholders a taste of its cash. It finally succumbed on Tuesday, saying it plans to pay out $100 billion by the end of 2015, in the form of stock buybacks and a higher dividend. That will amount to about $30 billion per year, according to Oppenheimer, which would just about take up all of Apple's "tax-free" cash flow, as he put it.
If Apple didn't borrow money, then it would have to, gasp, bring cash back home to help pay for its shareholder-greasing. And bringing Apple's offshore cash back home could result in a tax hit of up to $35 billion, assuming it pays the full statutory corporate tax rate (which doesn't happen very often). Analysts for months have been prodding Apple to borrow money to avoid the hit, and Apple has been listening, apparently.
Apple Would Rather Go Into Debt Than Bring Home $100 Billion In Offshore Cash
1). How about electing politicians who actually represent the people vs corporations?
2). How about stop buying their products?
3). So pouting is the least one can do, but any Nd everyone can do something to enact change and force Congress to correct this.
4). How about enforcing some laws that already on the books, like slapping an embargo tax on their products once they arrive into the U.S. for sale? Yes it would make their more expensive than it is already and less people would buy their product, thus losing that same amount or more in sales, thus forcing them to actually build their damn products here.
How about having a tax code that doesn't punish success and make it more expensive to pay taxes than to borrow $17 billion and pay it back with interest?!?
The fact that the point of this article went over your head that profoundly is simply amazing....
Really? Corporate taxes are the lowest (12.3 effective) in 42 years.
Really? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world.
Perhaps you should have a clue what you are talking about before commenting? Just a thought...
That WOULD be true if they actually PAID that rate...which we all know they don't....so why don't you put your Strawman to bed?
Yep... We should penalize companies like Apple even more, because it isn't like those penalties will ever get passed on to the consumer.
Paying what they fucking OWE is penalizing them? Turn the channel.
Who cares what the tax rate is, it's the effective (actual) rate that counts. I paid $496,500.00 in Federal taxes for 2012. That's a 3% effective rate.
So you're saying you want a tax code that punishes the most vulnerable? How feudalistic of you...
Who cares what the tax rate is, it's the effective (actual) rate that counts. I paid $496,500.00 in Federal taxes for 2012. That's a 3% effective rate.
So you're saying you want a tax code that punishes the most vulnerable? How feudalistic of you...
No - I'm saying I want a tax code that doesn't punish anyone. Because taxes were not intended to be a punishment (unfortunately you libtard parasites got a hold of them and turned them into a punishment).
Our tax rate should be a flat 10% across the board with no deductions or loopholes. Period. End of story.
Unfortunately though, parasites like you want to mooch off the hard work of others.
Yep... We should penalize companies like Apple even more, because it isn't like those penalties will ever get passed on to the consumer.
Paying what they fucking OWE is penalizing them? Turn the channel.
Yep... We should penalize companies like Apple even more, because it isn't like those penalties will ever get passed on to the consumer.
Paying what they fucking OWE is penalizing them? Turn the channel.
Yes - because you fucking parasites think they "owe" any where from 50% (beyond outrageous) to 100% (just plain fucking stupid communism).
So yes - the ideology of you libtards is to punish success. I know, sounds absurd when you actually see it outside of your own libtard heads, doesn't it?
Yep... We should penalize companies like Apple even more, because it isn't like those penalties will ever get passed on to the consumer.
So you're saying you want a tax code that punishes the most vulnerable? How feudalistic of you...
No - I'm saying I want a tax code that doesn't punish anyone. Because taxes were not intended to be a punishment (unfortunately you libtard parasites got a hold of them and turned them into a punishment).
Our tax rate should be a flat 10% across the board with no deductions or loopholes. Period. End of story.
Unfortunately though, parasites like you want to mooch off the hard work of others.
So you're saying you want a tax code that punishes the most vulnerable? How feudalistic of you...
No - I'm saying I want a tax code that doesn't punish anyone. Because taxes were not intended to be a punishment (unfortunately you libtard parasites got a hold of them and turned them into a punishment).
Our tax rate should be a flat 10% across the board with no deductions or loopholes. Period. End of story.
Unfortunately though, parasites like you want to mooch off the hard work of others.
Tax codes don't punish anyone...they keep government running...it's the cost of doing business and earning money here, as well as around the globe.
I bet I pay in more as a household than you do...so you might want to rethink the parasite thing.
No - I'm saying I want a tax code that doesn't punish anyone. Because taxes were not intended to be a punishment (unfortunately you libtard parasites got a hold of them and turned them into a punishment).
Our tax rate should be a flat 10% across the board with no deductions or loopholes. Period. End of story.
Unfortunately though, parasites like you want to mooch off the hard work of others.
Tax codes don't punish anyone...they keep government running...it's the cost of doing business and earning money here, as well as around the globe.
I bet I pay in more as a household than you do...so you might want to rethink the parasite thing.
Which State do you live?
Soaking the Poor, State by State | Mother Jones
