SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the a-billion-here-and-a-billion-there...-now-you're-starting-to-talk-about-real-money dept.
Apple invests $350 billion (with a "B") in USA over next 5 years
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/01/apple-accelerates-us-investment-and-job-creation/:
Apple today announced a new set of investments to build on its commitment to support the American economy and its workforce, concentrated in three areas where Apple has had the greatest impact on job creation: direct employment by Apple, spending and investment with Apple's domestic suppliers and manufacturers, and fueling the fast-growing app economy which Apple created with iPhone and the App Store. Apple is already responsible for creating and supporting over 2 million jobs across the United States and expects to generate even more jobs as a result of the initiatives being announced today.
Combining new investments and Apple's current pace of spending with domestic suppliers and manufacturers — an estimated $55 billion for 2018 — Apple's direct contribution to the US economy will be more than $350 billion over the next five years, not including Apple's ongoing tax payments, the tax revenues generated from employees' wages and the sale of Apple products.
[...] "Apple, already the largest US taxpayer, anticipates repatriation tax payments of approximately $38 billion as required by recent changes to the tax law. A payment of that size would likely be the largest of its kind ever made."
Using the new 15.5 percent repatriation tax rate, the $38 billion tax payment disclosed by Apple means they are doing a $245 billion repatriation. Apple had $252.3 billion in overseas cash as of the end of September quarter, according to SEC filings so that means the company is bringing back nearly all of its foreign cash.
Apple announces plans to repatriate billions in overseas cash and contribute $350B to US economy!
"Apple on Wednesday made a slew of announcements about its investment in and contribution to the U.S. economy in part because of the new tax law.
The headline from Apple is that it will make a $350 billion 'contribution' to the U.S. economy over the next five years, although it's unclear exactly how the company came to that number." https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/apple-announces-350-billion-investment-20k-jobs-over-5-years.html
(Score: 2) by n1 on Friday January 19 2018, @05:23PM (2 children)
I don't disagree with your sentiment, although the way you explained it makes you no better than the stubborn 'progtards' who remain committed to a view point in-spite of evidence. Regardless of how much evidence a 'progtard' gives you, you're not going to change your view, so why should they? After all their/your evidence is better, nothing is more conclusive than confirmation bias.
Either way, the headline and article is misleading which is alluded to at the end of the summary. This is what they 'hope to contribute' to the economy, the figure apparently arrived at through some secret proprietary formula of picking numbers out your ass. They are not actually investing 350bn.
They are paying $38bn in tax, and starting a $5bn manufacturing fund. (10% more than existing plans for general business operations) == $350bn somehow. At best -- according to my reading of the press release -- this can be concluded as the sum total of their operational expenses and R&D over 5 years.
How do you even work out what is 'over taxing' a business? What makes this new tax rate the right one, and why not just cut it a little more? If it was 1% more would apple have decided to continue reaping the maximum advantage from their offshore tax system and invested $0bn in manufacturing? If it was 1% less would they have invested billions more?
Fine if you want to argue for 0% tax, but that's not what you said here... What is the magic number as far as a corporate or indeed individual tax rate? How do offsets, deductions and other industry or business specific tax advantages (like what apple got in ireland) or incentives (like what amazon is getting cities to compete with) effect that magic number in regard to the effective tax rate?
Would this repatriation of capital actually be happening if the Ireland arrangement which got them a 0.005% tax rate was still in play and didn't bring the options down to going back to the US or finding a much more risky and politically exposed tax haven?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday January 19 2018, @05:58PM (1 child)
You pay attention. If your nation's largest businesses are paying little to no tax because they're offshoring all the profits, that's a damned good clue that you're charging too much. Or you could just go with "when you have the second or third highest corporate tax rate in the entire world".
If you're asking how you tell if you need a plus or minus 1% correction one way or the other, you don't. You can't tell which side and how far towards the edges you are on the Laffer Curve precisely. The results of large corrections to the tax rate tell you generally where you were but small changes can't be seen beyond the noise.
Now I don't believe businesses should be taxed at all (or be able to participate in politics at all) but that has nothing to do with what rate gets your nation the most income, which is what we're talking about here.
As for the $350bn, you're reading words that aren't there. They brought that much back to US shores and paid a 15% ($38bn) tax bill to be able to do so. That tells me that they are expecting to earn at least an extra $38bn by having easier access to that money. Which means they're planning on investing a pretty good chunk of it domestically somehow. You can bet your ass and the asses of your entire family that they did not do it just to give the President a $38bn Christmas present.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 19 2018, @09:37PM
Haha, that was a lot of words. By your own definition you are an idiot spewing wordy word bullshit. Jesus Christ, you're even talking about your own beliefs; what a waste of fucking time.