SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
El Reg reports
Steve Wozniak has spoken out against Apple's tax affairs, saying all companies ought to pay 50 per cent in taxes.
Speaking to BBC Radio 5 Live he said: "I don't like the idea that Apple might be unfair--not paying taxes the way I do as a person.
"I do a lot of work, I do a lot of travel and I pay over 50 per cent of anything I make in taxes and I believe that's part of life and you should do it."
Asked if Apple should pay that amount, he replied: "Every company in the world should."
According to Woz, money was never a factor when he started the biz with Steve Jobs 40 years ago. He added: "Steve Jobs started Apple Computers for money, that was his big thing and that was extremely important and critical and good."
Europe is currently scrutinising Ireland's tax arrangements with Apple over an alleged sweetheart deal with the company. Some have speculated the probe could lead to Apple paying $8bn in back taxes, even though the case is against the Irish government.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Capt. Obvious on Monday April 25 2016, @09:14PM
You don't invest the first 900M. You invest everything over 900M. Then it's an expense, and doesn't get taxed.
With that much R&D money lying around, every large company could take startup like risks. Try to replace a vacuum tube with a funny bit of metal? Go for it. Think you can replace ASM with something else? Try it Dr. Ritchie. Have ideas about a graphical way of interacting with computers? Go nuts PARC people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 25 2016, @09:22PM
Our scientific advances have covered so much that it seems corporations don't want to risk investing in research anymore. It still boils down to the spreadsheet, will the research result in higher profits later?
Our world has become so twisted, market value is all that matters. I would hazard a guess that our current situation looks quite similar to what the norm was about two thousand years ago, when some dude had enough and kicked some money lenders out of a temple. Let's see, the best analogy today I can think of are Bail Bonds. Don't want prison? Here, give us some money plus a nice fee and you can pretend you're a rich person! Why is bail needed, or set so high, when you can walk across the street and put 1/10th (or whatever %) down and walk? That makes no sense. There should not be profit involved in any part of the justice system.
(Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Monday April 25 2016, @09:30PM
Right, they don't want to risk money on research. If that money was tax-deductable, and taxes were at a significantly high rate, the research is, de facto, subsidized. Then, the calculus changes and its worth investing it.
Bail bonds in theory are driven because the bail bondsman will spend the cash on a bounty hunter to drag you back. Don't know why the government couldn't do that though... Or just pay the Federal Marshals their salary to bring him in.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday April 25 2016, @10:36PM
I was under the impression that posting bond *isn't* a for-profit motive. It's to make sure you actually show up for your court date.
Of course the question is how it works in practice. There are a great many things about our government that are fucked in the head and twisted the exact opposite direction from their original intent.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Tuesday April 26 2016, @08:45PM
Posting bail is not for-profit. It's just to make sure you actually show up for your court date.
Posting bond is when you pay a bailbondsman 10% to put up the entire bail on your behalf. (The bailbondsman will pay a bounty hunter to snatch your ass if you skip.) The bailbondsman is totally for profit. You won't get that 10% back (unlike bail).
Basically, the bail money is only forfeited if the person skips out on court and isn't recaptured in a period of time. So the bailbondsman might be out $50,000 if you run. (Although he got paid $5,000 to put up the $50,000). If you show up, you subsidize all the other people who run and give the bailbondsman a nice return. If you run, it's worth the bailbondsman time to sic Dog the Bounty Hunter on you. And, if it costs less than $5,000, he still wins. (Plus, he can often tack that cost onto the person as a debt.).
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday April 26 2016, @10:48PM
Ah. Sorry for not reading closely enough :P
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Capt. Obvious on Wednesday April 27 2016, @04:54AM
No problem. It's a subtle distinction that's lost on a lot of people (and on a lot of screenwriters, which is most people's source of knowledge on the subject.) I'm thankful my knowledge of the matter is all 2nd hand!