Apple is probably right in saying that the total of VAT, employee tax, etc. is the largest in Ireland, the US and World: they are the largest company in the world, so that statement should be fairly obvious. If someone who makes 1M$ per year pays 0.5% taxes, he still pays more than someone who pay 20% of their 24k$. That’s why this statement is seen as disingenuous: the ratio to your revenue is was matters.
The European Commission, the vast majority of observers and almost all Hacker News members are right in saying that they paid virtually no (0.005%) corporate tax, because that was the point of the statements they made to tax authorities around the world.
On whether what Apple did was legal: the stated that their all their value creation happened in the Dutch Antilles, which is patently false. That is nothing short of lying on your tax form. The Irish government accepted it because they were strong-armed into accepting that or seeing jobs go elsewhere. That type of coercion is also something that this letter lies about.
In the US, John Oliver pretending he is the Head of a Church whose main tenet is his personal enrichment is widely accepted as a legal, and deserving of a tax break; in the EU, such statements are considered disingenuous (that’s the fancy word for “bullshit”) and treated accordingly.
That is incorrect. Apple doesn't pay VAT, they offset any notional VAT bill against the total of VAT collected from customers and pass-through the residue to the revenue agency.
Generally, each such trader in the chain of supply from manufacturer through to retailer charges VAT on his or her sales and is entitled to deduct from this amount the VAT paid on his or her purchases.
http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/vat/
The non-corporate end-user is stuck with paying VAT because they're not 'adding value'.
However, I’d be surprised if Apple buys enough things in Ireland to offset the sales of iPhones in Europe.
You seem familiar with the principle of VAT. In reality, many companies who practice tax optimisation scheme are happy to play with that notion beyond recognition.
In Europe, Amazon aligns some of its prices to local prices including VAT, but they only collect Luxembourg VAT, pocketing the difference. The tax accountant of any (international) travel agent would be happy to dazzle you with how much money they are making from creative interpretation of international rules on VAT. If a good is not sold, the last buyer still owe the VAT on it, even when they are not a user of that good, end user or otherwise.
VAT is paid by companies: I’ve had enough issues with my own tax to confirm that you don’t need to collect it to owe it to unscrupulous governments.
Apple do not pay VAT, consumers pay VAT.
You don't also count the PAYE each of Apples employees pay as "tax that Apple pays" do you?
Apple tax lawyers probably do count it, when asked to inflated the number.
http://www.starbucks.co.uk/blog/starbucks-commitment-to-the-...
I haven't confined that they have the largest revenues, but paying the most is a weak argument in the face of what the governing body decides as what is a "fair" amount to pay.
Whether or not this decision is fair is another conversation altogether...
When I say virtually no tax, I mean the relationship between the % they pay and the % everyone else pays.
Therefore, [citation needed]