Hacker News Reader

Comment by NovemberWhiskey | Hacker News Reader

Why? Sure, Ireland would get a one-off tax boost, but then all the firms that had structured their business this way would no longer have a reason to invest in Ireland at all.

View on HN

I'm Irish and the ruling relates to the double-irish tax break specifically, it's about marketing for this tax evasion tactic. It's a hot topic in Ireland; Ireland looks like one of the richest countries on Earth (by GDP) but most Irish aren't feeling this. It's the huge amounts of money flowing through this double-irish loophole that creates the false GDP number. The loophole should end and paying the tax means closing the loophole.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement

I'm also Irish and you need to think of this more than just the GDP number. Tens of thousands of Irish people are working in the tech and pharma sector which is directly related to the tax status that companies have here. It's convenient for a company to have its "tax HQ" as well as a large physical presence in the country. It is allowing us to build our own sovereign wealth fund.

The Ireland of today is hugely better off than it was in the 80s and early 90s, and a good deal of that progress has been smart "marketing", as you call it, bringing in investment. Without this, the economy of Ireland would be closer to Greece or Portugal today.

I would also add that Ireland's corporation tax receipts, particularly from MNCs, are very significant, so the benefits aren't imaginary in any sense. The government has largely squandered those benefits but that's a different matter.

Fair points, and I agree. However, I believe that the double-irish loophole is more of a 'value add' for the big companies already here, to lessen their tax load in other countries via 'convenient' accounting. The EU ruling is more about this tax evasive nature/use of the loophole than the investment in Ireland and it's economy & jobs.

Edit: The EU ruling actually targets a specific use of this loophole by Apple, which alleges amounts to state aid, hence the anti-trust comments. (Gotta love the HN community for delving into the details)

Ireland funds it's pension scheme via the taxes it collects from Apple et al.

If those corporations leave then Ireland loses a lot of tax revenue.

Instead Ireland should tax property speculators.

This is an antitrust case, not a tax case. The whole point is that other firms did not benefit from the same rules.

The governments stance is that any company could have applied the same tax rules if they wished, so it was not state aid. As a side note, the "irish double sandwich" rules have changed since this

Sure, and in that case no issue. But that is the government stance, not the EU stance.

There is no "EU" stance.

The disagreement is between the European Commission and the Irish government. The deciding authority here will be the European Court of Justice, after appeal from the decision of the General Court - which favored Ireland.

Honestly at this point, they're probably not going to up sticks. Well-educated Anglophone workforce, lots of existing employees and infrastructure, excellent rule-of-law, lots of extant US-Irish good will, unlikely to elect popularist strongmen any time soon ... where else to go?

There is no investment.

Have you seen Dublin property prices?

Apple et al have 'made' billions of euros for the citizens of dublin in property value increases alone.

As a Dubliner, I can tell you that very few are feeling positive effects of these ‘billions of euros.’ The EU ruling is more about a tax evasion loop hole that sees vast billions of euros passing through it, then investment of billions in any part of the economy.

Most landlords (and property owners) in Dublin are not citizens but rather foreign investors and vulture funds.

Citation?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com