I think one naive answer is that US citizens living abroad get credits or deductions for local taxes they may have paid. A more general one is that we already accept the idea that corporations and individuals are governed by different tax laws so "Why shouldn't one be exactly like the other?" has a somewhat flippant reply in "They don't, already, for various reasons, so why should they be?"
But I don't think the objections (or counter-arguments) to Apple's behaviour as simplistic as that - it's just I don't quite understand what the source of the controversy is and was hoping that someone else did.
Regarding tax credits - that's fine, let's say Ireland taxes at 12.5%, and US at 35%, then all companies would be required to pay would be the difference, 22.5%.
Pay it to whom, though? Ireland? The US? Does the country with the highest tax rate get to set the global corporate tax rate?
I don't think any developing economy could possibly agree to such a scheme - it eliminates a less-developed economy's ability to compete for investment against established incumbents by offering tax incentives - I think this ends up translating to unacceptable protectionism for any non-economically-dominant country looking to attract investment and compete in the global marketplace. There'd never be a 'Celtic Tiger' economy under such a scheme.
US States, incidentally, compete for business on a similar basis.
Comments
I think one naive answer is that US citizens living abroad get credits or deductions for local taxes they may have paid. A more general one is that we already accept the idea that corporations and individuals are governed by different tax laws so "Why shouldn't one be exactly like the other?" has a somewhat flippant reply in "They don't, already, for various reasons, so why should they be?"
But I don't think the objections (or counter-arguments) to Apple's behaviour as simplistic as that - it's just I don't quite understand what the source of the controversy is and was hoping that someone else did.
Regarding tax credits - that's fine, let's say Ireland taxes at 12.5%, and US at 35%, then all companies would be required to pay would be the difference, 22.5%.
Pay it to whom, though? Ireland? The US? Does the country with the highest tax rate get to set the global corporate tax rate?
I don't think any developing economy could possibly agree to such a scheme - it eliminates a less-developed economy's ability to compete for investment against established incumbents by offering tax incentives - I think this ends up translating to unacceptable protectionism for any non-economically-dominant country looking to attract investment and compete in the global marketplace. There'd never be a 'Celtic Tiger' economy under such a scheme.
US States, incidentally, compete for business on a similar basis.