Moore Wealth Management’s Post

Apple Ordered to Pay €13bn in Taxes to Ireland in Final ECJ Ruling —— Check the full article here: https://lnkd.in/gJeW6Pr2 —— Visit the link in our bio. #JadeTimes #Apple #ECJ #TaxRuling #Ireland #GlobalEconomy #CorporateTax #EURegulation #TechNews #AppleNews

💡 Apple’s Tax Structure and EU Dispute: Legal Loopholes or Unfair Advantage? Apple has long utilized a network of subsidiaries to allocate profits across jurisdictions, notably through two Irish entities: Apple Sales International (ASI) and Apple Operations International (AOI). Despite generating significant profits from IP held in these entities, they were considered “stateless” for tax purposes, allowing Apple to pay extremely low tax rates in Europe, sometimes as low as 0.005%. In 2016, the European Commission ruled that Apple’s tax arrangements with Ireland constituted illegal state aid, ordering the company to pay €13 billion in back taxes. The Commission argued that Apple’s structure breached EU competition rules by giving it an unfair advantage over competitors. #TaxLaw #EU #Apple #StateAid #CorporateTax #Ireland #BusinessEthics #CompetitionLaw

BREAKING: Apple Illegally Obtained €13B State Aid, Top EU Court Rules The Court of Justice of the European Union has confirmed that Ireland provided illegal state aid to Apple, mandating the tech giant to pay €13 billion ($14.3 billion) in back taxes. The European Commission claims that Ireland offered Apple favourable tax arrangements that violated EU state aid laws, giving it a "selective advantage" in deals dating back to 1991 and 2007. These arrangements significantly reduced Apple’s tax liabilities across European markets. The court's decision overturns a previous 2020 General Court ruling, reinstating the European Commission’s initial 2016 finding against the tax breaks provided to Apple. To learn more about how Law360 UK & MLex, are reporting on this and other state aid cases, please connect with me for an initial consultation followed by a trial. #Apple #StateAid #EU #TaxLaw #EuropeanUnion #LegalNews #EuropeanComission #TechRegulation #Ireland

Apple: Just pay the tax bill and move on ————————————————— The tax case alone “shows that Apple contributes very, very little when it comes to taxes, in the jurisdictions where they make their profits,” “Apple leaves a “sad aftertaste of illegal behavior.” Vestager In a significant development, Apple Inc. has lost its legal battle regarding a €13 billion ($14.4 billion) tax bill in Ireland. The European Court of Justice overturned a previous ruling in favor of Apple, stating that the lower court had incorrectly assessed the case. This decision reinforces the European Union’s stance against special tax arrangements offered by member states to large corporations. The case, which dates back to 2016, had Apple CEO Tim Cook voicing strong opposition, calling the EU’s decision “total political crap.” The ruling is seen as a win for EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager as she nears the end of her term, and it continues to spotlight the EU's broader efforts in regulating tech giants. This is the right time for Apple to accept the judgment and pay the bill. #moveon #Apple #TaxLaw #EUCourt #Business #CorporateTax #Antitrust #Technology #Ireland

#Apple #Taxevasion #Transferpricing #EUtaxation #Offshorecentres #Internationaltax Apple and Ireland In contradiction to remarks by LinkedIn members stating international companies successfully avoid tax, the court of justice European after 8 years have judged that Apple must rembourse 13 milliards of euros to Ireland. This represents 1991-2014 tax reductions. This clearly shows that European law is real and anti avoidance legislation or actions by international companies do not have a gateway to tax avoidance . I have been stating in writing several times over the years that taxation rates should be assessed where the revenue is generated based in the country concerned on a consolidated real cost basis so that the margins are not artificial but fair. Thus excluded intercompany transactions , management charges etc. It is not a surprise this judgement and proves that current legislation is already effective .

The finding of the EU's top court against Apple and Ireland is significant in a number of respects. 1) Despite the case being historical (1991-2007), it will bring greater attention to the unusually large amount of corporation tax revenue Ireland currently raises from this source (as a share of total taxation) and strengthen claims that Ireland is facilitating international tax avoidance. 2) Although European countries have traditionally made this charge against Ireland, despite no sign that their corporation tax revenues have suffered over the decades, the risk for Ireland is that more attention is paid to the issue in the US. American corporation tax revenues have shown signs of decline for well over a decade. 3) In a worst case scenario for Ireland, other countries could make claims on the Apple money, with combined claims exceeding €13 billion. This poses a modest fiscal risk and a major diplomatic risk. I'll be discussing all this with Matt Cooper on his TodayFM radio show shortly after 5pm today.

📣 #Stateaid update Today, 10 September 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled against Apple in a landmark State aid case. 💡 The #CJEU sided with the European Commission and ruled that two Irish subsidiaries of the #Apple group received unlawful State aid from Ireland. This judgment is final and may boost the Commission’s investigations in other pending cases after it had suffered several losses in the Fiat, #Amazon and ENGIE cases, all concerning Luxembourg. 💡 With Harmen Van Dam and Peter Adriaansen, I give you more details on the case and some lessons taxpayers may draw, notably around the functional analysis and supporting #transferpricing documentation. ⤵ #lawandtax

Today, 10 September 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled against Apple in a landmark State aid case. The #CJEU sided with the European Commission and ruled that two Irish subsidiaries of the #Apple group received unlawful State aid from Ireland. This judgment is final and may boost the Commission’s investigations in other pending cases after it had suffered several losses in the Fiat, #Amazon and ENGIE cases, all concerning Luxembourg. Pierre-Antoine Klethi, Harmen Van Dam and Peter Adriaansen describe the judgment, the background, lessons for taxpayers and the impact on other pending State aid cases in our recent website post: https://lawand.tax/3zgfEC7 #EuropeanUnion #StateAid #tax #lawandtax

Only a day after the presentation of the new iPhone 16, Apple's loss in the EU top court over the €13 billion tax bill stems from a long-standing dispute with the European Commission. Here's a breakdown of the key points: 1. Background: In 2016, the European Commission ordered Ireland to recover up to €13 billion in back taxes from Apple. The Commission argued that Apple had received "illegal" tax benefits from Ireland over two decades. 2. Initial Rulings: Apple and Ireland appealed the decision, and in 2020, the EU General Court sided with Apple, annulling the Commission's decision. The court stated that the Commission had not sufficiently proven that Ireland had given Apple a tax advantage. 3. Final Appeal: The European Commission appealed the General Court's decision, bringing the case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). The ECJ recently ruled against Apple, confirming that Ireland had granted Apple unlawful state aid, which Ireland is required to recover. 4. Implications: This ruling underscores the EU's commitment to ensuring fair competition and cracking down on what it perceives as unfair tax practices by multinational corporations. It also highlights the ongoing tension between the EU and large U.S. tech companies over issues like taxation and antitrust. This case is significant because it sets a precedent for how the EU might handle similar cases in the future, potentially impacting other multinational corporations operating within the EU. Apple #EU #court #data #economy #market #AI

Ireland gave state aid to Apple - but did other multinationals benefit from the same aid ? If so can the benefits they received and the damage to competition now lead to cases for recovery?  The time taken to get the final decision may mean other cases are out of time - with justice for those harmed being delayed and denied.  But maybe there is a way to bring cases against Apple and others? If those benefitting were concealed and the basis of claim unknown maybe claimants, and public interest actors and authorities can still bring claims?  https://lnkd.in/etKJTKme