SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
tax havens
‘Long-Overdue Justice’: EU Court Rules Ireland Let Apple Avoid $14.4 Billion in Taxes
"This ruling exposes E.U. tax havens' love affair with multinationals."
Sep 10, 2024
The European Union's highest court on Tuesday ruled that Apple must pay €13 billion in back taxes to Ireland, determining that the country gave the company illegal tax benefits in the past, in what campaigners called a victory for tax justice.
The E.U. Court of Justice ruling brought to a close a landmark case that began in 2016 when the European Commission ordered Apple to pay the €13 billion ($14.4 billion) based on an unfair tax arrangement the company had with Ireland from 1991 until 2014. A lower court overturned the commission's order in 2020, but Tuesday's ruling, which is final, restores it.
Observers viewed the case as among the most important brought by E.U. Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, an antitrust official who's been in office since 2014.
"It's important to show European taxpayers that once in a while, tax justice can be done," Vestager, who leaves office in two weeks, said following Tuesday's ruling.
Chiara Putaturo, a tax policy adviser at Oxfam EU, said in a statement that "this ruling exposes E.U. tax havens' love affair with multinationals. It delivers long-overdue justice after over a decade of Ireland standing by and allowing Apple to dodge taxes."
Today is a huge win for European citizens and tax justice.
👉In its final judgment, @EUCourtPress confirms @EU_Commission 2016 decision: Ireland granted illegal aid to @Apple.
Ireland now has to release up to 13 billion euros of unpaid taxes.
— Margrethe Vestager (@vestager) September 10, 2024
The European Commission argued that the selective tax benefits that Ireland had offered to two Apple subsidiaries amounted to illegal state aid that hindered competition. The company's tax burden in Ireland, where its European operations have been based since 1980, was as low as 0.005% of its profits in 2014.
In November of last year, Giovanni Pitruzzella, the advocate general of the E.U. Court of Justice, issued an opinion in favor of the commission's position and against the lower court ruling, in a setback for the tech giant. The high court, which is based in Luxembourg, generally agrees with its advocate general following such recommendations, as it ultimately did on Tuesday.
The €13 billion, plus interest, has been held in an escrow account since 2018 and will be released to Ireland, even though the country fought against the commission's order. Ireland said it would respect the court ruling.
Ireland is often characterized a tax haven within the E.U. and hosts the European headquarters for many multinational firms, with critics charging that its tax system drives up inequality.
Tax justice campaigners said Tuesday's ruling should just be a start and that more fundamental reforms are needed at the international and E.U. level.
"Our tax problem is more than just one rotten apple," Tove Maria Ryding, a policy manager at the European Network on Debt and Development, said in a statement.
"The international system for taxing multinational corporations continues to be deeply complex, unpredictable and unfair," she added, arguing that a company's economic activity across many countries, including in the Global South, shouldn't mean tax revenues only for one country such as Ireland.
Ryding praised the United Nations' efforts to establish a global tax convention, calling the proposal a "beacon of hope for a fairer future."
Putaturo of Oxfam likewise called for a fairer tax system in Europe.
"While this ruling will force the tech giant to pay its debt, the root of the issue is far from solved," she said. "E.U. tax havens can still make sweetheart tax deals with big multinationals. The duty to stop this rests on the shoulders of E.U. policymakers. Yet, they have turned a blind eye to tax havens within their borders and the harmful race to the bottom that countries like Ireland are instigating."
Oxfam EU also called for the closing of tax loopholes and the establishment of a wealth tax.
The Apple case was not the only victory for Vestager, the antitrust chief, on Tuesday: The E.U. Court of Justice also ruled that Google had illegally used its search engine dominance to favor its own shopping service, fining the company €2.4 billion ($2.65 billion).
Bloomberg on Tuesday called it a "double boost to the European Union’s crackdown on Big Tech," and said that Vestager's past work had "paved the way" for the U.S. and the U.K. to take action against Google.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders, Schakowsky Introduce Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act
"American workers should not be paying more in federal income taxes, in a given year, than profitable companies like Target, Amazon, and T-Mobile," said the senator.
Apr 10, 2024
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky on Wednesday introduced a bill that aims to close tax loopholes for corporations, end tax breaks for businesses that move jobs abroad, and stop companies from hiding profits in tax havens.
"At a time of massive wealth and income inequality and soaring corporate profits, it is an outrage that many large, profitable corporations continue to pay little to nothing in federal income taxes," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement. "As working people struggle to pay rent and put food on the table, we have a corrupt and rigged tax code that is designed to benefit the wealthy and the powerful at the expense of working families."
"Meanwhile, Republicans would make a bad situation even worse by providing even more tax breaks to their corporate campaign contributors and the billionaire class while proposing massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid," he noted, nodding to GOP budget plans for fiscal year 2025, which begins in October.
"That is unacceptable. We need to create an economy and a government that works for all of us, not just the top 1%," Sanders asserted. "And, one of the ways we can begin to do that is by making sure that large corporations pay their fair share of taxes. American workers should not be paying more in federal income taxes, in a given year, than profitable companies like Target, Amazon, and T-Mobile."
"We need to create an economy and a government that works for all of us, not just the top 1%."
The Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act, unveiled as Americans prepare for the federal income tax deadline on Monday, could raise over $1 trillion in revenue over a decade with the tax haven provision alone, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
"Thanks to President Joe Biden, we are growing the economy from the bottom up and the middle out, but we must go even further by passing the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act to help put the interests of everyday Americans ahead of billionaires and transnational corporations," said Schakowsky. "I thank Sen. Sanders for devoting his career to tackling income inequality and am proud to partner with him on this important measure."
Biden's budget blueprint for the next fiscal year, released last month, includes proposals to hike taxes for corporations and ultrarich individuals—whose wealth is soaring to record heights. Such policies are not expected to pass the divided Congress, but they serve as a clear statement of the Democratic president's position just months away from the November election.
When then-President Donald Trump—now the presumptive Republican nominee to face Biden—signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in December 2017, he infamously declared that "corporations are literally going wild over this, I think even beyond my expectations."
Many of that law's cuts are set to expire at the end of next year. During an exclusive Florida fundraiser at the home of a billionaire investor over the weekend, the former president urged his supporters to help him "turn our country around" by taking steps including "extending the Trump tax cuts."
Keep ReadingShow Less
OECD Pushed Australia to Drop Plan Aimed at Showing Where Corporations Pay Taxes
"What little credibility the OECD had is now in tatters," said one campaigner. "The OECD makes promises about ending global tax abuse but was evidently doing everything it could behind closed doors to protect tax abusers."
Jul 08, 2023
The Financial Timesconfirmed Friday that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development lobbied Australia to weaken a law that would have compelled about 2,500 highly profitable multinational corporations to reveal where they pay taxes, eliciting outrage from tax justice advocates.
Citing two unnamed people familiar with the discussions, FT reported that the Paris-based club of wealthy nations "pressured Australia's ruling Labor government to drop a crucial part of a new finance bill that would have required some multinationals to publicly disclose their country-by-country tax bills."
"This shows the true colors of the OECD."
According to the newspaper, "The OECD, which has driven efforts to force the world's largest companies to pay their fair share of tax, believed the bill would have undermined its own efforts to make multinationals' affairs less opaque."
Campaigners were incredulous given that the legislation the OECD enfeebled "would have delivered the biggest transparency breakthrough to date on the taxes of multinational corporations," as the Tax Justice Network put it.
The advocacy group estimates that multinationals shift more than $1.1 trillion of profit into tax havens annually, costing the world $312 billion per year in foregone corporate tax revenue. It also calculates that at least 1 of every 4 of those lost tax dollars could be saved if corporations were required to publish country-by-country reporting data.
"The OECD yet again doing the bidding for big business, the only winners here," tweeted Nabil Ahmed, economic justice director at Oxfam America.
Ahmed's observation was shared by Isabel Ortiz, the former director of social protection at the United Nations' International Labor Organization, who said, "This shows the true colors of the OECD and who [it is] serving."
Australia's original proposal "would have exposed unprecedented details about companies' tax affairs in each country they operate," FT reported, aiding efforts to crack down on tax evasion by forcing an estimated 21% of the world's multinational corporations—including many of the biggest firms in history—to come clean about "how much of their revenues are booked in low-tax jurisdictions."
As the newspaper explained:
The bill was expected to clear the Australian parliament in June and come into force on July 1. However, the version of the bill that passed last month removed crucial disclosures, with the Australian government announcing a delay of the planned public country-by-country tax reporting regime for a year.
People close to the decision said officials from the intergovernmental body had stressed to the Australian Treasury that countries that signed the 2015 OECD agreement did so on the basis the tax reports would not become public.
"This is not a good look for the OECD," the Fair Tax Foundation wrote on social media. "Their work is by definition consensus-based and often lowest common denominator. If a country wants to push on and do something more substantial, they should applaud, not oppose."
David McNair, executive director of global policy at the anti-poverty nonprofit One, argued that "this story seriously undermines the OECD's credibility in the one area that it was leading in recent years."
"I hope it prompts some soul searching on the mission and values of the organization," he added.
"OECD has put itself firmly on the side of secrecy—on the side of tax abuse—against one of its members. That's an extraordinary state of affairs."
As FT observed, "For the past decade the OECD has spearheaded global efforts to close loopholes and restrict the use of tax havens after it was asked by the G20 in 2013 to address the growing problem of corporate tax avoidance."
"While large multinationals already report some country-by-country data to tax authorities under an international agreement brokered by the OECD in 2015, the Australian proposal would have disclosed additional new data points," the newspaper noted. "And crucially the OECD country tax reports are not shared with the public."
FT's article corroborates earlier reporting by the Center for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research (CICTAR) and the Tax Justice Network.
Two weeks ago, immediately after the Australian government unexpectedly postponed key components of its landmark bill, both groups suggested that "lobbying against the legislation by multinational corporations and their professional enablers may have been bolstered by the OECD itself—the organization which claims to set international tax rules in order to reduce corporate tax abuse."
In the wake of FT's bombshell story, Tax Justice Network chief executive Alex Cobham said in a statement that "what little credibility the OECD had is now in tatters."
"The OECD makes promises about ending global tax abuse," said Cobham, "but was evidently doing everything it could behind closed doors to protect tax abusers."
The Australian law opposed by the OECD – which may yet be adopted despite the delay – would force one 1 in 5 multinational corporations around the world to come clean about their profits and taxes. This includes many of the world’s biggest multinational corporations... pic.twitter.com/9j3KqNPee4
— Tax Justice Network (@TaxJusticeNet) July 8, 2023
Cobham called it "genuinely shocking to see it confirmed that the OECD has lobbied its own member country against introducing a key measure to fight corporate tax abuse."
"Public country-by-country reporting, when it arrives, will increase revenues around the world to the tune of billions of dollars, by exposing the most egregious profit shifting," Cobham continued. "Investors will benefit from reduced risk in their shareholdings, and employees will benefit both from lower risk and from the chance to negotiate fairly based on a true reporting of the profits of their work. Smaller and domestic businesses will benefit from a more level playing field, instead of a system that subsidizes multinationals' tax bills by effectively granting them immunity from abuse."
"OECD has put itself firmly on the side of secrecy—on the side of tax abuse—against one of its members. That's an extraordinary state of affairs," he added. "And it couldn't send a clearer signal to countries wondering whether the OECD's proposed tax rules will help them to curb tax abuse. They won't, and countries should pursue their own alternatives while preparing for negotiations to establish a proper tax body at the United Nations instead."
Supporters of UN tax leadership have pointed to the OECD’s failure to meaningfully include most countries in its rulemaking process – a concern unlikely to be eased by news of the OECD lobbying its own member against introducing a key measure to fight corporate tax abuse.
— Tax Justice Network (@TaxJusticeNet) July 8, 2023
As economic historian Adam Tooze pointed out, the OECD strong-armed Australia's left-leaning government while being led by Mathias Cormann, a right-wing Australian who previously served as the country's finance minister.
On Saturday, Cormann said in a statement that "the OECD has a proud record of facilitating global cooperation on tax policy and administration, to help ensure globally effective measures to tackle multinational tax avoidance."
"Suggestions the OECD pressured Australia into weakening legislation to tackle such tax avoidance are false," he claimed.
Cobham criticized Cormann's response, pointing out that the OECD secretary-general goes on to admit that the body's experts "raised a number of technical issues," after which Australian lawmakers watered down their proposal.
According to Cobham, the "possible unintended consequences" brought up by OECD experts are "flat wrong." He added that "Cormann seems to have confessed that the OECD did lobby Australia to weaken their proposals to fight corporate tax abuse... and also that they used a false threat to do so—one which, as experts in their own standard, they surely knew was erroneous."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular