How Apple's phantom taxes hide billions in profit

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
By PETER SVENSSON, AP


NEW YORK — On Tuesday, Apple is set to report financial results for the second quarter. Analysts are expecting net income of $9.8 billion. But whatever figure Apple reports won't reflect its true profit, because the company hides some of it with an unusual tax maneuver.

Apple Inc., already the world's most valuable company, understates its profits compared with other multinationals. It's building up an overlooked asset in the form of billions of dollars, tucked away for tax bills it may never pay.

Tax experts say the company could easily eliminate these phantom tax obligations. That would boost Apple's profits for the past three years by as much $10.5 billion, according to calculations by The Associated Press.

While investors might rejoice if Apple suddenly added $10.5 billion to its profits, unilaterally erasing a massive U.S. tax obligation could tarnish its reputation as a relatively responsible payer of U.S. taxes. Instead, the company is lobbying to change U.S. law so that it can erase its liabilities in a less conspicuous fashion. The issue has become part of the presidential campaign.

Like other companies, Apple typically keeps profits on overseas sales in overseas accounts. When someone buys an iPad in Paris or Sydney, for instance, the profit stays outside the United States.

Apple may pay some corporate income taxes on that profit to the country where it sells the iPad, but it minimizes these by using various accounting moves to shift profits to countries with low tax rates. For example the strategy known as "Double Irish With a Dutch Sandwich," routes profits through Irish and Dutch subsidiaries and then to the Caribbean.

When it comes to using creative tax techniques, Apple is no different from other multinational corporations, says Robert Willens, an independent accounting expert.

And just like other corporations, Apple leaves cash overseas. If it brought it home to the U.S., it would have to pay federal income taxes on the money (though it would get a credit for foreign taxes already paid). In Apple's case, those overseas accounts have grown to a staggering $74 billion — equal to the market value of Citigroup Inc.

The money is accumulating overseas because corporations are counting on lower U.S. tax rates in the future. At 35 percent, the U.S. corporate tax rate is among the highest for developed countries. In 2004, Congress enacted a one-year "tax holiday" for overseas earnings, and multinationals are hoping for a repeat of that. Presidential candidate Mitt Romney wants to permanently eliminate federal taxes on overseas profits. President Barack Obama attacked that idea last week, saying it won't create U.S. jobs, like the Romney campaign contends.

Where Apple does differ from other companies is that it sets aside a portion of these overseas profits, marking them as subject to U.S. taxes sometime in the future. Essentially, it's saying "this is money that we'll likely have to pay U.S. federal income taxes on" because we intend to repatriate it, says Willens.

But because Apple doesn't actually bring the profits into U.S. accounts, it doesn't pay the taxes. Instead, it records a tax liability. When Apple reports quarterly results, it subtracts these liabilities from its profits, even though it hasn't actually paid the taxes.

The liabilities accumulate, and as Apple's profits grow, they're piling up faster and faster.

"When you capitalize that into the future, it might be tens of billions of dollars," said Martin Sullivan, an economist with Tax Analysts, a nonprofit publisher.

The company had a net $6 billion of tax liabilities at the end of September, the last reported figure. It's had two blow-out quarters since then and is expected to report another one Tuesday. Based on reported and expected profits for the last three quarters, the liabilities can be estimated at around $10.5 billion.

Apple declined to comment on the specifics of its tax strategies or why it records tax liabilities that other multinationals avoid.

"Apple has conducted all of its business with the highest of ethical standards, complying with applicable laws and accounting rules," the Cupertino, Calif., company said in a statement.

Yet Apple has made clear that it has no intention of repatriating its profits from overseas at the current U.S. tax rate. When CEO Tim Cook announced that the company would start paying a dividend this summer, he said the board determined the size of the dividend solely by looking at the amount of cash the company has in U.S. accounts.

"We do not want to incur the tax cost to repatriate the foreign cash at this time," Chief Financial Officer Peter Oppenheimer told investors in March.

Apple's net tax liabilities started building three years ago, when its sales started rocketing because of the iPhone. In that time, the company has reported a total of $69 billion in net income. If it had applied the same accounting practices as other multinational technology companies, and not marked some overseas profits as subject to U.S. taxes, its profits would have been about $78 billion, or 13 percent higher.

The boost to net income could mean a boost to the stock, since companies are usually valued on their earnings. If investors were to value Apple based on the last 12 months of earnings, with the tax liabilities added to earnings, the stock might be 13 percent higher.

Willens and Sullivan say that Apple could erase its liabilities by considering the profits "permanently reinvested" overseas, acknowledging that they will never be brought home. That would erase the tax liability, but it could make Apple look like a less responsible corporate citizen.

"I doubt they're going to do that on their own, because they don't want to be set up for criticism," said Willens.

Groups such as Citizens for Tax Justice compile lists of the tax rates corporations report. Apple looks like a relatively good taxpayer on such lists, with a 24 percent rate. But Apple doesn't actually pay the 24 percent, since it isn't repatriating its overseas profits. The actual taxes Apple pays are 13 percent of profits, as computed by Sullivan. That's a relatively low rate compared with other multinationals.

But keeping the money overseas limits what Apple can do with it. It means, for instance, that Apple can't use it to buy another U.S. company, or give it to shareholders.

To get the money home without paying full U.S. taxes on it, the company advocates a change in U.S. tax law. It's a member of Working to Invest Now in America, or WinAmerica. The coalition is lobbying for two congressional bills that would temporarily reduce the tax rate on such earnings to 5.25 percent. That would encourage the repatriation of some of the $1.4 trillion in cash that U.S. companies have sitting in overseas accounts, the group says.

The temporary tax amnesty enacted in 2004, resulted in hundreds of billions being brought home to the U.S. But according to the Congressional Research Service, it didn't create jobs or stimulate the economy, as had been hoped.

Google Inc., Oracle Corp., Microsoft Corp. and Cisco Systems Inc. are also members of WinAmerica, but none of them stand to gain as much as Apple from a tax amnesty, because they have less cash overseas.
 

MasterChief

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2012
253
58
935
Sweden
Thank you for posting. As a CFO myself I am familiar with the process of optimizing the markup factor and setting the perfect transfer prices depending on national corporate taxes but for our company there is no 10 quadrillions. :b
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Only in a world inhabited by the hopelessly naive could any of this be surprising. The only substantive responsibility of the publicly traded company is building shareholder equity. That means maximizing income and minimizing taxes, including bringing off shore money home to those shareholders as inexpensively as possible. Do we think companies like Apple should stop the games and pay their share to support the nation, the economy and the national consumer market that made their amazing international success possible? Do we think American corporations should create American jobs, support American growth, and be honorable, if not exemplary American corporate citizens?

No, we don't. We worship at the altar of free markets that are not even close to free (and can't be), elect public servants who serve corporate interests over our own and stand by passively as they create a Court that gives those corporate interests, which already had inordinate power, nearly absolute and utterly opaque collective power over our elections. We stand here at the end of 3 decades of bi-partisan corporatism, deregulation, shrinking taxes for the wealthy and the incorporated, etc., etc., and listen...and buy it...when people tell us we're over-regulated, over-taxed and have an anti-business atmosphere.

God help us.

In the meantime, down here at the street level, the few among us who seem to have found a voice at all are wasting their breath bitching at each other over tthe l stuff of government's role in our lives, not even noticing that government is looking right through us, and is not serving any of us. The right and the left in this country have a common enemy. They need to fight it. They need to take representative democracy back. Then they need to understand that the only way to work out the small stuff is the old way, the hard way: Compromise.

But I'm not holding my breath. We need election reform, tax reform and a series of amendments to the constitution no smaller in scope than the Bill of Rights. But it simply can't happen under the current system. I'm afraid it will have to get very, very bad; on the verge, at least, of revolution - in the streets or at the ballot box -- before anything substantive will be done. I don't expect to see it in my life time.

Tim
 

rockitman

Member Sponsor
Sep 20, 2011
7,097
414
1,210
Northern NY
If the US had a more competitive corporate tax scheme, these corps's wouldn't need to run off shore escaping the congressional/irs tax thug authorities.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
If the US had a more competitive corporate tax scheme, these corps's wouldn't need to run off shore escaping the congressional/irs tax thug authorities.

I'm all in favor of a competitive* corporate tax scheme coupled with the complete elimination all the dodges and shelters. We'd raise more revenue and appear more competitive in one fell swoop. But corporations don't avoid taxes because they need to; they avoid taxes because they can. Belief in anything else is incredibly naive.

Tim

* Here's the defining question: Competitve with whom? Germany? Canada? India? Indonesia? The next third world country that barely industrializes with no regard for the safety and security of its people and the sustainability of its land? To what level do we allow ourselves to drive our middle class so our corporate class can be "competitive?" It's a very real question that no one is asking.
 
Last edited:

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
When you are growing fast, you do everything in your power to keep the numbers down. That way, there is always future good news that can push the stock up, should you not have as good of a quarterly earnings. Every successful major company does that. Only report as much above the analysis estimates to surprise and push the stock up, but not to create a one-time frenzy and set yourself up with a higher target you can't incrementally achieve in the next quarter.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
When you are growing fast, you do everything in your power to keep the numbers down. That way, there is always future good news that can push the stock up, should you not have as good of a quarterly earnings. Every successful major company does that. Only report as much above the analysis estimates to surprise and push the stock up, but not to create a one-time frenzy and set yourself up with a higher target you can't incrementally achieve in the next quarter.

Having had a couple of 300%+ years, I'm not sure Apple has followed this strategy very closely.

Tim
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
The lesser amount of money the government gets the lesser they can destroy, so you can see it in a positive way:D

Yet once the roads crumble or nature (or man) strikes we first look toward the Government ... You think a government will be able to help a growing population facing various and ever more serious threats, growing needs with less or dwindling revenues? Such rhetoric will never cease to amaze me.

I agree with Tim by the way...
 
Last edited:

andromedaaudio

VIP/Donor
Jan 23, 2011
8,499
2,850
1,400
Amsterdam holland
Just take a look at europe and how it got into this mess over the last 12 or so years , give them money and they take away freedom and take more control and higher taxes , a negative spiral
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Yet once the road crumbles or nature (or man) strikes we first look toward the Government ... You think a government will be able to help a growing population facing various and ever more serious threats, growing needs with less or dwindling revenues ... Such rhetoric will never cease to amaze me.

I agree with Tim by the way...

There are a lot of people in America who think civilization shouldn't cost anything...well, let me correct that; they think civilization shouldn't cost them anything. May they all live on a floodplain.

Tim
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Just take a look at europe and how it got into this mess over the last 12 or so years , give them money and they take away freedom and take more control and higher taxes , a negative spiral

No doubt the line between civil society and governmental corruption is a fine one. The answer is in work, not resignation. MHO. YMMV.

Tim
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,579
1,794
1,850
Metro DC
The best arrgument against the flat tax. The best argument in favor of a real alternative minimum tax. BTW does not the SEC require accurate earning statements in a prospectus?
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
The best arrgument against the flat tax. The best argument in favor of a real alternative minimum tax. BTW does not the SEC require accurate earning statements in a prospectus?

What is a real alternative minimum tax, if not a flat tax?
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,579
1,794
1,850
Metro DC
A flat tax allows income manipulation. A real ATM would be based on the companies impact on the community. So Walmart would pay for health care, living wage,etc.

I know I'm politically naive.
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
A flat tax allows income manipulation. A real ATM would be based on the companies impact on the community. So Walmart would pay for health care, living wage,etc.

I know I'm politically naive.

Perhaps, but it is surely must be an improvement over what is happening now.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,579
1,794
1,850
Metro DC
What is the difference? Reduce your income to zero by deductions or by accounting tricks? At least with deductions you can encourage some socially beneficial spending.
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
What is the difference? Reduce your income to zero by deductions or by accounting tricks? At least with deductions you can encourage some socially beneficial spending.


No,no...FLAT TAX RATE......no deductions or accounting tricks. Same for everyone. If you allow deductions then really the rate isn't flat, is it?
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
38
0
Seattle, WA
Having had a couple of 300%+ years, I'm not sure Apple has followed this strategy very closely.

Tim
When I joined Microsoft in 1990s it had sky high growth with the stock splitting every 9 to 12 months. Yet the management did everything to sandbag the earnings the way I mentioned. That's why Apple is doing it now. They don't need the extra dollars to push up the stock.
 

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
When I joined Microsoft in 1990s it had sky high growth with the stock splitting every 9 to 12 months. Yet the management did everything to sandbag the earnings the way I mentioned. That's why Apple is doing it now. They don't need the extra dollars to push up the stock.

Sorry Amir, I should have added a smiley. I was just trying to say Apple was doing a lousy job of "keeping the numbers down."

Tim
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing