California should exercise their eminent domain powers and purchase it for what it's worth.

Don’t encourage heavy handedness by the government, instead push for a better system of checks and balances.

>> California should exercise their eminent domain powers and purchase it for what it's worth.

> Don’t encourage heavy handedness by the government, instead push for a better system of checks and balances.

That's not heavy handedness, it's calling a hyper-rich entity on its greedy, obvious bullshit. It'd be a welcome lesson to all to all such organizations.

I'd also say such eminent domain actions would be a reasonable part of checks and balances: no one would under-represent the value of their property, at least not as much as Apple has, if they invited that kind of risk.

I think it was sarcasm to prove a point. If the government did it, it would be outrage, but the reverse, and it's just business being "efficient".

The writer of the article really couldn't be bothered to look into the details at all and find out the reason behind the discrepancy in valuations? A lot of people are probably curious, it's the whole hook of the headline...

> Business Insider has contacted Apple for comment. The company declined to comment when approached by The Chronicle.

Either the story is balderdash, or Apple knows how bad any explanation will look. It's probably just easier for the reporters to ask a source in the local government.

As an accountant, I expect they can report their value differently if they are especially specialised, so they aren't useful for anyone else. No idea how that works with US tax, though.

The city should offer to buy it from them for $201.

not only offer, but make it a friendly compulsory acquisition, say for $400, with 100% profits for Apple (taxable!)

Nothing more American than Apple(pie) and tax evasion.