Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way I understand it, it's not really like Ireland is demanding Apple pay suddenly, the EU is saying that Apple owes Ireland the 13B and has to make up the losses due to Ireland & Apple colluding to strike an tax deal that is unfair (for all other EU members) for Apple.

Ireland itself probably doesn't want to do this, since those deals exist for a reason.

> since those deals exist for a reason.

Scam the rest of the EU countries?

To be exact, the ruling is that Ireland gave unfair advantage to Apple, compared to other companies. If Ireland want to set corporate taxes at 1%, it can, but it should be for all companies. Amazon notably didn't get the same deal Apple did, which is anti-competitive.

Shouldn't Ireland be fined 13 billion from the EU then?

This is not a fine, tho. It's just the amount that Apple would have paid in taxes, if the special deal didn't exist.

The EU is not imposing any fines on Apple. They're just ordering Ireland to collect the taxes owed to them (Ireland), since the tax deal was found to be unfair/illegal.

Yes. Which if you think about it, is doubly unfair. First Ireland reaped the benefits of keeping Apple in the country; then it gets paid Apple's taxes anyway. Sure, this puts a stop to the practice and makes it much harder to sell such deals in the future, but for the moment Ireland had its apple cake and ate it, too.

It would be unfair if the term was fair to begin with, but it wasn't, according to that court.

What would be interesting is to see Apple revealing the cost of its lobbying, to claim a claw back. It won't.

It turned out great for Ireland yes, it is odd the court didn't fine that country for offering illegal tax terms.

I think that the court ruled that it was unfair to other countries, not to Ireland. Ireland gained from the deal, didn't lose anything.

No, it's unfair to other _companies_. The issue like I said was that Apple was taxed ~1%, when others were taxed ~12%, which impact fair competition.

True. In any case, not unfair to Ireland.

> If Ireland want to set corporate taxes at 1%, it can, but it should be for all companies. Amazon notably didn't get the same deal Apple did, which is anti-competitive.

This was formerly the case, but actually now they no longer can set them that low, due to a deal by many countries to effectively force a 15% minimum. This was also largely aimed at Ireland's low 12.5% tax rate, which is being phased out as a result.

Sure, but here Ireland has gotten both the benefit of the illegal agreement _and_ will get the tax revenue. Those deals existed to attract large tech companies to Ireland, and create an ecosystem there, and I don't think that'll go away just because Ireland can't offer any new ones.

Not suggesting that Ireland did this expecting to get both sets of benefits, but seems a little counter-productive that they are in fact receiving those.

> Does feel a bit like the EU should get the cash, not the state that was responsible for it

The EU court judges that a member country didn't tax a company enough, so the EU takes the money? That would be ripe for abuse.

Country should get the tax cash, then company and country should both be fined by EU.

No more so than any other fine the EU raises

If the EU can judge that one country's taxes have been "unfairly low" for the last N years, and take what would have been the tax receipts for the last N years, they can raise a lot more than they do by fines. This is especially true if they decide to do it for all of the businesses in a country, instead of just for a few.

I mean, look, the EU is still a place that is more or less governed by rule of law. All I'm saying is that, if the EU keeps the money, that creates the temptation to abuse it.

They didn’t do that, they decided that specific tax deals made with specific companies were outside of the law

Yes, I know that. That's all that has happened... so far.

And I maintain that, to keep it that way, it is good that the money not wind up at the EU, but rather at the member state.