As reported by the news agency Reuters, this week Apple will file the announced appeal against the decision of the European Commission that forces the company to pay up to € 13.000 billion in back taxes to Ireland.
Last August, European authorities concluded that for years, Apple had been receiving preferential tax treatment from Ireland materialized in tax benefits. These benefits allowed Apple to pay less taxes than it really was entitled to compared to other companies for having its European headquarters located there.
According to Apple, the EU has ignored the experts and treats it differently
Following the announcement of this decision by the European Commission, Apple CEO Tim Cook issued a harsh statement in which he qualified the process undertaken by the European authorities as "Total political shit" further pointing out that the calculation that had been made on unpaid back taxes was based on a "false number". For this reason, the executive also promised to appeal the Commission's decision, an attitude that received the support of the Irish government itself, which also rejected the conclusions of the European Commission and announced that it would support Apple to reverse it.
Last Monday, Bruce Sewell, Apple's general counsel, told Reuters that the presentation of this appeal against the decision of the European Commission was imminent. According to this executive, the basis of the appeal lies in the conviction on the part of the company that the EU authorities voluntarily ignored the tax experts to reach their conclusions.
The Irish provided the expert opinion of a highly respected Irish tax attorney. The Commission not only didn't attack that - it didn't discuss it, as far as we know - it probably didn't even read it. Because there is no reference (in the EU decision).
Apple, a "convenient target"
Sewell has come to say that The European Commission has treated Apple differently because of its success, a way that would have hurt the company. According to the Apple advisor, the decision was purposely based on a "local notion of non-residence" in order to facilitate a greater penalty, despite the fact that, in his opinion, there are other arguments that are just as legitimate and legal. that could have been used to make the final amount much less.
Apple is a convenient target because it generates a lot of headlines. (Bruce Sewell, Apple director).
Also Ireland, in unison with Apple, issued a statement last Monday stating that the commission of the European Union had 'misunderstood the relevant facts and Irish law'.
Ireland did not give Apple favorable tax treatment, the full amount of the tax was paid in this case and no state aid was provided. Ireland does not make deals with taxpayers.
Furthermore, Apple's subsidiaries in Ireland are also a major point of disagreement between the company and the European Commission. The authorities pointed out that Apple Sales International (ASI) and Apple Operations Europe existed only on paper, and did not justify the billions they had made in profits. Faced with it, Sewell claims that just because a holding company has no employees on its books, it does not mean that it is inactive, as it could be actively managed by employees of its parent company.:
When Tim Cook, who is the CEO of our company, makes decisions that affect ASI, the Commission says that we do not care because he is not an employee of ASI, he is an employee of Apple Inc. But to say that somehow Tim Cook does not can make decisions for ASI is a complete mistake of corporate law, it is a misunderstanding of how companies operate.
Definitely, the matter is quite complicated and we still do not know for sure how it will end however, What is certain is that with the presentation of this appeal the final decision will be delayed in time.
