Social Europe

politics, economy and employment & labour

  • Projects
    • Corporate Taxation in a Globalised Era
    • US Election 2020
    • The Transformation of Work
    • The Coronavirus Crisis and the Welfare State
    • Just Transition
    • Artificial intelligence, work and society
    • What is inequality?
    • Europe 2025
    • The Crisis Of Globalisation
  • Audiovisual
    • Audio Podcast
    • Video Podcasts
    • Social Europe Talk Videos
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Dossiers
    • Occasional Papers
    • Research Essays
    • Brexit Paper Series
  • Shop
  • Membership
  • Ads
  • Newsletter

Apple, Ireland And The New Green Jersey Tax Avoidance Technique

by Emma Clancy on 4th July 2018 @emmaclancy123

Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedIn
Emma Clancy

Emma Clancy

After the European Commission’s state aid ruling on Ireland, both Apple and the Irish government assured us that Apple has paid tax at Ireland’s statutory rate of 12.5% since 2014. But our research, following up on the revelations made last November in the Paradise Papers, finds that changes in Ireland’s tax law in 2014 have provided Apple with a near-total offset mechanism for sales profits.

Using data from Apple Inc’s 10-K filings to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, we estimate that Apple’s tax rate for the period 2015-2017 for its non-US earnings is between 3.7% and 6.2%.

Within the EU, Apple paid tax at a rate of between 1.7% and 8.8% during the period 2015-2017. If we assume that Apple’s provision for foreign tax is substantially smaller than the amount actually transferred to foreign governments, we estimate that Apple may have paid as little as 0.7% tax in the EU.

Applying this range of estimates, this means that Apple has avoided paying between €4bn-€21bn in tax to EU tax collection agencies during this period.

Ireland remains at the centre of Apple’s tax avoidance strategy. Apple organised a new structure in 2014-2015 that included the relocation of its non-US sales and intellectual property (IP) from “nowhere” to Ireland, and the relocation of its overseas cash to Jersey.

But despite the relocation of sales income and IP assets to Ireland, there was no observable corresponding increase in corporation tax received from Apple by Irish Revenue from 2015-2017.

Join our growing community newsletter!

"Social Europe publishes thought-provoking articles on the big political and economic issues of our time analysed from a European viewpoint. Indispensable reading!"

Polly Toynbee

Columnist for The Guardian

Thank you very much for your interest! Now please check your email to confirm your subscription.

There was an error submitting your subscription. Please try again.

Powered by ConvertKit

Industry designs a replacement for the Double Irish

The structure Apple uses today was designed by the industry and willingly implemented by the Irish government as a replacement for the Double Irish scheme.

It is based on the use of full capital allowances for expenditure on intellectual property and massive intra-group loans to purchase the IP, with full deductions on the interest paid for these loans, in order to cancel out the tax bill arising from sales profits.

Ireland’s capital allowance for intangible assets was introduced in the Finance Act 2009, with a cap of 80%. It meant relief in the form of a capital allowance for expenditure on IP against trading income in a given reporting period or as a write-off against taxable income over 15 years. Deductions for associated interest expenses could also be written off up to an 80% cap.

Our report reveals that the Irish government raised this 80% cap to 100% following lobbying by the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland in 2014. This resulted in the amount of capital allowances being claimed by multinational corporations rising from €2.7 billion in 2014 to €28.9 billion in 2015.


We need your help! Please join our mission to improve public policy debates.


As you may know, Social Europe is an independent publisher. We aren't backed by a large publishing house or big advertising partners. For the longevity of Social Europe we depend on our loyal readers - we depend on you. You can support us by becoming a Social Europe member for less than 5 Euro per month.

Thank you very much for your support!

Become a Social Europe Member

In 2017 the Irish government announced that it would bring back the 80% cap but said it would not apply to the IP that was brought onshore from 2015-2017, which included Apple’s IP assets.

Apple and the ‘Green Jersey’ technique

Our research indicates that, with the assistance of the Irish government, Apple has successfully created a new structure that allows IP and sales profit to be onshored, but the company is granted a tax write-off against almost all of its non-US sales profits.

Apple is achieving this by using:

  • A capital allowance for depreciation of intangible assets at a rate of 100%;
  • A massive outflow of capital from its Ireland-based subsidiaries to its Jersey-based subsidiaries in the form of debt from intra-group loans used to fund the IP acquisition;
  • Interest deductions of 100% on these intra-group loans;

 

While several multinationals continue to use the Double Irish, which will not be phased out until 2020, briefings on Ireland’s tax regime from offshore law firms suggest this structure is the new normal – a “typical” structure now used by companies that trade in IP.

We call it the “Green Jersey” in reference to the Paradise Papers revelations regarding Apple’s use of Jersey in its new structure.

The essential features of this technique are:

  • It can be used by large multinational corporations engaged in trading in IP;
  • It has specifically been designed by the Irish government to facilitate near-total tax avoidance by the same companies who were using the Double Irish tax avoidance scheme;
  • While the Double Irish was characterized by the flow of outbound royalty payments from Ireland to Irish-registered but offshore-tax resident subsidiaries, this scheme is characterized by the onshoring of IP and sales profits to Ireland;
  • Sales profits are booked in Ireland, but the expenditure the company incurs in the one-off purchase of the IP license(s) can be written off against the sales profits by using the capital allowance program for intangible assets;
  • It is beneficial for the company to complement the tax write-off by continuing to use an offshore subsidiary, but no longer for outbound royalty payments. The role of the offshore subsidiary is to store cash and provide loans to the Irish subsidiary to fund the purchase of the IP. The expenditure on the IP is written off, but so too are the associated interest payments made to the offshore subsidiary, which thus accumulates more cash that goes untaxed.

The new structure has allowed Apple to almost double the mountain of cash it holds in offshore tax havens, as highlighted by the ICIJ.

The law governing the use of capital allowances for IP is not subject to Ireland’s transfer pricing legislation, but it includes a prohibition from being used for tax avoidance purposes. Apple is potentially breaking Irish law by its restructure and its exploitation of the capital allowance regime for tax purposes.

This article outlines the key findings of a new study co-authored by Martin Brehm Christensen and Emma Clancy, published by the European United Left (GUE/NGL) group in the European Parliament, called “Apple’s Golden Delicious tax deals: Is Ireland helping Apple pay less than 1% tax?” Read the full report here.

Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedIn
Home ・ Economy ・ Apple, Ireland And The New Green Jersey Tax Avoidance Technique

Filed Under: Economy

About Emma Clancy

Emma Clancy is an economist specialising in tax justice and illicit financial flows eurozone economic policy and feminist economics. She is currently an advisor on the ECON and TAX3 committees in the European Parliament for GUE/NGL.

Partner Ads

Most Popular Posts

Thomas Piketty,capital Capital and ideology: interview with Thomas Piketty Thomas Piketty
sovereignty Brexit and the misunderstanding of sovereignty Peter Verovšek
China,cold war The first global event in the history of humankind Branko Milanovic
centre-left, Democratic Party The Biden victory and the future of the centre-left EJ Dionne Jr
Covid 19 vaccine Designing vaccines for people, not profits Mariana Mazzucato, Henry Lishi Li and Els Torreele

Most Recent Posts

BBC,public value Don’t defund the BBC Mariana Mazzucato
inequalities,dissatisfaction with democracy Inequalities and democratic corrosion Piergiuseppe Fortunato
Deregulation,Better Regulation,one in one out Leaving behind the EU’s deadly addiction to deregulation Patrick ten Brink
regulation Making EU regulation better for all Isabelle Schömann
governance The crisis after the crisis Christof Schiller, Thorsten Hellmann and Karola Klatt

Other Social Europe Publications

RE No. 12: Why No Economic Democracy in Sweden?
US election 2020
Corporate taxation in a globalised era
The transformation of work
The coronavirus crisis and the welfare state

Hans Böckler Stiftung Advertisement

Renewing labour relations in the German meat industry: an end to 'organised irresponsibility'?

Over the course of 2020, repeated outbreaks of Covid-19 in a number of large German meat-processing plants led to renewed public concern about the longstanding labour abuses in this industry. New legislation providing for enhanced inspection on health and safety, together with a ban on contract work and limitations on the use of temporary agency employees, holds out the prospect of a profound change in employment practices and labour relations in the meat industry. Changes in the law are not sufficient, on their own, to ensure decent working conditions, however. There is also a need to re-establish the previously high level of collective-bargaining coverage in the industry, underpinned by an industry-wide collective agreement extended by law to cover the entire sector.


FREE DOWNLOAD

ETUI advertisement

Working on digital labour platforms: a trade union guide for trainers on crowd-, app- and platform-based work

This guide aims to raise awareness about the reality of platform work among national trade union organizations. It provides trade union trainers with all the necessary pedagogical elements to deliver education activities at national level, compatible with various professional sectors as well as different time/resource availabilities.

It covers a wide range of needs:

• information on the concept of platform work, its evolution and impact on the labour market;

• development of competences for trade union representatives involved in social dialogue in sectors with a high prevalence of platform workers, and

• raised awareness of the importance of trade union action for decent working conditions for platform workers.


DOWNLOAD HERE

Eurofound advertisement

Industrial relations: developments 2015-2019

Eurofound has monitored and analysed developments in industrial relations systems at EU level and in EU member states for over 40 years. This new flagship report provides an overview of developments in industrial relations and social dialogue in the years immediately prior to the Covid-19 outbreak. Findings are placed in the context of the key developments in EU policy affecting employment, working conditions and social policy, and linked to the work done by social partners—as well as public authorities—at European and national levels.


CLICK FOR MORE INFO

Foundation for European Progressive Studies Advertisement

FEPS Progressive Yearbook

Twenty-twenty has been an extraordinary year. The Covid-19 pandemic and the multidimensional crisis that it triggered have boosted existing trends and put forward new challenges. But they have also created unexpected opportunities to set a new course of action for the European Union and—hopefully—make a remarkable leap forward in European integration.

The second edition of the Progressive Yearbook, the yearly publication of the Foundation for European Progressive studies, revolves around the exceptional events of 2020 and looks at the social, economic and political impact they will have in 2021. It is a unique publication, which aims to be an instrument for the progressive family to reflect on the recent past and look ahead to our next future.


CLICK HERE

Social Europe Publishing book

With a pandemic raging, for those countries most affected by Brexit the end of the transition could not come at a worse time. Yet, might the UK's withdrawal be a blessing in disguise? With its biggest veto player gone, might the European Pillar of Social Rights take centre stage? This book brings together leading experts in European politics and policy to examine social citizenship rights across the European continent in the wake of Brexit. Will member states see an enhanced social Europe or a race to the bottom?

'This book correctly emphasises the need to place the future of social rights in Europe front and centre in the post-Brexit debate, to move on from the economistic bias that has obscured our vision of a progressive social Europe.' Michael D Higgins, president of Ireland


MORE INFO

About Social Europe

Our Mission

Article Submission

Legal Disclosure

Privacy Policy

Copyright

Social Europe ISSN 2628-7641

Find Social Europe Content

Search Social Europe

Project Archive

Politics Archive

Economy Archive

Society Archive

Ecology Archive

.EU Web Awards