Skip to main content

Don't blame Apple; blame the tax code

By Will Marshall, Special to CNN
May 23, 2013 -- Updated 1138 GMT (1938 HKT)
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Congressional committee strongly criticized Apple's handling of taxes
  • Will Marshall: Don't make Apple the scapegoat for a flawed corporate tax code
  • He says corporations face world's highest rate and a dysfunctional system
  • Marshall: U.S. corporate tax code should empower firms in global competition

Editor's note: Will Marshall is the president of the Progressive Policy Institute, a nonprofit think tank that advocates for tax reform and has received contributions from many U.S. companies that do business abroad.

(CNN) -- The Capitol Hill hearing on the IRS scandal this week upstaged another Senate investigation into how U.S. technology companies shelter earnings from domestic taxes. That was just as well, since the real culprit here isn't tax-dodging corporations; it's America's absurd corporate tax code.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations had hoped to make a media splash by landing a big fish rarely seen in Washington: Apple CEO Tim Cook. It released a 40-page report on the eve of the hearing, excoriating Apple's use of "gimmicks" to avoid paying U.S. taxes on $44 billion in offshore income between 2009 and 2012.

Chaired by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Michigan, the subcommittee has been investigating the tax avoidance strategies of major U.S. tech firms. Last year, Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard were in the dock; Tuesday, it was Apple's turn.

"Apple wasn't satisfied with shifting its profits to a low-tax offshore tax haven," Levin told the New York Times. "It has created offshore entities holding tens of billions of dollars while claiming to be tax resident nowhere."

Will Marshall
Will Marshall

At issue are foreign subsidiaries that U.S. multinationals use to manage their overseas operations. The subcommittee report says that tech companies can shuffle their intellectual property as well as earnings among such entities to shield them from America's steep corporate tax rates.

Cook, however, denied that Apple funnels any of its U.S. profits into offshore tax havens.

The company has amassed more than $100 billion in foreign earnings, he said, because international sales of iPhones and other products account for 61% of its revenues. Apple pays taxes in the countries where its products are sold, he told the panel, adding that it is probably also America's largest corporate taxpayer, with expected 2013 liabilities of $7 billion.

The Senate inquisitors aren't accusing the tech companies of doing anything illegal but of cleverly exploiting loopholes in U.S. tax laws that allow them to shelter income overseas. Lawmakers want the firms to "repatriate" their overseas profits so that they can be taxed here. But the companies say that would be tantamount to taxing them twice, putting them at a disadvantage with foreign competitors who pay taxes only where their products are sold.

At a time when America urgently needs to rebuild its revenue base and continue unwinding its public debts, it's little wonder that lawmakers cast a covetous eye on the overseas profits of U.S. firms. But while grilling CEOs may make for good political theater, it doesn't get to the heart of the problem: America's outdated and dysfunctional corporate tax code.

How flawed is it? Let us count the ways. First, it subjects U.S.-based corporations to a top marginal rate of 35%, among the highest in the world. Designed at a time when U.S. companies competed mainly with each other, the code now hobbles them in global competition.

Second, the code is riddled with special tax deductions, credits and exemptions, which make it both fiendishly complicated and economically inefficient. As economist Robert Shapiro noted in a recent Progressive Policy Institute study, these provisions entail significant administrative and compliance costs and, more damagingly from the standpoint of economic growth, undercut markets' ability to allocate capital to its most productive uses. They also make the code highly inequitable as some companies get breaks while others don't with little rhyme or reason other than how effective their lobbyists are.

Third, the United States is one of the few remaining countries (PDF) that has a "worldwide" tax system, meaning that we apply the 35% top rate to the worldwide profits of U.S-based companies: that is, on the profits made by foreign subsidiaries as well. Almost every other major economy has a territorial tax system, which taxes only the business profits earned in that country. While U.S. companies get a credit for the taxes they pay overseas, they are still liable for the difference between what they pay abroad and the higher U.S. marginal tax rate.

These glaring defects have engendered a rare bipartisan consensus in Washington for sweeping reform of the corporate tax code. The basic idea, endorsed by the Obama administration and House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp, is to radically simplify the code by phasing out special preferences and using some or all of the revenues to cut the tax rate. (Progress toward reform is snagged, however, on a dispute over whether any of those revenues should be used for deficit reduction.)

More controversial is adopting a territorial system. Some progressives are leery of this approach, since it would put the foreign earnings of U.S.-based companies forever beyond Washington's reach. But as Progressive Policy Institute economist Michael Mandel notes, those foreign profits are already taxed by the countries in which the money is earned. In today's increasingly globalized economy, it makes sense to move toward a simpler system that is easier to enforce.

Unlike Apple, U.S. lawmakers have the power to fix our broken corporate tax system. That's probably a better use of their time than villainizing America's most innovative and successful companies.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Will Marshall.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
December 25, 2014 -- Updated 0633 GMT (1433 HKT)
Danny Cevallos says the legislature didn't have to get involved in regulating how people greet each other
December 23, 2014 -- Updated 2312 GMT (0712 HKT)
Marc Harrold suggests a way to move forward after the deaths of NYPD officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.
December 24, 2014 -- Updated 1336 GMT (2136 HKT)
Simon Moya-Smith says Mah-hi-vist Goodblanket, who was killed by law enforcement officers, deserves justice.
December 24, 2014 -- Updated 1914 GMT (0314 HKT)
Val Lauder says that for 1,700 years, people have been debating when, and how, to celebrate Christmas
December 23, 2014 -- Updated 2027 GMT (0427 HKT)
Raphael Sperry says architects should change their ethics code to ban involvement in designing torture chambers
December 24, 2014 -- Updated 0335 GMT (1135 HKT)
Paul Callan says Sony is right to call for blocking the tweeting of private emails stolen by hackers
December 23, 2014 -- Updated 1257 GMT (2057 HKT)
As Christmas arrives, eyes turn naturally toward Bethlehem. But have we got our history of Christmas right? Jay Parini explores.
December 23, 2014 -- Updated 0429 GMT (1229 HKT)
The late Joe Cocker somehow found himself among the rock 'n' roll aristocracy who showed up in Woodstock to help administer a collective blessing upon a generation.
December 23, 2014 -- Updated 2115 GMT (0515 HKT)
History may not judge Obama kindly on Syria or even Iraq. But for a lame duck president, he seems to have quacking left to do, says Aaron Miller.
December 23, 2014 -- Updated 1811 GMT (0211 HKT)
Terrorism and WMD -- it's easy to understand why these consistently make the headlines. But small arms can be devastating too, says Rachel Stohl.
December 22, 2014 -- Updated 1808 GMT (0208 HKT)
Ever since "Bridge-gate" threatened to derail Chris Christie's chances for 2016, Jeb Bush has been hinting he might run. Julian Zelizer looks at why he could win.
December 20, 2014 -- Updated 1853 GMT (0253 HKT)
New York's decision to ban hydraulic fracturing was more about politics than good environmental policy, argues Jeremy Carl.
December 20, 2014 -- Updated 2019 GMT (0419 HKT)
On perhaps this year's most compelling drama, the credits have yet to roll. But we still need to learn some cyber lessons to protect America, suggest John McCain.
December 22, 2014 -- Updated 2239 GMT (0639 HKT)
Conservatives know easing the trade embargo with Cuba is good for America. They should just admit it, says Fareed Zakaria.
December 20, 2014 -- Updated 0112 GMT (0912 HKT)
We're a world away from Pakistan in geography, but not in sentiment, writes Donna Brazile.
December 19, 2014 -- Updated 1709 GMT (0109 HKT)
How about a world where we have murderers but no murders? The police still chase down criminals who commit murder, we have trials and justice is handed out...but no one dies.
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 2345 GMT (0745 HKT)
The U.S. must respond to North Korea's alleged hacking of Sony, says Christian Whiton. Failing to do so will only embolden it.
December 19, 2014 -- Updated 2134 GMT (0534 HKT)
President Obama has been flexing his executive muscles lately despite Democrat's losses, writes Gloria Borger
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 1951 GMT (0351 HKT)
Jeff Yang says the film industry's surrender will have lasting implications.
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 2113 GMT (0513 HKT)
Newt Gingrich: No one should underestimate the historic importance of the collapse of American defenses in the Sony Pictures attack.
December 10, 2014 -- Updated 1255 GMT (2055 HKT)
Dean Obeidallah asks how the genuine Stephen Colbert will do, compared to "Stephen Colbert"
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 1734 GMT (0134 HKT)
Some GOP politicians want drug tests for welfare recipients; Eric Liu says bailed-out execs should get equal treatment
December 18, 2014 -- Updated 1342 GMT (2142 HKT)
Louis Perez: Obama introduced a long-absent element of lucidity into U.S. policy on Cuba.
December 16, 2014 -- Updated 1740 GMT (0140 HKT)
The slaughter of more than 130 children by the Pakistani Taliban may prove as pivotal to Pakistan's security policy as the 9/11 attacks were for the U.S., says Peter Bergen.
ADVERTISEMENT