2016

The European Commission has ordered Apple to pay Ireland 13 billion euros ($14.5 billion) for its tax dealings in a case that is being closely followed inwashington and by the business community. @

The European Union's executive arm ordered the payout on the grounds that Apple had received unfair state aid from Ireland in the form of tax rulings that allowed the tech giant to pay very little in taxes on its profits from European sales. According to the Commission, such aid came in violation of European Union regulations that prevents member states from granting special tax provisions to companies.@

Here are five things to know about the ruling. @

by Martin Robinson (Daily Mail)

Apple has already threatened to cut jobs in Europe after Brussels ordered it to repay £11billion ($14.5billion) - the biggest tax bill ever imposed outside the US. The European Commission's three-year investigation into Apple's sweetheart dealwith Ireland has found it amounted to illegal state aid. Its damning report published today says the tech giant paid as little as 0.005 per cent tax by funnelling its non-US profits through its Irish headquarterswith no staff or premises then on to its $178billion (£120bn) offshore fund.¬Å@

by Commission Eurpeenne

The European Commission has today adopted a decision that Apple's tax benefits in Ireland are illegal.@

Two tax rulings granted by Ireland have artificially reduced Apple's tax burden for over two decades, in breach of EU state aid rules. Apple now has to repay the benefitsworth up to �13 billion, plus interest.@

by Justin Fox (Bloomberg)

Youwant your multinational corporation to be seen as a good corporate citizen. But you also feel obliged to your company's shareholders to keep it from paying a cent more in taxes than it is required to.@

Sowhat's the dividing line beyondwhich responsible tax management turns into poor citizenship? @

bywall Street Journal

The European Union said Apple Inc. owes billions of dollars in unpaid taxes to Ireland ​after it ruled on Tuesday that a dealwith Dublin allowed the company to avoid almost all tax ​on profits ​across the entire bloc for more than a decade.@

Here'swhat to know about the ruling.@

by Stephenwilmont (Wall Street Journal)

The startling thing about the European Commission's ruling against Apple's Irish tax bill is how few people it pleases.@

You might think the Irish governmentwould be grateful for extra fundsworth up to �13 billion ($14.5 billion)�a figure equivalent to about 30% of its total tax receipts last year. This could be seen as a chance to recoup some of the estimated �43 billion controversially spent on bailing out banks in thewake of the 2008 financial crisis.@

But Irish Finance Minister Michael Noonan "disagrees profoundly"with the Commission. He evidentlywants to maintain the jobs and income tax associatedwith his country's reputation as a tax-efficient base for multinationals.@

by Dara Doyle and Peter Flanagan (Bloomberg)

Apple's billions in back taxes could cover the entire annual Irish health budget, build about 100,000 homes for the poor or pay off a chunk of the nation's debt. Sowhy doesn't the governmentwant the money?@

Irish Finance Minister Michael Noonan on Tuesday vowed to fight a European Commission ruling that could force theworld's richest company to pay it at least 13 billion euros ($14.5 billion), more than twice the country's entire 2015 corporate tax take and equivalent to about $3,000 for every man,woman and child. He drew fire from opposition lawmakerswho say Dublin should take the money. For the government, though, the stakes are higher. @

by Caroline Byrne

Tax authorities from the US to Australia and Taiwan are circling digital service providers Uber, Airbnb and other cash-rich app disrupters in a crusade to impose higher taxes and find cutting-edgeways to subsidise the old economy. @

by James Kanter and Mark Scott (New York Times)

A decision on Tuesday by Margrethe Vestager, the European Union commissioner for competition, is the culmination of a two-year investigation intowhether Ireland gave preferential treatment to Apple. Credit Andrew Testa for The New York Times @

@

Europe's antitrust enforcer ordered Ireland on Tuesday to claw back billions from Apple over illegal tax breaks, a move thatwill ramp up trans-Atlantic tensions over how much global companies should pay to countrieswhere they do business.@

by Natalia Drozdiak and Sam Schechner(Wall Street Journal)

The European Union's antitrust regulator demanded that Ireland recoup roughly �13 billion ($14.5 billion) in taxes from Apple Inc. after ruling that a dealwith Dublin allowed the company to avoid almost all corporate tax across the entire bloc for more than a decade�a move that could intensify a feud between the EU and the U.S. over the bloc's tax probes into American companies.@

by Dana Doyle (Bloomberg)

Apple Inc.was ordered to repay a record 13 billion euros ($14.5 billion) plus interest after the European Commission said Ireland illegally slashed the iPhone maker's tax bill.@

Apple and the Irish government have both vowed to fight the decision,which also risks stoking a fightwith the U.S. over taxation policies --with the U.S. having already complained that Europe is unfairly targeting American companies and threatening global tax reforms.@

A new international tax regime aimed at combating base erosion and profit shiftingwon't mean big changes, a Canada Revenue Agency official said.

by Maggie Zhuang (International Tax Review)

Foreign businesses offering cross-border service provisions to Chinese entities must take caution as the tax authorities are becoming more confident than ever in looking into cross-border transactions involving Chinese companies.@

Foreign businesses offering digital services should prepare themselves for more e-commerce taxes and more rules from New Zealand. @

by Joe Stanley-Smith

Businesses have just five months to prepare for Russia's new VAT rules that impose a tax on e-services from 2017. @

by OECD

On 11 July 2016, interested partieswere invited to provide comments on a discussion draftwhich dealswith elements of the design and operation of the group ratio rule under Action 4 (Interest deductions and other financial payments) of the BEPS Action Plan. The OECD is grateful to the commentators for their input and now publishes the comments received.@

by Grace Perez-Navarro (OECD.org)

In a ceremony at OECD Headquarters in Paris today, Burkina Faso, Malaysia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Samoa signed the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters, bringing the number of participating jurisdictions to 103.@

by Maggie Zhuang

Foreign businesses offering cross-border service provisions to Chinese entities must take caution as the tax authorities are becoming more confident than ever in looking into cross-border transactions involving Chinese companies. @