Profit seeking companies exist for one purpose...to make a profit. Unlike government entities, which exist for the purpose of taking money from profit seeking companies and giving that money to people who vote for the career politicians who populate those government entities, profit seeking companies measure their success at serving the sovereign consumer by how much profit they make. Profits are the measure of success for a profit seeking company. The more profit a company has the more it knows that it is giving the consumers what they want for a price they are willing to pay. When a profit seeking company realizes a profit we know for sure that both the consumers and the company are happy.
In the corporate world a profit seeking company is owned by the shareholders of that company. The shareholders of the company hire a Board of Directors to conduct the affairs of the company and the Board of Directors hire the people who actually operate the business. In a profit seeking company the shareholders are supreme. The profits that the profit seeking company realizes belong to the shareholders and the shareholders alone. Nobody else has a moral claim upon the profits of the shareholders. Anyone who claims to have a moral right to the profits of the shareholders of a profit seeking company is an envy filled liar who should be severely punished for his socialist beliefs.
All corporate profits should be tax free. I argued at length for this position here. If you want to see the argument, click on the link. Only those who worship at the throne of civil government believe that profit seeking corporations should be forced to pay taxes on the profits they realize. Profit seeking corporations that cut deals with the various civil governments in which they do business that allow them to operate in environments where the tax burden is reduced or, in some cases, eliminated completely for a period of time, should be praised for their shrewd dealings with the Beast. Civil governments cut those types of deals because they realize that some revenue is better than no revenue at all. Wise managers of profit seeking businesses will play various civil government and agencies against one another to get the best possible deal they can get when it comes to taxes.
All of the above blather is introductory to today's post. Soft-headed, patriotic, envy filled and government worshiping Andrew Baird of Evergreen, Colorado made the following comments in the editorial section of the Denver Post today: "I for one am happy to see Apple punished by the European Union. If Apple and other American companies had any sense of loyalty to the American people, they would stay at home and pay their fair share of US taxes." Let's consider Andrew's inane comments here today.
For those of you unfamiliar with the story, Apple had cut a deal with the government of Ireland in which it received tax incentives to operate in Ireland. The EU found out about what Ireland had done and decided to intervene. After examining the details of the situation the bureaucrats at the EU announced that they were going to overrule the sovereign right of Ireland to conduct tax policy as it sees fit and declared that Apple had to pay Ireland $15 billion in "back taxes." Ireland has been one of the economic success stories of the EU precisely because it has cut its tax burden put upon profit seeking businesses. The career politicians and bureaucrats within the EU want to put a stop to that.
Let's get a couple of things straight, things that Andrew does not seem to understand. Ireland has no moral right to tax a profit seeking business. The EU has no moral right to tax a profit seeking business. The EU also has no moral right to tell Ireland how to go about its affairs when it comes to taxing profit seeking businesses. Everything the EU has done is immoral and every bureaucrat who has been engaged in this persecution of Apple will be held accountable by the God of the Bible for his sins.
Andy believes that Apple, a profit seeking corporation, should be held morally accountable for not being "loyal to the Amerikan people," whatever that means. What is the moral or ethical basis for his assertion? He has none. Andy's belief that Apple should not conduct any business operations in foreign countries so that all of its activities can be taxed at the confiscatory domestic corporate tax rate of 35% is his understanding and definition of loyalty. Envy-filled Andy is so blinded by his envy that he can't stand it when a profit seeking company makes a profit. In other words, Andy hates it when businesses serve the consumers. On the other hand, Andy rejoices every time a business is forced into subjection and required to serve civil government. That reveals the most relevant fact about Andy....he worships civil government.
Andy is happy that Apple is "being punished" by the EU. Typically punishment is something done after a sin or crime has been committed. Andy apparently believes that Apple committed a sin or a crime when it agreed to do business in Ireland when Ireland agreed to reduce some of the immoral tax burden Apple would normally be required to pay. How that behavior rises to the level of a sin or a crime is not described. Andy is driven by his feelings, not his thoughts, and he feels really good when profit seeking corporations are punished for sins they did not commit. That tells us another thing about Andy. He is a committed socialist.
Andy believes that a profit seeking corporation in the Socialist Democracy of Amerika has a moral obligation, punishable by civil government when not performed, to remain in the geopolitical entity in which it was started and pay, in the case of the SDA, 35% of its profits to the government of the SDA. Andy's ethical system contains the moral principle that all profit seeking businesses must remain within the geopolitical confines of the country they originated in regardless of how large they become, who their customers are and with no regard to the economic conditions of the time. The alleged lack of "loyalty" on display when Apple conducts business operations in foreign lands, populated with stinkin' foreigners who are no doubt stealing our jobs, outrages Andy and he wants the offenders to be severely punished by taking more than a third of their profits and giving it to beatific government agents to be dispersed to their friends.
I wonder.....does Andy own any product produced in more than one country? Does he own any product produced by Apple? Does he own any product produced in a foreign land that allowed the manufacturer of that product to escape paying its "fair share" of taxes to its government? Does he own anything produced by an international conglomerate? Is everything that Andy owns made in Amerika, by Amerikans, and sold exclusively to Amerikans? My guess is that if I were granted free access to Andy's home and possessions I would find hypocrisy of the highest degree there. Only in Andy's mind it would not be hypocrisy. When he gets a good deal buying a foreign or internationally produced good he brags to his neighbors about what a sweet deal he made. But when a profit seeking corporation does the same thing he calls for the police to arrest, persecute, fine and incarcerate the offenders. That is a fine example of hypocrisy and, in case you were not aware, God will judge it severely.
God-haters love to quote the biblical passage which exhorts us to "judge not, lest you be judged." In doing so they ignore the context of the passage. The statement is not a blanket prohibition upon the act of judgment. The verse that follows explains the meaning. "For in the manner in which you judge shall you be judged." Andy self righteously judges Apple for his concept of corporate sins while, at the same time, ignores the fact that his standard finds him guilty as well. That is not a good place to be.