A legal adviser to the European Court of Justice has argued a ruling allowing Apple to avoid paying €13bn (£11bn) in back taxes should be overturned.
The move is the latest in the long-running saga between the EU, the US tech giant and the Irish government.
Three years ago, a ruling which found Apple had been given illegal tax breaks by the Irish government was overturned.
Three years ago, a ruling which found Apple had been given illegal tax breaks by the Irish government was overturned.
He argued a series of legal errors had been made and the ruling in Apple’s favour had failed “to assess correctly the substance and consequences of certain methodological errors that, according to the Commission decision, vitiated the tax rulings”.
The legal opinion is not a final verdict and is non-binding, but the court does tend to agree with such opinions in the majority of cases.
In response to the latest twist, an Apple spokesman said that the initial ruling allowing the firm to avoid paying back taxes was “very clear that Apple received no selective advantage and no state aid”.
“We believe that should be upheld,” they added.
A legal adviser to the European Court of Justice has argued a ruling allowing Apple to avoid paying €13bn (£11bn) in back taxes should be overturned.
Three years ago, a ruling which found Apple had been given illegal tax breaks by the Irish government was overturned.
The move is the latest in the long-running saga between the EU, the US tech giant and the Irish government.
He argued a series of legal errors had been made and the ruling in Apple’s favour had failed “to assess correctly the substance and consequences of certain methodological errors that, according to the Commission decision, vitiated the tax rulings”.
Three years ago, a ruling which found Apple had been given illegal tax breaks by the Irish government was overturned.
Three years ago, a ruling which found Apple had been given illegal tax breaks by the Irish government was overturned.
He argued a series of legal errors had been made and the ruling in Apple’s favour had failed “to assess correctly the substance and consequences of certain methodological errors that, according to the Commission decision, vitiated the tax rulings”.
The legal opinion is not a final verdict and is non-binding, but the court does tend to agree with such opinions in the majority of cases.
In response to the latest twist, an Apple spokesman said that the initial ruling allowing the firm to avoid paying back taxes was “very clear that Apple received no selective advantage and no state aid”.
“We believe that should be upheld,” they added.
#Apple #pay #13bn #Irish #tax #argues #lawyer
Note:- (Not all news on the site expresses the point of view of the site, but we transmit this news automatically and translate it through programmatic technology on the site and not from a human editor. The content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.))
