I completely agree. At 1:28 he said "Despite this, lawmakers can't do anything about it [because] this process, although sketchy, is technically legal." That's absolutely and factually wrong. Lawmakers have the power conferred upon them by democratic elections and the Constitution to enact and pass laws to make "this process" ILLEGAL. Therefore they CAN do something about it, but rather, the issue is whether they have the political capacity and willingness to do so. To be fair he is probably referring to prosecutors instead of lawmakers. But the word lawmakers essentially says the person who makes the law. So I don't get how one can mix these things up. At this point I would take everything this person says with a huge grain of salt.

@@StormyMusic9 He doesnt explain why lawmakers havent done anything about it and you dont seem to understand it either. Corporate income taxes are in theory supposed to be a tax on profits. You get revenue and deduct your costs and what you have at the end is taxed (assuming you have any). So Apple US have revenue but if they pay royalties to this other company they own that is in another country with low/no corporate income taxes then its considered a cost for Apple US that can be deducted to avoid taxes. Reason lawmakers dont do anything about this? well there could be corruption but its also the fact that you cant differentiate between this and a legitimate transaction. Countries like Ireland for instance massively benefits from the current system. So to conclude, corporate income taxes are probably just outright flawed.

@@correctionguy7632 It is possible to differentiate. What do you think tax lawyers do for a living? Heard of the arm's length principle and transfer pricing rules?

@@correctionguy7632 Anyways you are missing the point. My point is not that he failed to explain why lawmakers haven't done anything about it. If that was the case it may have just been oversight on his part. My main point of criticism is that he made a factually wrong claim. He claimed that "lawmakers CAN'T do anything about it", which means "is physically unable to do something". If he wanted to be factually correct, he could have simply said "[some] lawmakers REFUSE to do [because of political backlash etc etc]". And your point about the royalties loophole is actually not that hard to fix or that hard to distinguish from legitimate transactions. Some cases are obvious. Other cases are borderline and result in intense litigation. Perhaps take a look at some international tax regulations and see how other jurisdictions close this loophole, what is the role of auditors and fair valuation of intellectual property. There are numerous cases authorities brought by tax authorities for breaches of this principle.

@@StormyMusic9 the video was trash, had to quit less than halfway through. Ok so if its possible to differentiate do explain. How do you differentiate between a legitimate business expense and funelling money to another country with no/low corporate income taxes?

They can always dilute the stock in the future and technically get back the cash.

@@simonk.2969 Apple could not get back all $700 billion they've spent on buybacks, their stock would go to near zero and they'd run out of buyers. Selling new shares increases share count, thus diluting the earnings per share (and thus shareholder ownership of future earnings). That would send the stock price tumbling. Other people would sell their tumbling shares and create too much supply and not enough demand, creating a vicious cycle. As a side note, Apple does use buybacks to help hide option grants to employees, where the company issues new shares to entice employees to stick around and perform. They do dilute their stock, as you say, but it is hidden by the buyback program.

​@@SpaceTravel1776 For sure they can't get it all back at once, but I think they could get it back one bit at a time.

@@MatheusSilva-qm1ft No they couldn't, the board of directors and investors would remove the leadership who attempted to do so. Selling $700 billion in new stock, even spread out over years, would destroy the value of the company from a shareholder perspective, no one would want it to happen. It is not a private company, its executives couldn't do something so obviously insane and bad for the company over a long period of time without being removed.

@@SpaceTravel1776 what a nerd

Yes sir!

idk think just paper... apple definetely selling stock and goods

@@philipphilip5472 Big companies use most of their money into inflating the price of their own stocks and making their investors rich. Its all a Ponzi scheme.

Canada does that to. it is double taxation. welcome to tha lands of taxes.

@Hart Thim You're right Sir, it's obvious a lot of people remain poor due to ignorance, it's better to take risks and make sacrifices than to remain poor

@@christianajoe8563 It's not ignorance but due to some unprofessional broker in the market

Bitcoin is the most profitable investment online of only you trade with the help of a professional expert

I recently got into forex trading and im already marveling over the profits I'm making, I'm like " how the hell have i been sleeping on this

@@oliviagreg5298 Same here, I wish I knew about this Bitcoin trading earlier, brace up and get yourself some Bitcoin before it's too late

They would be worthless if they're secret

If is the story of your life

cause its been discontinued?

For the same reason why Windows XP's market share dropped: IT'S OLD

@@mihailmojsoski4202 how did all you miss his joke?

I miss the simple UI of windows 7. Windows 10 is too complex.

@@angelgjr1999 it’s the same thing lol

Oh ok, my bad. Thanks for the correction!

Noticed that too and was confused, nonetheless, it's a great video!

Bruh see the scale again it's starting from 20. Have you studied statistics. Some graphs starts at above point zero.

@@masterdementer I think he knows, and that's the point - by starting the X axis at 20% it makes the difference between the 35% and 21% tax rates much larger than it is. In this case, it looks as if 35% tax rate was several times larger than the 21%, when in fact it's about a 40% drop.

@@jubbujzulu sure. But it is a big tax cut nonetheless. No one can argue that

@@rookiesuy9254 Of course. All I was saying is that the graph is potentially misleading

@@masterdementer You’re right but it would have been more representative if it started at 0. The bars aren’t the correct size. The way the graph in this video is set up, it looks as if 20 is 1/6 of 35 when it should appear to be about half the length.

Thank you Vedant!

It’s in the name!

Makes sense

@@kylewilliams4691 ok😉

You are soo beautiful. ❤️❤️❤️

And Great hospitality good sir.

😂😂😂😂

Ooh thanks for making it cozy

Thank you for the correction!

Thank you Habib!

Thanks man!

@@LogicallyAnswered SAME

Thank you sir!

Nice pic

I should!

Maybe also intonation? I was somehow get confused when just hearing

Thanks for watching Fahim!

Ikr I was wondering what he was on about

dude just got straight up exposed

Too funny

Hehe old Jersey

You mean the EU´s epstein´s island? xd.

@@fallencrow6718 no he had a island in the caribbean

@@hannesproductions4302 I think you might be unawere(no surprise, teh press pretends it never happend) of the investigation surrounding sexual abuse in the orphanage of the island(funny how big it is for such a small population) and the bodys found there.

@@fallencrow6718 they didn’t find any body’s they found what was believed at the time too be a child’s skull buried in the garden but after tests they found a protein not found in human bones but more commonly found in coconut shells and that’s what it’s believed to be now

That would be awesome bro! Let's see if we can get there!

Same I was here when he was at around 8k subs. I bet he’ll reach 250-500K as the hard part is getting to 10K.

You called it

Thank you Manpreet!

Yeah, roads, hospitals, security, firefighter and all other public services are just here out of the blue (the healtcare system of the united states does not apply as public service). Are Taxes used efficient? i dont think so, but your statement seemt to me just a little onesided...

@@stanihutter let me explain. The State is a service company, is NOT the people, it's a service company it gives you some services. The problem is that it's a forced monopoly system, so you can't choose not to pay for them, and you can't choose a different company. Whatever they give you, you have to pay or you go go jail. Any service that people ask to be run by the state, is people asking for it to be run by a single company that forces you to pay, instead of by multiple companies with voluntary pay. It's just plain stupid. So, what's the incentive of politicians? They get more money if they charge more taxes, they get more power if they put more regulations and laws. NOT if they do a good service. It's the exact opposite than you. The less taxes, the more money you get to keep, the less regulations and laws, the more freedom you have. USA used to run with 5% GDP of gov spending. Now they are at 48% and growing, with high inflation. That extra 43% of GDP is what citizens are tricked to give away "for their own good". Imagine that money in the hands of the people... but the people are stupid and think the State is them, so ask for more taxes and regulations. Easily tricked. So yes, as things are ser up, the State is the enemy of the people. All those services can be solved by multiple companies that people choose voluntarily. Politicians are your enemies, except for the ones that want to lower your taxes and remove regulations. Those are the ones on the side of the people. 99.9% of them are against you, they live off you, they get to put more laws if there's caos, not if we get along. The State is currently by far mankind's worst enemy. Ask Ukraine and Russia or Europe during the world wars. A monopolistic company with an army and nukes. ALL wars are created by politicians with too much power. The more we limit their power, the better of society is, no doubt about it.

@@santiagopuentep Hey you have an interesting view on this. How would the health care system or emergency services work on this system of lower taxes because those make up I’d say 50 percent of the budget. I can see transport and construction for roads and plumbing working but at the end of the day I think it would turn into bidding on projects and either it would be a crappy job or the workers would be paid less.

@@brandonchartrand1102 Argentina's health care system used to be the best of the world when it was a complete free market (now it's crap, due to socialism). What do you think is better, to have thousands of clinics, treatments and doctors fighting to give you the best possible care, or a single entity ruled by politicians (people that live off your work) and paid by force (taxes), with no consequence if they do a bad job? Of course the free market is INFINITELY better. You know why big pharma exists? Because the american FDA only allows treatmens that are approved by politicians, after spending billions of dollars in bribes and certifications, to go to market. The regular person CAN'T get in. They are big companies protected from competition by the police. The USA's health care system is crap and EXTREMELY expensive due to it NOT being a free market. It's socialism, but people say it's due to capitalism (which is not), so they ask for more regulation, so they make big pharma bigger. Free market capitalism is the solution, because it's moral, it allows free competition, and forces everyone to find solutions for you, so that you VOLUNTARILY give them your money. Socialism is politicians putting a gun on your head and forcing you do things their way. It's as simple as that, but very few people understand it. What do you thing is more moral and what do you thing works best? The State administrators (what people wrongly call "government") should never tell us what to do with our bodies. They are our employees, not our masters.

@@santiagopuentep This is an extremely well thought out take on taxes/gov't regulation. What should be done about social security, unemployment and other benefits? Do you believe that taxes should be abolished all together or just curtailed? About 1/4 of every dollar that you pay in taxes goes to maintaining the US military; do you believe we should still maintain a strong military and if so, how will it be funded with reduced/no taxes?

Thank you so much Vedant!

Yep, it’s quite interesting how they accomplish it!

​@@LogicallyAnsweredyow you mentioned warren buffett hating on corporate bonds when he pays berkshire bonds by selling bonds too 😅

Thank you!

Thank you sir!

You're watching the ads man! That's more than enough support!

@@LogicallyAnswered I have SponsorBlock on Firefox dude. Sorry.

@@harambetidepod1451 lmao

💯💯💯

Thank you Gralf!

Thank you Mang! I really appreciate you watching and commenting as always!

07:33 and 08:26 theyre getting bigger because the cash is invested in national (the safest investment for me) and coporate bonds means theyre cash is not only sitting its keep growing year by year

@@Wasnt-1even if it was sitting in bank accounts the interest alone is more than most people earn in their entire lifetimes.

inflation coming soon

15% annually is insane. That would mean prices *double* every 5 years… have prices *doubled* in the last 5 years? Saylor has completely lost it lmao

also I love your channel

Thanks man, you would be the third richest person in the world if you had that much!

Please answer me logically cause I am so much confused

When apple first sold stocks in the company the people who bought them owned a small part of apple and apple the company owned less and now apple has more money they can afford too buy their own shares affecting the supply and demand for them increasing their price

@@HarryJourneaux that’s how General Motors failed, with buybacks. So you say there are 2 separate entities? Apple and Apple Company?

The US government is practically guaranteed to pay back the money. The US treasury is more trustworthy than your own mother. That is why they can offer such low interest and still have willing buyers. Same idea as Jeff Bezos getting a small loan. No one is afraid he cannot afford to pay it back. So interest rate for Jeff Bezos is super low.

Inflation

US bonds are safest security and investors trust it way more than mexico so lower cost of borrowing

Do you really think it’s that easy to make a law lol. It took them 10 years after car boom to implement the safety belt law and that’s the most urgent law they need to make. Then how long do you think they would need to take to make a law about a tax loop they’re benefitting from. 50 years? Or maybe never?

Easy not get married :-)

Hahaha, I don’t think we’ll see someone have that much cash anytime soon! But we will likely see someone with that much stock in the imminent future!

@@LogicallyAnswered Vladimir Putin enters the chat😂.

I feel like Elon Musk will become the first trillionaire within the next 5-10 years but won’t have more than a few billion in cash

@@dimaisatree Hey... Money is money ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ but it's not what we feel or think it's like thinking just because the person is at last place during the race will come last but end up first... What can i say, life is unpredictable