https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We need to >wait it out.
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), TonyWhat a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA will not notice. Gee you are thick!
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We need >>to
wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to
apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars -
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), TonyWhat a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA will not
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We need >>>to
wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to
apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
notice. Gee you are thick!
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We >>>> need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to
apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA
will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars -
already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an alternative . . ..
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We >>>>> need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to
apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA
will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars -
already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an
alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made
in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually
made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor /
resellers, or direct to customers.
The only real exception is probably the various car models made in the
USA, including *some* models from Ford, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, and
Mercedes Benz.
Of course, there is a lot of computer software and web-based services
that are USA based, although even then, the actual manufacturing and
servers could be almost anywhere.
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), TonyThere is no upside to us imposing tariffs on the USA and huge risk. Do you really want us to commit financial suicid. Sorry, silly question, of course you do.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars -
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), TonyWhat a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA will >>not
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We need >>>>to
wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to >>>apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
notice. Gee you are thick!
already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an >alternative . . ..
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We >>>>>> need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to >>>>> apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We >>>>> are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA >>>> will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars -
already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an
alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made
in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually
made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor /
resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is
considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ.
If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from
a company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be applicable?
The only real exception is probably the various car models made in the
USA, including *some* models from Ford, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, and
Mercedes Benz.
Of course, there is a lot of computer software and web-based services
that are USA based, although even then, the actual manufacturing and
servers could be almost anywhere.
An interesting chart here: https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/imports/united-states
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We >>>>>>> need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to >>>>>> apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We >>>>>> are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA >>>>> will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars -
already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an >>>> alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made
in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually
made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor /
resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is
considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ.
If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from
a company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be
applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use
loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have
nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the
products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple >Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised
resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered >money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more
tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised >resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense
because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple >Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the >products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate
income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in
Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no
tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
The only real exception is probably the various car models made in the
USA, including *some* models from Ford, Toyota, Nissan, BMW, and
Mercedes Benz.
Of course, there is a lot of computer software and web-based services
that are USA based, although even then, the actual manufacturing and
servers could be almost anywhere.
An interesting chart here:
https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/imports/united-states
I was really only referring to the general public themselves having
very little they could avoid buying.
There are of course a lot more US products bought by NZ businesses,
including things like fully built planes as well as many parts /
ingredients used to make a full products here. But businesses tend to
go wherever the cheapest price is, so is the US price rises due to
import tarrifs, then they'll go somewhere cheaper, which isn't really >"avoiding" buying US products either, but an economic necessity to
avoid raising their own product prices.
Looking at that list, you really have to wonder why New Zealand, a
dairy country, imports so much dairy product from America. No doubt
because New Zealand ships much of their dairy products to Europe and
the remainder sold here is over-priced, that means importing dairy
products is probably cheaper. :-\
Looking at that list, you really have to wonder why New Zealand, a
dairy country, imports so much dairy product from America. No doubt
because New Zealand ships much of their dairy products to Europe and
the remainder sold here is over-priced, that means importing dairy
products is probably cheaper. :-\
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com> wrote:
Looking at that list, you really have to wonder why New Zealand, a
dairy country, imports so much dairy product from America. No doubt
because New Zealand ships much of their dairy products to Europe and
the remainder sold here is over-priced, that means importing dairy
products is probably cheaper. :-\
Yep, same applies to meat, in particular ham. Getting NZ-grown ham in
NZ is crazy hard. Getting NZ-grown ham in NZ *is* possible, if you're
a crazy label-reader as I am. Sometimes they were export-intended and accordingly labelled, but sold domestically in the end.
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:42:19 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We >>>>>>>> need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to >>>>>>> apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We >>>>>>> are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA >>>>>> will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars - >>>>> already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an >>>>> alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made
in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually >>>> made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor /
resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is
considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ.
If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from
a company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be
applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use
loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have
nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the
products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple
Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised
resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered
money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more
tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised
resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense
because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple
Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the
products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate
income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in
Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no
tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
There are ways of making sure that the tax payable in New Zealand
represents the profit made here - it is not exact, but in effect it
requires that charges made by say Apple Australia to Apple New Zealand
represent a fair charge for services provided, and not an artificial
charge designed to have profit emerge in the lowest tax regime. The
have been cases in Australia and New Zealand concerning a parking
building company owned in Asia that charged governance and policy
charges sufficient to make the Australian and New Zealand companies
make a zero profit in those countries. Not easy to fix, but it was
fixed. The Australian Banks similarly need to justify charges to NZZ Subsidiaries.
Ireland is used by a number of countries to ensure tax arises mostly
in that country as they have low company taxes - other countries try
to make sure they get a fair tax on profits made from their country.
. .
Tariffs make all of that more complicated
On 2025-04-08 23:56:38 +0000, Willy Nilly said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com> wrote:
Looking at that list, you really have to wonder why New Zealand, a
dairy country, imports so much dairy product from America. No doubt
because New Zealand ships much of their dairy products to Europe and
the remainder sold here is over-priced, that means importing dairy
products is probably cheaper. :-\
Yep, same applies to meat, in particular ham. Getting NZ-grown ham in
NZ is crazy hard. Getting NZ-grown ham in NZ *is* possible, if you're
a crazy label-reader as I am. Sometimes they were export-intended and
accordingly labelled, but sold domestically in the end.
Crazily, it's almost cheaper to buy New Zealand made butter or meat
from England and ship it back, rather than buying it here in New
Zealand in the first place. :-\
On 2025-04-08 07:49:55 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:42:19 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We
need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to >>>>>>>> apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We >>>>>>>> are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA >>>>>>> will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars - >>>>>> already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an >>>>>> alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made >>>>> in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually >>>>> made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor /
resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is
considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ. >>>> If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from
a company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be
applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use
loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have
nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the
products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple
Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised
resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered
money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more
tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised
resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense
because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple
Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the
products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate
income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in
Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no
tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
There are ways of making sure that the tax payable in New Zealand
represents the profit made here - it is not exact, but in effect it
requires that charges made by say Apple Australia to Apple New Zealand
The point is that there is no "Apple New Zealand" to pay any income
tax. All sales of Apple devices in New Zealand are done by third-party >Authorised Resellers buying stock from Apple Australia. The resellers
are already paying the appropriate income tax on the tiny profit they
make from the sales. An iPhone might sell for a retail price of $1000 ,
but that's not what the reseller pays income tax on. The reseller pays
income tax on the *profit* after the expense of buying the stock, and
that profit is only around $100, if they're lucky. This is the problem
that the fools in the government simply don't understand. It's not tax
on $1000, it's tax on $100.
Similarly, all sales via Apple's webstore are also handled by Apple >Australia, so again no actual income in New Zealand that can be taxed.
(GST is paid by Apple Australia bacuse those tax laws were changed a
while back.)
Apple Australia will also be paying the appropriate income tax in
Australia, but that too is tiny, because they buy their stock from
Apple Asia.
Apple Asia too will be paying the appropriate income tax in Asia
(Singapore, from memory), which is where the main tax is paid at a much
lower rate.
It's a bit of a loophole in business income tax laws, but it's similar
to the loophole that almost every rich person (including the likes of >government ministers) uses to get out of paying their own income taxes
by hiding their income in overseas banks and overseas income.
represent a fair charge for services provided, and not an artificial
charge designed to have profit emerge in the lowest tax regime. The
have been cases in Australia and New Zealand concerning a parking
building company owned in Asia that charged governance and policy
charges sufficient to make the Australian and New Zealand companies
make a zero profit in those countries. Not easy to fix, but it was
fixed. The Australian Banks similarly need to justify charges to NZZ
Subsidiaries.
Ireland is used by a number of countries to ensure tax arises mostly
in that country as they have low company taxes - other countries try
to make sure they get a fair tax on profits made from their country.
Every country is already being paid the fair taxes according to their
own business tax laws. The fact that it's there is a loophole created
by rich government ministers for their and their friend's benefit is
not the fault of the companies.
. .
Tariffs make all of that more complicated
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 16:08:44 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 07:49:55 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:42:19 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We
need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to >>>>>>>>> apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We >>>>>>>>> are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA >>>>>>>> will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars - >>>>>>> already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an >>>>>>> alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made >>>>>> in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually >>>>>> made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor /
resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is
considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ. >>>>> If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from >>>>> a company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be
applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use
loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have
nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the
products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple
Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised
resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered
money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more
tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised >>>> resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense
because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple
Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the >>>> products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate
income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in
Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no
tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
There are ways of making sure that the tax payable in New Zealand
represents the profit made here - it is not exact, but in effect it
requires that charges made by say Apple Australia to Apple New Zealand
The point is that there is no "Apple New Zealand" to pay any income
tax. All sales of Apple devices in New Zealand are done by third-party
Authorised Resellers buying stock from Apple Australia. The resellers
are already paying the appropriate income tax on the tiny profit they
make from the sales. An iPhone might sell for a retail price of $1000 ,
but that's not what the reseller pays income tax on. The reseller pays
income tax on the *profit* after the expense of buying the stock, and
that profit is only around $100, if they're lucky. This is the problem
that the fools in the government simply don't understand. It's not tax
on $1000, it's tax on $100.
Similarly, all sales via Apple's webstore are also handled by Apple
Australia, so again no actual income in New Zealand that can be taxed.
(GST is paid by Apple Australia bacuse those tax laws were changed a
while back.)
Apple Australia will also be paying the appropriate income tax in
Australia, but that too is tiny, because they buy their stock from
Apple Asia.
Apple Asia too will be paying the appropriate income tax in Asia
(Singapore, from memory), which is where the main tax is paid at a much
lower rate.
It's a bit of a loophole in business income tax laws, but it's similar
to the loophole that almost every rich person (including the likes of
government ministers) uses to get out of paying their own income taxes
by hiding their income in overseas banks and overseas income.
If they are genuinely different companies then all is well - if some
are subsidiaries governments will ensure that pricing and charging for services do not reduce tax payable unreasonably.
Of more importance is whether tariffs are payable if the goods are seen
as being imported from Asia or Australia rather than from the USA - it
may be desirable to restructure some entities, but again tax avoidance authorities will be watching for such changes.
On 2025-04-09 04:44:51 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 16:08:44 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 07:49:55 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:42:19 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We
need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to >>>>>>>>>> apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA
will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars - >>>>>>>> already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an >>>>>>>> alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made >>>>>>> in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually >>>>>>> made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor /
resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is
considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ. >>>>>> If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from >>>>>> a company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be >>>>>> applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use
loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have
nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the
products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple
Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised
resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered
money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more >>>>> tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised >>>>> resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense
because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple >>>>> Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the >>>>> products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate >>>>> income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in >>>>> Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no >>>>> tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
There are ways of making sure that the tax payable in New Zealand
represents the profit made here - it is not exact, but in effect it
requires that charges made by say Apple Australia to Apple New Zealand
The point is that there is no "Apple New Zealand" to pay any income
tax. All sales of Apple devices in New Zealand are done by third-party
Authorised Resellers buying stock from Apple Australia. The resellers
are already paying the appropriate income tax on the tiny profit they
make from the sales. An iPhone might sell for a retail price of $1000 ,
but that's not what the reseller pays income tax on. The reseller pays
income tax on the *profit* after the expense of buying the stock, and
that profit is only around $100, if they're lucky. This is the problem
that the fools in the government simply don't understand. It's not tax
on $1000, it's tax on $100.
Similarly, all sales via Apple's webstore are also handled by Apple
Australia, so again no actual income in New Zealand that can be taxed.
(GST is paid by Apple Australia bacuse those tax laws were changed a
while back.)
Apple Australia will also be paying the appropriate income tax in
Australia, but that too is tiny, because they buy their stock from
Apple Asia.
Apple Asia too will be paying the appropriate income tax in Asia
(Singapore, from memory), which is where the main tax is paid at a much
lower rate.
It's a bit of a loophole in business income tax laws, but it's similar
to the loophole that almost every rich person (including the likes of
government ministers) uses to get out of paying their own income taxes
by hiding their income in overseas banks and overseas income.
If they are genuinely different companies then all is well - if some
are subsidiaries governments will ensure that pricing and charging for
services do not reduce tax payable unreasonably.
I don't know what the legal set-up is. They might be separate companies
or subsidiaries, but in the end they are all owned by the parent
company Apple US.
On 2025-04-09 06:51:53 +0000, It's A Me said:
On 2025-04-09 04:44:51 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 16:08:44 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 07:49:55 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:42:19 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>The point is that there is no "Apple New Zealand" to pay any income
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We
need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to
apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA
will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars - >>>>>>>>> already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an
alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made >>>>>>>> in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually
made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor / >>>>>>>> resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is >>>>>>> considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ. >>>>>>> If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from >>>>>>> a company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be >>>>>>> applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use
loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have >>>>>> nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the >>>>>> products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple >>>>>> Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised >>>>>> resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered
money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more >>>>>> tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised >>>>>> resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense >>>>>> because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple >>>>>> Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the >>>>>> products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate >>>>>> income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in >>>>>> Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no >>>>>> tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
There are ways of making sure that the tax payable in New Zealand
represents the profit made here - it is not exact, but in effect it
requires that charges made by say Apple Australia to Apple New Zealand >>>>
tax. All sales of Apple devices in New Zealand are done by third-party >>>> Authorised Resellers buying stock from Apple Australia. The resellers
are already paying the appropriate income tax on the tiny profit they
make from the sales. An iPhone might sell for a retail price of $1000 , >>>> but that's not what the reseller pays income tax on. The reseller pays >>>> income tax on the *profit* after the expense of buying the stock, and
that profit is only around $100, if they're lucky. This is the problem >>>> that the fools in the government simply don't understand. It's not tax >>>> on $1000, it's tax on $100.
Similarly, all sales via Apple's webstore are also handled by Apple
Australia, so again no actual income in New Zealand that can be taxed. >>>> (GST is paid by Apple Australia bacuse those tax laws were changed a
while back.)
Apple Australia will also be paying the appropriate income tax in
Australia, but that too is tiny, because they buy their stock from
Apple Asia.
Apple Asia too will be paying the appropriate income tax in Asia
(Singapore, from memory), which is where the main tax is paid at a much >>>> lower rate.
It's a bit of a loophole in business income tax laws, but it's similar >>>> to the loophole that almost every rich person (including the likes of
government ministers) uses to get out of paying their own income taxes >>>> by hiding their income in overseas banks and overseas income.
If they are genuinely different companies then all is well - if some
are subsidiaries governments will ensure that pricing and charging for
services do not reduce tax payable unreasonably.
I don't know what the legal set-up is. They might be separate companies
or subsidiaries, but in the end they are all owned by the parent
company Apple US.
Of course, Apple was simply an exmaple. Pretty much all of the other
big companies are the same. Even if they have a New Zealand based
subsidiary, it is at best a warehousing and distribution centre, so
makes little to no actual sales profit. The parent company where the
stock is ordered from makes the profit.
If the fools in government try to change the laws to obtain this
supposed income tax money, then it's only going to cause a massive
mess. It's basically the little countries trying to grab their greedy
slice of the pie, at the expense of the countries where that income tax
is currently beng paid since you can't charge a company twice for the
same sale.
It would also mean that if The Warehouse is currently importing
products from the XYZ Widget company in Wyoming, USA, then the
government would have to try to charge XYZ Widget company for New
Zealand income tax, even though they aren't actually making any New
Zealand income!
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:55:52 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-09 06:51:53 +0000, It's A Me said:
On 2025-04-09 04:44:51 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 16:08:44 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 07:49:55 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:42:19 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>The point is that there is no "Apple New Zealand" to pay any income
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We
need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to
apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA
will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars - >>>>>>>>>> already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an
alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made >>>>>>>>> in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually
made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor / >>>>>>>>> resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is >>>>>>>> considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ. >>>>>>>> If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from a
company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be >>>>>>>> applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use
loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have >>>>>>> nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the >>>>>>> products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple >>>>>>> Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised >>>>>>> resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered
money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more >>>>>>> tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised >>>>>>> resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense >>>>>>> because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple >>>>>>> Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the >>>>>>> products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate >>>>>>> income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in >>>>>>> Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no >>>>>>> tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
There are ways of making sure that the tax payable in New Zealand
represents the profit made here - it is not exact, but in effect it >>>>>> requires that charges made by say Apple Australia to Apple New Zealand >>>>>
tax. All sales of Apple devices in New Zealand are done by third-party >>>>> Authorised Resellers buying stock from Apple Australia. The resellers >>>>> are already paying the appropriate income tax on the tiny profit they >>>>> make from the sales. An iPhone might sell for a retail price of $1000 , >>>>> but that's not what the reseller pays income tax on. The reseller pays >>>>> income tax on the *profit* after the expense of buying the stock, and >>>>> that profit is only around $100, if they're lucky. This is the problem >>>>> that the fools in the government simply don't understand. It's not tax >>>>> on $1000, it's tax on $100.
Similarly, all sales via Apple's webstore are also handled by Apple
Australia, so again no actual income in New Zealand that can be taxed. >>>>> (GST is paid by Apple Australia bacuse those tax laws were changed a >>>>> while back.)
Apple Australia will also be paying the appropriate income tax in
Australia, but that too is tiny, because they buy their stock from
Apple Asia.
Apple Asia too will be paying the appropriate income tax in Asia
(Singapore, from memory), which is where the main tax is paid at a much >>>>> lower rate.
It's a bit of a loophole in business income tax laws, but it's similar >>>>> to the loophole that almost every rich person (including the likes of >>>>> government ministers) uses to get out of paying their own income taxes >>>>> by hiding their income in overseas banks and overseas income.
If they are genuinely different companies then all is well - if some
are subsidiaries governments will ensure that pricing and charging for >>>> services do not reduce tax payable unreasonably.
I don't know what the legal set-up is. They might be separate companies
or subsidiaries, but in the end they are all owned by the parent
company Apple US.
Of course, Apple was simply an exmaple. Pretty much all of the other
big companies are the same. Even if they have a New Zealand based
subsidiary, it is at best a warehousing and distribution centre, so
makes little to no actual sales profit. The parent company where the
stock is ordered from makes the profit.
If the fools in government try to change the laws to obtain this
supposed income tax money, then it's only going to cause a massive
mess. It's basically the little countries trying to grab their greedy
slice of the pie, at the expense of the countries where that income tax
is currently beng paid since you can't charge a company twice for the
same sale.
It would also mean that if The Warehouse is currently importing
products from the XYZ Widget company in Wyoming, USA, then the
government would have to try to charge XYZ Widget company for New
Zealand income tax, even though they aren't actually making any New
Zealand income!
Income tax has little to do with tariffs, if XYZ widget company makes
no profit they would not pay income tax, and our government has
decided not to increase our tariffs (which may not apply to XYZ Widget products anyway.
On 2025-04-09 10:23:15 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 19:55:52 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-09 06:51:53 +0000, It's A Me said:
On 2025-04-09 04:44:51 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 16:08:44 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com>
wrote:
On 2025-04-08 07:49:55 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 15:42:19 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com> >>>>>>> wrote:The point is that there is no "Apple New Zealand" to pay any income >>>>>> tax. All sales of Apple devices in New Zealand are done by third-party >>>>>> Authorised Resellers buying stock from Apple Australia. The resellers >>>>>> are already paying the appropriate income tax on the tiny profit they >>>>>> make from the sales. An iPhone might sell for a retail price of $1000 , >>>>>> but that's not what the reseller pays income tax on. The reseller pays >>>>>> income tax on the *profit* after the expense of buying the stock, and >>>>>> that profit is only around $100, if they're lucky. This is the problem >>>>>> that the fools in the government simply don't understand. It's not tax >>>>>> on $1000, it's tax on $100.
On 2025-04-08 01:21:01 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2025 10:52:04 +1200, It's A Me <its-a-me@mario.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 2025-04-07 22:18:07 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 19:52:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 07:15:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-ideology-of-grovelling-to-trump.html
What idiocy, the government has no possible way to influence Trump. We
need to wait it out.
A tit for tat imposition of tariffs by New Zealand, possibly only to
apply to imports from the USA) could at least bring some money in. We
are too small to be significant to USA finances.
What a stupid suggestion, to do that will simply damage us and the USA
will not notice. Gee you are thick!
If the USA will not notice, we could do with a few million dollars -
already some people are avoiding buying from the USA where there is an
alternative . . ..
There is very few products sold in New Zealand that are actually made
in the USA or imported from the USA anyway.
Even if it is an American company (e.g. Apple), the product is actually
made in Asia and shipped to the local authorised distributor / >>>>>>>>>> resellers, or direct to customers.
Where it is made does not necessarily coincide with whether it is >>>>>>>>> considered to be exported by a USA company - tax residency may differ.
If a Dealer in New Zealand imports a Tesla manufactured in China from a
company based in the USA, would a tariff on goods from the USA be >>>>>>>>> applicable?
That's why it becomes stupid and very messy, and companies use >>>>>>>> loopholes to get around it.
For example, officially imported Apple product in New Zealand have >>>>>>>> nothing to do with the USA. The product parts are made in Asia, the >>>>>>>> products are assembled in Asia, Apple Asia then sells them to Apple >>>>>>>> Australia, which in turn distributes them to New Zeland authorised >>>>>>>> resellers and personal customers.
That is also why, depite the New Zealand government's blinkered >>>>>>>> money-grabbing attempts, it is not sensible nor possible to get more >>>>>>>> tax out of Apple - there is no "Apple New Zealand" as such. Authorised >>>>>>>> resellers offset the wholesale purchase price as a business expense >>>>>>>> because the products are ordered from Apple Australia. In turn, Apple >>>>>>>> Australia offsets the purchase price as a business expense because the >>>>>>>> products are ordered from Apple Asia. Apple Asia pays the appropriate >>>>>>>> income tax in which ever country they are based. The same happens in >>>>>>>> Europe, where sales are routed through Apple Ireland, so there is no >>>>>>>> tax to pay in the UK, France, etc.
There are ways of making sure that the tax payable in New Zealand >>>>>>> represents the profit made here - it is not exact, but in effect it >>>>>>> requires that charges made by say Apple Australia to Apple New Zealand >>>>>>
Similarly, all sales via Apple's webstore are also handled by Apple >>>>>> Australia, so again no actual income in New Zealand that can be taxed. >>>>>> (GST is paid by Apple Australia bacuse those tax laws were changed a >>>>>> while back.)
Apple Australia will also be paying the appropriate income tax in
Australia, but that too is tiny, because they buy their stock from >>>>>> Apple Asia.
Apple Asia too will be paying the appropriate income tax in Asia
(Singapore, from memory), which is where the main tax is paid at a much >>>>>> lower rate.
It's a bit of a loophole in business income tax laws, but it's similar >>>>>> to the loophole that almost every rich person (including the likes of >>>>>> government ministers) uses to get out of paying their own income taxes >>>>>> by hiding their income in overseas banks and overseas income.
If they are genuinely different companies then all is well - if some >>>>> are subsidiaries governments will ensure that pricing and charging for >>>>> services do not reduce tax payable unreasonably.
I don't know what the legal set-up is. They might be separate companies >>>> or subsidiaries, but in the end they are all owned by the parent
company Apple US.
Of course, Apple was simply an exmaple. Pretty much all of the other
big companies are the same. Even if they have a New Zealand based
subsidiary, it is at best a warehousing and distribution centre, so
makes little to no actual sales profit. The parent company where the
stock is ordered from makes the profit.
If the fools in government try to change the laws to obtain this
supposed income tax money, then it's only going to cause a massive
mess. It's basically the little countries trying to grab their greedy
slice of the pie, at the expense of the countries where that income tax
is currently beng paid since you can't charge a company twice for the
same sale.
It would also mean that if The Warehouse is currently importing
products from the XYZ Widget company in Wyoming, USA, then the
government would have to try to charge XYZ Widget company for New
Zealand income tax, even though they aren't actually making any New
Zealand income!
Income tax has little to do with tariffs, if XYZ widget company makes
no profit they would not pay income tax, and our government has
decided not to increase our tariffs (which may not apply to XYZ Widget
products anyway.
We moved on from tariffs two days ago. :-)
But the tariffs will increase the prices, and the fools in government
will see products selling for more, get more sales, and incorrectly
expect more income tax.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 497 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 67:48:14 |
| Calls: | 9,766 |
| Calls today: | 7 |
| Files: | 13,745 |
| Messages: | 6,186,021 |