SHEESH! No, it was NOT concluded by CONGRESS. This is what makes you an idiot. You don't know the difference between a research reported by Senators office staff and a Congressional Hearing and the vote they may or may not have taken. The committee staff's report is NOT taken under oath, Tim Cook's testimony and the evidence submitted WAS entered under oath and it REFUTED that staff report, proving its allegations WRONG! Evidence does count for something. SHEESH!
Had that subcommittee report been correct, Tim Cook and his auditors would be languishing in JAIL and subject to major fines. I've seen both. That report is NOT a report to "investors," it is a FINANCIAL REPORT to the Federal Exchange Commission, a part of the Federal Government which investors are free to see, and is also filed WITH Apple's Tax Return. They have to agree. Don't you know anything? Apparently not. And they DID agree.
If you'd bother to read the foot note on Page 39 where the article got its piece of misinformation from the subcommittee's report, which even the researchers obviously did not understand what they included, Apple's 10K FINANCIAL STATEMENT filed with the SEC footnoted the following:
"According to Apple’s 2011 10-K, the company had net excess tax benefits from stock based compensation which is the main reason for the difference between Apple’s current tax liability on its financial statement and the liability reported on Apple’s tax return. See Apple Inc. Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 29, 2011, at 63; Subcommittee interview of Phillip Bullock (5/15/2013)."
In other words, the 4.4 billion difference was being paid in a different, but completely legal FORM that particular year. . . but, oh, doesn't it make for a juicy story fodder for people who don't understand tax law? Someone, like you or the author of the article, who doesn't bother to read footnotes, or doesn't understand what they read. IRS got the total amount due, just not in that manner.
AGAIN, you, without any evidence, conflate something you do not understand and which is completely legal into a "crime." You are really a piece of work, fireman.
“For the hearing [about Apple’s tax practices in 2013], I’ve never testified in front of Congress before. So I called up [Goldman Sachs CEO] Lloyd Blankfein, because I looked back to say who’s done this before? I knew Lloyd and thought he’d be honest with me. I called up President Clinton. He knows a lot about the politics. I’d not met him through a political connection. I’d met him through the foundation. I went to Laurene, Steve’s wife. Laurene has the lens of knowing me and deeply understanding Apple.”
So the second person Little Timmy thought of calling after his best buddy Goldman Sachs CEO, Lloyd Blankfein, was Bill Clinton? But he assures us he hadn't met his buddy Billy Boy Wonder through a “political connection”; he met him through the “foundation”. Golly Gee Batman, I wonder what “foundation” he was referring to? I guess there must be a million foundations he could have met Bill Clinton through?
Isn't it wonderful to find out that all these globalists are so supportive of each other? And it is wonderful that you are so supportive of these poor guys that are picking up all this static from looting the USA.
Sorry forgot the link with the Tim Cook Quote:
“Clinton's fundraising highlights the apparent blurry lines between her family's charitable work and political ventures. Of the 15 fundraisers Clinton has held over the last week, more than half have been hosted by donors who have also given to the foundation, including one today by apple C.E.O. Tim Cook. His cohost, Executive Vice President Lisa Jackson, is on the foundation's board.”
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2016/08/24/