I wonder how long it's going to be until the monster in DC wants a bigger slice of Apple.
Big oil gets targeted constantly for windfall tax proposals. As Apple marches toward $50+ billion in profit, it seems impossible the government will just leave the world's richest and most powerful corporation alone.
You're missing why oil companies are good targets for that sort of thing - people have little choice but to buy their products, prices to consumers are rising so the companies are unpopular and they are directly or indirectly responsible for shed loads of environmental damage.
That's not the case with Apple, Google, MS or other tech companies.
To the beast in DC, it has absolutely nothing to do with the arguments you posit. You're talking about logic; it doesn't apply to their decision making.
It's about the money. That's why big oil has always been a target, it has been the most profitable enterprise in America since Rockefeller formed Standard Oil.
News flash: they also didn't target big tobacco because cigarettes are bad for you (that was merely the excuse they needed), or to pay for healthcare bills. They targeted them to steal / fleece a golden goose, and then divert the stolen money to other projects. Which is exactly what they did.
The public don't like taxes of any sort on anything, however targeting specific taxes is far easier to sell if they're levelled at companies seen to be bad hence tobacco and alcohol taxes, banking taxes, oil and so on.
Walmart are massively profitable and are by many measures the biggest company in the world yet remain untargeted. If what you say is true why is this?
As you say, it's the excuse they need but if they don't have an excuse then the won't/can't do it.
I agree with you. Its just getting to be too tempting. Plus government would be the last one to worry if they destroy something.
They could look very deep into the "made in china" "issue". Lookup "Kluska" - owner of company Optimus in Poland. One of the richest man in 90s. Basically, CBS imprisoned him for months after he allegedly broke the law by exporting parts to foreign countries where PCs were assembled and brought back to Poland. The issue was that he did not pay tax out of the assembly. After years of litigation (bail denied), he was free man, while his company went bankrupt and he was left in debt after fighting with Government. Polish IRS (Urzad Skarbowy) did not even apologize.
1) Big Oil is in an industry where demand is highly inelastic, while demand for consumer electronics is far more elastic.
2) Big Oil is the subject of huge direct and indirect subsidies. Apple benefits to some extent from the fact that they don't pay for some of the inherent costs of their profit-making activity (disposal of iPhones, etc). The energy industry generally, and the fossil fuels industry in particular, don't pay for a lot of the inherent costs of their activity. From an economic point of view, dollar of uncompensated environmental damage is as good as a dollar of direct subsidies. The BP settlement, at less than what BP would've had to pay in damages, was probably $10bn+ subsidy. I haven't seen statistics for the oil industry, but the indirect subsidies in the coal industry run to the $300-$500 billion/year range (http://www.fastcompany.com/1727949/coal-use-costs-half-a-tri...). I'd imagine oil is in the same ballpark.
Apple also isn't responsible for any of the major ecological catastrophes of the last 100 years. Labor violations in China certainly, multiple companies ruining hundreds of miles of United States coastline not so much.
Big oil gets targeted constantly for windfall tax proposals. As Apple marches toward $50+ billion in profit, it seems impossible the government will just leave the world's richest and most powerful corporation alone.