Local employment motivated Apple Ireland tax deal but it’s an isolated case

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Local employment motivated Apple Ireland tax deal but it’s an isolated case

The EC is investigating tax arrangements between Ireland and Apple because it thinks the tech company was given a financial advantage in exchange for creating jobs.

While evidence points towards employment being a driving factor in the Apple Ireland case, it is unlikely it had much significance in other tax rulings.

In the public version of the EC’s letter to Ireland, specific reference is made to employment and the role the EC alleges it played in Apple brokering a deal with the Irish government.

“...the reduction of the margin after a certain level above $ [60-70] million would have been motivated by employment considerations, which is not a reasoning based on the arm’s-length principle. In particular, two margins of 20% and 65% are relatively far apart...”

The EC claims that tax margins lacked “economic basis” and were motivated by local job opportunities.

“Apple were certainly a major employer in Ireland and, at the time, Ireland was very focused on building up employment generally,” said Heather Self of Pinsent Masons.

Another aspect which concerns the EC is the length of the advance pricing agreements between Apple and Ireland. The 1991 agreement lasted 16 years while the standard length for arrangements in other European countries rarely exceeds five.

Not a widespread trend

“In relation to other deals, I think most (for example, pharma companies) invested significant resource into Ireland - and indeed, it has become a noted centre of expertise for pharma and IT. I think Apple is relatively unusual in having Irish non-resident companies, with significant profits not taxed anywhere. There may be a small number of other Irish rulings for US MNCs, but I doubt there were many,” said Self.

Although the EC’s claims relating to local employment in the Apple-Ireland deal seem warranted, most tax professionals think this is an isolated occurrence.

“There is no need or possibility of obtaining a ruling or a deal with Irish authorities. Any company doing trade or business in Ireland is subject to the Irish corporate tax and can benefit from the Irish treaty. There is no employment threshold. All intercompany transactions of such an Irish company, including payments made to other jurisdictions, are subject to the regular Irish law and transfer pricing rules based on OECD guidelines. On matters of transfer pricing, it may be possible to obtain an advanced pricing agreement, but these are not all that different than any other jurisdiction,” said one adviser.

Apple’s future

The EC plans to carry out detailed investigations into tax rulings issued by Ireland in 1991 and 2007 in favour of Apple.

“...the Commission’s preliminary view is that the tax ruling of 1990 (effectively agreed in 1991) and of 2007 in favour of the Apple group constitute State aid...The Commission has doubts about the comparability of such State aid with the internal market.”

Two of Apple group’s companies have been asked to provide full financial accounts for 2004 to 2013.



Further reading:

UK Treasury defends Patent Box against EC threat

The potential TP irony of Juncker's EC presidency

EC investigations suggest weakening control of tax authorities

UK and Germany come to agreement over Patent Box signalling European reform of IP regimes

Luxembourg better defines TP rules amid EC investigations

What taxpayers and advisers think about PwC's leaked documents on Luxembourg's tax arrangements

EC investigations could negatively impact legitimate TP arrangements

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The threat of 50% tariffs on Brazilian goods coincides with new Brazilian legal powers to adopt retaliatory economic measures, local experts tell ITR
The country’s chancellor appears to have backtracked from previous pillar two scepticism; in other news, Donald Trump threatened Russia with 100% tariffs
In its latest G20 update, the OECD also revealed tense discussions with the US where the ‘significant threat’ of Section 899 was highlighted
The tax agency has increased compliance yield from wealthy individuals but cannot identify how much tax is paid by UK billionaires, the committee also claimed
Saffery cautioned that documentation requirements in new government proposals must be limited if medium-sized companies are not exempted from TP
The global minimum tax deal is not viable without US participation, Friedrich Merz has argued
Section 899 of the ‘one big beautiful’ bill would have spelled disaster for many international investors into the US, but following its shelving, attention turns to the fate of the OECD’s pillars
DLA Piper’s co-head of tax for the US and Latin America tells ITR about her fervent belief in equal access to the law, loving yoga, and paternal inspirations
Tax expert Craig Hillier agrees with the comparison of pillar two to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut
The amount is reported to be up 57% from the £5.6bn that the UK tax agency believes was underpaid in the previous year
Gift this article