Apple has more money than the US government

By on July 29, 2011, 1:26 PM

Apple now has more liquid cash and marketable securities on hand than the US government, according to financial statements released by the US Treasury on Wednesday.

Last week Apple posted their best-ever quarter with $28.57 billion in revenue and a net profit of $7.31 billion. Stock prices soared as the news hit Wall Street with shares topping out at over $400 earlier this week. The report shows Apple had $76.2 billion in cash and securities on hand at the end of last month.

Meanwhile, the US government reported an operating cash balance of only $73.8 billion on Wednesday. The numbers are a bit misleading, however, as the federal government brings in a lot more money than Apple from tax revenue. The federal numbers represent how much money the government has on hand before they hit the virtual “debt ceiling” while Apple’s money is liquid assets.

The key difference is that Apple knows how to live on less than they make, a concept that the US government hasn’t quite figured out yet.

Even if the world’s largest tech company were to loan Uncle Sam all of its available cash, the United States would blow through it in about eight days. According to Fortune, the US spends more than $10 billion a day.

Key to Apple’s success is their growing smartphone market share, which now ranks number one ahead of Nokia and Samsung in the global smartphone market. iPhone sales are expected to remain strong as a new model is scheduled for release in September.




User Comments: 38

Got something to say? Post a comment
lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

That is some cheap, misleading title. Come on Techspot, you're better than this.

mario mario, Ex-TS Developer, said:

Yet everyone is using a similar title: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14340470 [link]

supyo said:

not too worry, the US government will have a couple trillion in a few days. A couple fake trillion dollars that they will never be able to pay back. Money is an illusion.

Guest said:

...and a lot less debt ...and still this guy can't afford to buy a new shirt for himself.

Trillionsin Trillionsin said:

I have more money than the US Goverment...

gwailo247, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

The US should institute their own version of the Apple Tax, and take 30% of their cash for the rights to exclusively sell Apple software and hardware in the US.

Win7Dev said:

trillionsin said:

I have more money than the US Goverment...

Unless you have several trillion dollars in debt, you've definitely got more. The US government has grown far too large to be effective when its the biggest employer in the country. Not even large companies like Coca Cola have more employees and they are a world wide business.

Guest said:

Isn't every country has their government as the biggest employer?

paynetrain007 said:

technically we all have more money then the government but also in a way we don't. Our finances our based of the value of the dollar.... that means our wealth is based on the government's wealth. Therefore we all share the government's debt equally.... therefore we don't have more money then the government....

Guest said:

And yet republicans are afraid to raise taxes on corporations. LOL. Some of our politicians are absolutely crazy!!!

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

And yet republicans are afraid to raise taxes on corporations. LOL. Some of our politicians are absolutely crazy!!!

I don't want to, nor am I skilled enough, to debate politics. But, to me, it seems that if corp taxes go up, they wouldn't care. They'd just inflate the price to the consumer to make up for the tax. Then the consumer ends up indirectly getting taxed for the corporation..

Guest said:

That's akin to being able to raise your own salary at will and just spending and spending, but at some point your employer is going to go bankrupt supporting you. If your employer goes out of business, you'll _never_ get the money to pay off your massive debt. You could tax every dollar the rich have in this country and it wouldn't even put a dent in our current debt.

The republicans don't want to raise taxes because that would hurt the economy even more than it already has been. Lower taxes encourage businesses to spend money and hire, which creates more taxpayers. More taxpayers is what we need, not higher taxes. And being able to live within its means is something else the government needs to learn.

Guest said:

"They'd just inflate the price to the consumer to make up for the tax. Then the consumer ends up indirectly getting taxed for the corporation.. "

That's exactly right. This is why it's often said that "corporations don't pay taxes". They just charge the consumer more.

Trillionsin Trillionsin said:

gwailo247 said:

The US should institute their own version of the Apple Tax, and take 30% of their cash for the rights to exclusively sell Apple software and hardware in the US.

This would just turn into an additional tax on the consumers.... not Apple.

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

nor am I skilled enough, to debate politics.

I highly doubt that's true.

They'd just inflate the price to the consumer to make up for the tax. Then the consumer ends up indirectly getting taxed for the corporation

...and you have history on your side for this.

w3b0n said:

Guest said:

" Lower taxes encourage businesses to spend money and hire, which creates more taxpayers. More taxpayers is what we need, not higher taxes."

i would vote for you

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

I don't want to, nor am I skilled enough, to debate politics. But, to me, it seems that if corp taxes go up, they wouldn't care. They'd just inflate the price to the consumer to make up for the tax. Then the consumer ends up indirectly getting taxed for the corporation..
I think wording this; "Then the consumer ends up indirectly getting taxed >>BY<< the corporation", would be semantically more precise!

Apple now has more liquid cash and marketable securities on hand than the US government, according to financial statements released by the US Treasury on Wednesday.
But we have the US Mint! Deal with that Apple......And all they have to do is let their printing presses run steady for a few days, and Apple's cash and securities wouldn't be worth squat.

Guest said:

From guest:

"The republicans don't want to raise taxes because that would hurt the economy even more than it already has been. Lower taxes encourage businesses to spend money and hire, which creates more taxpayers.

More taxpayers is what we need, not higher taxes. And being able to live within its means is something else the government needs to learn."

The question is ---where will businesses spend and hire?

China India, Brazil---Surely not the US.

GE is moving its Xray division to China from the US.

HP is spending tons of money hiring engineers and building facilities in CHINA.

stewi0001 stewi0001 said:

all I got to say is that there is alot of wasteful spending and I ain't getting in any farther than that.

Mokito said:

The article is ok but the title is misleading.

Guest said:

"The US government has grown far too large to be effective when its the biggest employer in the country. "

There is the root of the problem. If corporations would hire more here and less overseas it would help our economy greatly. Employees now are not partners but cost centers, easily replaced with someone cheaper, preferably with VISA status. Except of course you are in the upper corporate echelons.

Otherwise you are a corporate drone whose existence is to hang on until the next almost unattainable s.m.a.r.t. objective or unreasonable SLA agreement forces you out.

Sad to say that the government at least gives decent livable wages to police, firemen, teachers, others. Otherwise if it was privatized they'd all be working minimum wage by now.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

There is the root of the problem. If corporations would hire more here and less overseas it would help our economy greatly. Employees now are not partners but cost centers, easily replaced with someone cheaper, preferably with VISA status. Except of course you are in the upper corporate echelons.

Sadly, the labor unions have accelerated rather than inhibited this process. American workers have simply priced themselves out of the market, but are a bit too accustomed to a belief of entitlement to stop the slide.

Granted, corporate greed is a huge factor, but still, somebody's always hungrier than an American, even when he's starving.

You can't work for high wages, and simultaneously demand cheap goods. It's a very simple concept, that nobody here seems to be able to grasp. Cue China's industrial revolution.

Guest said:

Then the government must take what it needs.

hellokitty[hk] hellokitty[hk], I'm a TechSpot Evangelist, said:

I wonder if people will notice if I debate myself using multiple guest posts.

Or maybe I'll make a statement and have a hoard of guests support me.

Darth Shiv Darth Shiv said:

The republicans don't want to raise taxes because that would hurt the economy even more than it already has been. Lower taxes encourage businesses to spend money and hire, which creates more taxpayers.

More taxpayers is what we need, not higher taxes. And being able to live within its means is something else the government needs to learn.

Increasing the debt ceiling periodically does NOT mean you cannot live within your means. If your economy is growing and therefore the tax collected grows with it, you can indefinitely keep repeating this cycle without risk of over-borrowing.

Analogous to your pay being increased every year. What you could do is raise the credit limit on your credit card each year a certain amount to match what you can now afford to repay.

NunjaBusiness said:

Darth Shiv said:

The republicans don't want to raise taxes because that would hurt the economy even more than it already has been. Lower taxes encourage businesses to spend money and hire, which creates more taxpayers.

More taxpayers is what we need, not higher taxes. And being able to live within its means is something else the government needs to learn.

Increasing the debt ceiling periodically does NOT mean you cannot live within your means. If your economy is growing and therefore the tax collected grows with it, you can indefinitely keep repeating this cycle without risk of over-borrowing.

Analogous to your pay being increased every year. What you could do is raise the credit limit on your credit card each year a certain amount to match what you can now afford to repay.

Very well put. It seems several people here actually understand finances and discuss it intelligently.

Nice change from teh intarweb status quo who rail against whatever they don't understand.

Guest said:

"You can't work for high wages, and simultaneously demand cheap goods. It's a very simple concept, that nobody here seems to be able to grasp. Cue China's industrial revolution. "

Good point, but who decides what is considered "high wages"? Is it $30,00-$50,000 too much for teachers? What is the threshold, who determines it, and what is the living wage index? This isn't 1932 anymore, it's 2011 and EVERYTHING is expensive. Heck our family makes almost 6 figures, and where we live we just getting buy (no extravagant spending/housing/etc). Real estate costs being a good chunk of the reason of the mess we in. it is a larger % of everyone's salary than ever before. Only now has real estate falling to what it should have been before the low borrowing rate rush.

Union membership is a popular whipping boy, but in reality we have lowest levels of union membership nowadays:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_Stat
s

So the adage "its unions holding us down" isn't enough of a straw-man argument anymore.

The corporation and their politcal/lobbying powers has hurt us than unions ever did. Corporations send jobs outside the country, they pay low or no taxes thru MANY existing tax shelter loopholes.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

"You can't work for high wages, and simultaneously demand cheap goods. It's a very simple concept, that nobody here seems to be able to grasp. Cue China's industrial revolution. "

Good point, but who decides what is considered "high wages"? Is it $30,00-$50,000 too much for teachers? What is the threshold, who determines it, and what is the living wage index? This isn't 1932 anymore, it's 2011 and EVERYTHING is expensive. Heck our family makes almost 6 figures, and where we live we just getting buy (no extravagant spending/housing/etc). Real estate costs being a good chunk of the reason of the mess we in. it is a larger % of everyone's salary than ever before. Only now has real estate falling to what it should have been before the low borrowing rate rush.

Union membership is a popular whipping boy, but in reality we have lowest levels of union membership nowadays:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

[link]

So the adage "its unions holding us down" isn't enough of a straw-man argument anymore.

The corporation and their politcal/lobbying powers has hurt us than unions ever did. Corporations send jobs outside the country, they pay low or no taxes thru MANY existing tax shelter loopholes.

Well suppose I say that 30 to 50 grand a year is too little for a good teacher, will that make you happy?

As far as the rest of your doggerel, try and wrap your head around these concepts:

1: "Currency" is the avatar of commodity, not services!

2: A self contained "service based economy" cannot exist because there are no commodities either manufactured, dug up, or grown".

3: If you want to maintain a working "service based economy", then you must take your, "service" (IE teaching) into an economy based on commodity, and bring that money back into yours.

4: People seem to embrace the idea that services can generate "currency". They cannot,! It's that simple.

And in example of that, let me point out that a nurse wiping an elderly person's a** doesn't generate anything other than s**tty rags. These are certainly not a "commodity", and consequently can't be exchanged for currency.

5: Look how far we've come from the Gutenberg Bible! Now we have gigantic printing presses that churn out tons of "currency" on a daily basis.

Suffice it to say, that automatically doesn't really make it worth anything.

I'd consider it a personal favor if you'd explain how you can print something, call it currency, then owe it to yourself, and still expect it to have a tangible value.

Let me remind you that the US has abandoned both the gold and silver standards. We're on the "paper standard" now.

At the end of the day, you could actually print money, then pay someone as much of it as they want! The only drawback would be, they wouldn't accept it at the grocery store.

People and Unions alike suffer under the illusion that any "big company" has pockets endlessly lined with gold. They do! And that's why the US has such a "thriving" steel industry. Non union made steel, now available at a Japan in your area.

lawfer, TechSpot Paladin, said:

mario said:

Yet everyone is using a similar title: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14340470 [link]

As if that makes it any better...?

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

As if that makes it any better...?
Realistically speaking, you could title the thread anything you want, since it's very doubtful that it will stay directly on topic anyway.

What did you think of my post above? (#29)

Guest said:

much of the money apple has is due to exploitation of its developers. apple takes 30% of the price of an app sold in the appstore (which cannot be sold elsewhere). instead of paying developers for generating revenue for apple, apple forces them to pay an ANNUAL fee of $100, even if its a free app, or just to test a non commercial app on an iphone.

u have more that enough money, steve.

this piggery should stop.

Guest said:

Ugh. This is an Apple press release masquerading as "news".

Lots of companies, especially tech companies, have billions in cash reverse. This month it's Apple who are the number one spot, but was there a media fanfare when it was another company? No. It's not news.

The comparison to the US Government is a cheap ploy to make it seem like news, but it's utterly meaningless. For starters, I agree with others that the title is misleading. And there are reasons why a company might build up large cash reserves, but this doesn't apply to Governments, who have things that need doing with that money - they have to run a country. Would it be a good idea if the US Government decided to raise taxes, have a load of cuts, just to build up a stockpile to sit around doing nothing? No.

I have 70 million times less debt that the US Government - do I get a story?

We then have ignorant nonsense like:

"The key difference is that Apple knows how to live on less than they make, a concept that the US government hasn't quite figured out yet."

Last time I looked, Apple aren't maintaining a military, paying people welfare, paying people's education. This kind of comment is worse than ignorant - it's disgusting; that Apple should be praised for sitting on billions, whilst the US Government is mocked for spending money on the public!

The idea that this is spun as being pro-Apple is itself just an example of the Apple bias in the media - when was the last time you ever heard a Microsoft fan say "But Microsoft have so much money!"?

"Key to Apple's success is their growing smartphone market share, which now ranks number one ahead of Nokia and Samsung in the global smartphone market."

Er sorry, false. Nokia are still number one ( http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/20110731135325_N
kia_Remains_World_s_First_Maker_of_Smartphones.html ), and also in total sell around ten times what Apple sell.

Even if it was true, it's funny that it's only news when Apple were number one, but all the years that Nokia outsell Apple, it's still Apple that are hyped. If being number 3 or number 4 was good enough for Apple, why not for other companies? "Smartphone" is also usually defined in an arbitrary and misleading way that includes the IPhones, but doesn't include phones like Nokia's S40 phone line, which sells hundreds of millions a year, with total sales estimated at 1.5 *billion*. Sorry, Apple aren't anywhere near close.

Pathetic really - Apple get all this free advertising from the media (if they're so rich, maybe they can pay for the adverts like everyone else?), but are still outsold by other companies.

Tedster Tedster, Techspot old timer....., said:

I am quite sure now that Apple is stupid enough to draw attention to this, our marxist administration will figure a way to "redistribute the wealth." After all, profit and prosperity is evil to them. Can have a business that will create jobs and produce quality items now can we?

SNGX1275 SNGX1275, TS Forces Special, said:

Ted - I think you might have left out a few characters towards what you wanted to say....

Guest said:

Lol title is misleading but oh so true at the same time. The government is like a 12 yr old kid when it comes to money. Give them both 100 bucks they'll blow 110.

I wonder if apple gets a refund every yr in taxes or even pays any taxes at all like thes hoosiers..

1) Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.

2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion.

3) Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.

4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009.

5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year.

6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction.

7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department.

Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.

9) ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2007 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.

10) Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent.

No wonder usa is broke they try to squeeze blood out of a turnip which is the working class while these guys and others get away with to much.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Lol title is misleading but oh so true at the same time. The government is like a 12 yr old kid when it comes to money. Give them both 100 bucks they'll blow 110.
I think that's probably a charitable estimate of what the government would spend if given $100.00. I can't speak to the ten year old.

Guest said:

bq. The key difference is that Apple knows how to live on less than they make, a concept that the US government hasn't quite figured out yet.

Social policy costs money. Social media makes money.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

bq. The key difference is that Apple knows how to live on less than they make, a concept that the US government hasn't quite figured out yet.

Social policy costs money. Social media makes money.

Well then, would it be fair to say that many people receiving social entitlements are buyers of Apple product? So if you use social entitlement to purchase social media, would it also be fair to say that Apple is at least partly responsible for the government's debt problems?

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.