The internet’s foundation is crucial for various services, from entertainment platforms like TikTok to essential functions like emergency services, banking systems, and political and military communications.
However, the network of undersea cables around the coasts of Great Britain and Ireland has been targeted by military, terrorist, or criminal actors, leading to incidents where internet cables were cut, disrupting communication in the Baltics. As 75% of transatlantic cables pass through or are near Ireland, the strategic importance of these cables is significant for the UK and Europe.
Recent incidents, such as cable cuts between Finland and Estonia, have raised concerns about the security of Ireland’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) that extends beyond its coast.
Ireland’s neutrality and limited defense capabilities have left the country vulnerable to potential threats. Calls have been made for a reassessment of Irish defense policies and the need to secure vital infrastructure.
There is growing recognition that Ireland’s neutrality may not shield it from modern threats, and steps must be taken to protect against potential attacks on critical infrastructure.
Current discussions are focusing on Ireland’s vulnerability, the need for increased defense resources, and potential collaborations with other countries facing similar security challenges.
Efforts are being made to address gaps in surveillance capabilities and response mechanisms to safeguard critical undersea infrastructure from unexpected threats.
The Russian ship Yantar will be observed by a Royal Navy ship when it enters British waters in January. It was discovered in the Irish Sea in November. Photo: Royal Navy/PA
Ensuring the security of undersea cables in Europe is essential for safeguarding communication networks and vital services across the continent.
Collaboration and investment in defense capabilities are key to protecting critical infrastructure and responding effectively to emerging threats in the undersea domain.
It is imperative for countries to prioritize the security of undersea cables and strengthen their defense forces to address potential vulnerabilities in the global communication network.
By enhancing surveillance, response capabilities, and international cooperation, nations can mitigate risks and ensure the resilience of undersea infrastructure.
Apple has lost its high-profile 13 billion euro (11 billion pounds) Irish tax battle with the EU, but the ruling will bolster efforts by the European Commission to crack down on “preferential” tax regimes favoring multinational companies.
The long-awaited ruling from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) came after a years-long legal battle over whether the European Commission was right in 2016 to demand the return of 13 billion euros of “illegal” tax breaks given to Apple for giving the iPhone maker an unfair advantage.
ECJ (European Court of Justice) The verdict was given The Commission argued that a lower court ruling in favor of Apple should be overturned, upholding a 2016 European Commission decision that found Ireland had provided unlawful assistance to Apple in the tax treatment of profits from Apple’s activities outside the United States and that Ireland was required to recoup the money.
In 2020, a lower court, the General Court, annulled the 2016 European Commission decision, finding that it had not been sufficiently established that Apple’s subsidiaries enjoyed a selective advantage. That ruling has now been set aside by the European Court of Justice, which has confirmed the European Commission’s 2016 decision.
The ruling was a victory for EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who concluded: 2016 The iPhone maker benefited from billions of dollars worth of unfair tax breaks from the Irish government.
Vestager, who is due to step down this year, has been seen as a tough enforcer who has boldly taken on powerful multinationals such as Fiat, Amazon and Starbucks over their tax claims. But some of the cases have not stood the test of time, with a 2022 ruling against Fiat that was later overturned.
The case brings to an end a years-long legal battle that began in 2016 when the European Commission ordered Apple to pay billions of euros for significant underpayment of tax on profits from 2003 to 2014. Apple, which has had its European headquarters in Cork since 1980, was found by the EU’s competition watchdog to have benefited from a tax ruling by Irish authorities and to have paid an effective tax rate of 0.005 percent in 2014.
Apple has denied the accusations, saying the government aid money had not been paid, and CEO Tim Cook said: It is called The claim is “political nonsense.”
Apple challenged the Commission at the General Court, the EU’s second-highest court, and won. Conclusion In July 2020, Brussels ruled that Apple had failed to prove that it had obtained an illegal economic benefit in terms of tax in Ireland.
The Commission appealed, and last year the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice, Giovanni Pitruzzella, recommended that the Commission overturn the General Court’s earlier ruling. Advocate General Pitruzzella said the General Court had made an error of law and needed to carry out a new assessment. He recommended that the European Court of Justice remit the case back to the General Court for a new ruling on the substance of the case.
Pitruzella’s recommendation was not legally binding and did not have to be followed by the ECJ, but the attorney general’s opinion carries great weight and usually influences the court’s final decision.
Following the ECJ ruling, Apple said: “This case is not about how much tax we pay, but which government we owe tax to. We have always paid all taxes wherever we do business and have never had any special arrangements. Apple is a driver of growth and innovation in Europe and around the world, and we are proud to have consistently been one of the world’s largest taxpayers.”
“The European Commission is seeking to change the rules retroactively, ignoring the fact that our income is already subject to tax in the United States under international tax law. We are disappointed by today’s decision because the European Court of Justice previously reviewed the facts and invalidated this case in its entirety.”
Meanwhile, the ECJ It also ruled He upheld the 2.4 billion euro fine imposed by the European Commission against Google in an antitrust case. Whether Google falsely favored its online shopping service. In this case, the Attorney General said In January, the ECJ ruled that Google’s appeal should be dismissed.
Google said: “We are disappointed with the court’s decision, which concerns very specific facts. We made changes in 2017 to comply with the European Commission’s decision. Our approach has been successful for more than seven years, generating billions of clicks across over 800 comparison shopping services.”
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
