repatriate

If you want to pay dividends with that money, you have to repatriate the money first.

Cheaper to buy them with money stuck overseas than repatriate and pay taxes on it.

Cost to repatriate money ~ 35% Cost to borrow money < 1%No brainer

This looks like a very tax-efficient way to repatriate cash.

Are these companies all hoping that one day their will be a tax holiday and they can re-repatriate the funds?

It is up to the company to repatriate it or throw it back into overseas operations.

Microsoft bought Skype because they have large amounts of cash in Europe that they cannot repatriate without taking a huge tax hit.

" I've seen it mentioned quite a few times that tech companies end up with massive overseas cash reserves they can't repatriate for tax reasons.

It's part of a broad government push to repatriate American funds into American banks.

Every dollar of taxes paid overseas is credited against US tax owed when the cash is repatriated.

Is the hording related to an expectation of another round of the regular tax amnesty for them to repatriate the funds to the US?

As an example, Apple has $100 billion parked in offshore subsidiaries that it refuses to repatriate to the US because the full 35% tax rate would apply.

In the UK at least it's continuing to do harm for the US government reputation every time the media bring it up, or worse yet, bring up the fact that there are British citizens still there whom the British government wants to repatriate yet the US won't release.

Why would they repatriate those profits, not earned in the US to the US and take a second tax hit?If the contention is that they are somehow hiding US profits by misrepresenting them as overseas profits to avoid taxes, then that would obviously seem rather sleazy.