Ireland isn't a sovereign country. It's an EU member state. So it's like Apple violating Federal law and saying it's okay because what they're doing is legal under California law.
You've got an unusual definition of "sovereignty".
I'm not sure about US states (I would have thought they are considered sovereign member states of the Federation, but I haven't researched the issue), but the much less incorporated European Union certainly consists of "sovereign" states.
Or was it just a linguistic shortcut for "Ireland has submitted itself under treaties and laws of the European Union"?
You're not sovereign if some other entity can micro-manage your tax policies. It's a big stretch to call U.S. states "sovereign" but even they get to decide on how they give tax breaks.
Ireland is still sovereign. They could pull out of the EU and its rules at any time if they wanted to. Is this different to delegating some aspect of trade to WTO rules?
If the U.S. doesn't sign the TPP, it is not bound by it, regardless of how many other countries support it. But, e.g. Massachusetts was bound by the Defense of Marriage Act for ~20 years even though a majority of its Congressmen and both of its Senators voted against it. That's not sovereignty.
EU rules are like U.S. federal laws, not WTO treaties. Member states can be bound by them even if their representatives vote against them.
They can only micromanage your policies if you specifically allow it beforehand.
If you follow your line of thought a bit further to its extremes, your home state is not sovereign, because its administration ordered some paper clips from a supplier and is now bound to pay for them, without the senators being asked if they really want to pay. ;-)
> They can only micromanage your policies if you specifically allow it beforehand.
A formerly sovereign state can choose to give up its sovereignty to join a larger union, as the U.S. states did and as EU member countries have done.
> your home state is not sovereign, because its administration ordered some paper clips from a supplier and is now bound to pay for them, without the senators being asked if they really want to pay
They're not obligated to pay for the paperclips. E.g. if the U.S. government fails to pay for paperclips you sell it, you can file a claim in the Court of Federal Claims, but only because the government has chosen to waive its sovereign immunity as to such claims.
Which brings it back to square one: Ireland complies with the EU micro-managing (like the the US on the paperclip contract) because it has chosen to waive sovereign immunity from other countries' intervention into its tax policy.
