taxation

[Pico and ME]

It seems that the 'marketplace' favors cheap labor. Maybe we can foster more of that.

[Undertoad]

Indeed. They are called immigrants, and we have plenty of room for them.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Indeed. They are called immigrants, and we have plenty of room for them.

I agree provided they enter the country LEGALLY, otherwise, get in line or GTFO and start over. Way to many people have done it the right way for us to give blanket amnesty to anyone who happened to overstay a visa or sneak in with a coyote.

[Clodfobble]

To imply that there is a "line" for willing immigrants is the opposite of the statement that "we have plenty of room for them." Either there is room, or they need to wait in line.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

To imply that there is a "line" for willing immigrants is the opposite of the statement that "we have plenty of room for them." Either there is room, or they need to wait in line.

I don't believe we have the room at the rate they want to jump the line, illegally.

[Undertoad]

There is room at the inn, there is a line at the check-in desk.

[Clodfobble]

(Just to be clear, I was agreeing with you UT, I was taking issue with Merc's contradictory statements.)

[BigV]

Originally Posted by mercy

Given the US has among the highest rates of taxation and corps are moving their headquarters out of the US, what do you determine to be "their fair share"?

That's a good question mercy. I've talked about this in a couple posts to this point, and I'll recap those thoughts here.

I don't have a strict numeric value in mind for what constitutes their fair share. Focusing on a number like this is misleading. In fact, anyone who views the information in the two links you provided will find wildly different numbers for US corporation tax rates. Cato says 40% and Tax Foundation says 27%. The story I recently cited talked about Google paying 2.4% So, "what's fair?", see how that isn't a useful question if the answer needs to be a percentage?

Back to your good question. Just like our individual tax system is built so that the highest earners pay rates that are lower than the rates paid by individuals who earn less, our system is built to permit corporations with lots of profit and therefore lots of resources to take advantage of the rules to shelter large portions of that profit from exposure to taxation. Our laws are written to permit corporations to avoid/shield/evade/shelter whatever lots of these profits. I'm not the one saying so, just look at their own words!

From here:

Representative Kevin Brady, a Texas Republican who serves on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, in May introduced legislation that would call for an immediate tax holiday allowing companies to repatriate overseas profits at a 5.25 percent rate.

How much money are we (and by we I mean the US Chamber of Commerce, by far the most pro-business organization in the country) talking about? As much as one-thousand two-hundred BILLIONS. That's 1.2 Trillion Dollars. That is how much money is estimated to be "parked" offshore by corporations, US corporations that do their business here in the United States. And that's accumulated since 2004, the date of the last tax repatriation holiday. Look, what's happening here is NOT that businesses are being driven out of the country because of our tax laws. What's happening here is that our laws permit the profits from those businesses (most especially very large businesses) to leak, not be driven, out of the country. This is legal. This is how we've built our system. This is what I am saying is UNFAIR.

That we have a system that enables corporations who, in every other way, participate fully in all other aspects of our society, except the part where they pay their fair share for all the things they enjoy, is evidenced by the very existence of overseas profits. Why is the whole idea of a tax repatriation holiday even possible if there were no EXPATRIATED profits? You can't REpatriate what hasn't been EXpatriated in the first place. Why do we *let* profits be expatriated?

It's not just unfair to me, oh poor me, but to all of the rest of us who do not have the situation or wherewithal to take advantage of these aspects of our systems, and who therefore pay proportionally more than the corporate giants who can and are.

As I said before, the system we have, the laws we have are configured to make the costs of running our country to fall unfairly on those who have less money. Is this explanation clear to you?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by BigV

That's a good question mercy. I've talked about this in a couple posts to this point, and I'll recap those thoughts here.

I don't have a strict numeric value in mind for what constitutes their fair share. Focusing on a number like this is misleading. In fact, anyone who views the information in the two links you provided will find wildly different numbers for US corporation tax rates. Cato says 40% and Tax Foundation says 27%. The story I recently cited talked about Google paying 2.4% So, "what's fair?", see how that isn't a useful question if the answer needs to be a percentage?

Which I why I posted two links, there is a huge disparity between what they pay and what people think they pay.

Our laws are written to permit corporations to avoid/shield/evade/shelter whatever lots of these profits. I'm not the one saying so, just look at their own words!

From here:

I agree, the tax holiday with bring those dollars back into the country.

How much money are we (and by we I mean the US Chamber of Commerce, by far the most pro-business organization in the country) talking about? As much as one-thousand two-hundred BILLIONS. That's 1.2 Trillion Dollars. That is how much money is estimated to be "parked" offshore by corporations, US corporations that do their business here in the United States. And that's accumulated since 2004, the date of the last tax repatriation holiday. Look, what's happening here is NOT that businesses are being driven out of the country because of our tax laws. What's happening here is that our laws permit the profits from those businesses (most especially very large businesses) to leak, not be driven, out of the country. This is legal. This is how we've built our system. This is what I am saying is UNFAIR.

I understand parking the profits. The bigger issue is that very large corps are moving their HQ out of the US because of the tax policy in this country. Your points are valid as well.

That we have a system that enables corporations who, in every other way, participate fully in all other aspects of our society, except the part where they pay their fair share for all the things they enjoy, is evidenced by the very existence of overseas profits. Why is the whole idea of a tax repatriation holiday even possible if there were no EXPATRIATED profits? You can't REpatriate what hasn't been EXpatriated in the first place. Why do we *let* profits be expatriated?

More good points.

As I said before, the system we have, the laws we have are configured to make the costs of running our country to fall unfairly on those who have less money. Is this explanation clear to you?

More clear. The costs of running our country are not borne by those who make less, they are paid for by people who have more money, if you look at the tax system alone. Excluding sales taxes that everyone pays a minority of people pay the majority of the taxes.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

<snip>
I agree, the tax holiday with bring those dollars back into the country.

<snip>
More clear. The costs of running our country are not borne by those who make less,
they are paid for by people who have more money, if you look at the tax system alone.
Excluding sales taxes that everyone pays a minority of people pay the majority of the taxes.

Merc, I don't get your thinking... the media report that the big companies are sitting on hugh sums of cash.

How does a "tax holiday" benefit the country ...
other than giving the corporations that "avoided" US taxes yet one more freebie ?



Also, what is your justification for excluding sales taxes from the equation ?

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Also, what is your justification for excluding sales taxes from the equation ?

Well duh. Wouldn't back up his argument if he didn't.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Well duh. Wouldn't back up his argument if he didn't.

I would support a 9% sales tax on everything like in your tax heavy country similar to a VAT. So tell us how that has worked out for your country and it's current situation? Has it fixed your problems?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

How does a "tax holiday" benefit the country ...
other than giving the corporations that "avoided" US taxes yet one more freebie ?

How is it a "freebie" when we charge among the highest of tax rates for corps?

By giving them a tax holiday they are encouraged to bring their offshore dollars back into the country, at a low rate, to reinvest in their own countries which create jobs. Understand?

[BigV]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

How is it a "freebie" when we charge among the highest of tax rates for corps?

By giving them a tax holiday they are encouraged to bring their offshore dollars back into the country, at a low rate, to reinvest in their own countries which create jobs. Understand?

I think I should have a tax holiday too! I'm a corporation! No, wait, I'm a person, dammit.

Back to the tax holiday. What a crock of shit proposal. Why, tell me why again this money is out there, shivering in the cold, wanting to get "in"? Later, later. Look. The US Chamber of Commerce is suggesting that the law be changed to let these profits be repatriated and taxed at a rate of 5.25%. Why?

Why is 5.25% an acceptable figure for the corporations? Because it's a screamin deal, that's why. I alluded to a fair pie sharing algorithm in a recent post, here's my twist on that for this tax holiday.

Let's have a tax holiday for all these profits that have been expatriated. But tax them at a rate that they say they've been paying for the last few years already. I'm guessing that no corporation will claim that they've been paying 35%, the shareholders would arise with pitchforks and torches. In fact, I believe this number is already what they believe they have been paying, about 5%. They just want, you know, amnesty for being caught on the wrong side of the border.

Why should we offer a holiday at all? What fucking good have tax breaks for filers with kabillions of dollars done for me lately? Hey, why would the corps want the money back anyhow? Especially if they know it will be taxed? Isn't that a net loss for them? They already freakin earned the money, why offer it up to the government? What is their motivation? You know, the last time this was done for them, they used the money to buy back their own stock. They used the cash to increase the value of their shares, not to "create jobs". And that was a measly $400 billion. This is triple that amount. Why should we fall for that crap again?

And it's not liike the money is sitting in a sailboat in the marina in Bermuda. The actual money's on deposit in banks here, like in New York. It's just classified as owned by Offshore LLC or whatever.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

How is it a "freebie" when we charge among the highest of tax rates for corps?

By giving them a tax holiday they are encouraged to bring their offshore dollars back into the country, at a low rate, to reinvest in their own countries which create jobs. Understand?

Here's how it's a freebie.

I (not a corporation) have a pool of money that has NOT been taxed by the government, it's called my 401k account. Shielding that money from taxes was done legally. I can't access that money to do things like pay my mortgage, or create jobs, or buy food or whatever. I want that money now though, and if I access it, I will have to pay taxes on it as regular income (at more than 5.25%).

A corporation (not me) has a pool of money that has NOT been taxed by the government, it's called their offshore profits. Shielding that money from taxes was done legally. It can't access that money to do things like buy outstanding shares of stock, or create jobs, or pay executive bonuses or whatever. It wants that money now though, and to access it, it will have to pay taxes on it as regular profit (at more than 5.25%).

A tax holiday is just a giveaway of revenue that was due to the government (yes, due) at the time it was moved. The move did two things, avoid taxes and lock up the money. Locked up money is not very useful, not useLESS, just of limited use. For example, it can't be spent. And that's the main function of money, to be spent. Now, to spend this money, it has to "re-enter" our system. We already have rules for that, why do we, "the people", need a new rule? I can see why we, "the corporation", or we, "the 401k holder", would want a new rule, because we don't like the "cost" of the current rule. But those "costs" (penalties, taxes due, etc) were already known by the corporations and people that moved the money "out" of the system in the first place. Now we need a ... a... do-over? Cause, waaah, I changed my mind, I don't like the deal I accepted in the first place. *Sigh*.

We have a system for establishing and changing our rules, our laws. That system is in play now with lobbying efforts like the letter from the US Chamber of Commerce to the Congress. I just don't agree with their point that they need relief. I've looked at "the numbers" and I don't see how they're suffering, despite the enormous tide of propaganda to the contrary.

I don't think a tax holiday is needed for the corporations to continue to prosper. If they want that money, let them repatriate it through the already functioning system we already have in place.