And then watch as the cost of goods and services shoot up into the sky and you'll be making a second thread about how "GREEDY" these businesses are for pushing off the added cost of manufacturing in the US (while attempting to compete globally) onto the US consumer.
Like costs aren't already shooting to the sky?And then watch as the cost of goods and services shoot up into the sky and you'll be making a second thread about how "GREEDY" these businesses are for pushing off the added cost of manufacturing in the US (while attempting to compete globally) onto the US consumer.
So maybe Dave can clarify. Is it just the greedy rich people you want to leave the country, or the greedy rich corporations also? It's hard to keep track of who's supposed to stay and who's supposed to go.
if we closed the loopholes so that ALL american companies must pay their fair taxes then you wouldnt see businesses move overseas because everyone would be on the same playing field.
its not like these companies cant afford the taxes... its just that their competitors dont have to pay the taxes because they moved over the boarder. so why wouldnt you do the same?
OK. For the last 4 years O'Blamer has been threatening to raise corporate tax rates by allowing the Bush era tax temporary tax cuts to expire. So if you are a corporation, why not move your business overseas to avoid over-taxation? This seems to be the desired result of O'blamer's threat. O'Bammah and Democrats and even some Republicans like over regulation, overtaxation, and threatening corporations. What do you think was going to happen with all these threats and regulations?
I think they are making the right moves.
He's going to "reward" them with higher taxes.8-29-2012
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-firms-move-abroad-024200566.html
U.S. Firms Move Abroad to avoid taxes
More big U.S. companies are reincorporating abroad despite a 2004 federal law that sought to curb the practice. One big reason: Taxes.
Since 2009, at least 10 U.S. public companies have moved their incorporation address abroad or announced plans to do so, including six in the last year
The companies that have moved recently include manufacturer Eaton Corp., oil firms Ensco International Inc. and Rowan Cos., as well as a spinoff of Sara Lee Corp. called D.E. Master Blenders 1753.
Eaton, a 101-year-old Cleveland-based maker of components and electrical equipment, announced in May that it would acquire Cooper Industries PLC, another electrical-equipment maker that had moved to Bermuda in 2002 and then to Ireland in 2009.
It plans to maintain factories, offices and other operations in the U.S. while moving its place of incorporationfor nowto the office of an Irish law firm in downtown Dublin.
In his State of the Union speech in January, President Barack Obama said that "it's time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas, and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America."
For companies that leave the U.S., the appeal of lower taxes "is still there, but people now are also getting more concerned about where tax reform is going," says Bret Wells, a University of Houston law professor.
Still, several key lawmakers hope to rewrite the tax code to give companies an extra incentive to stay in the U.S.
Tariffs
Hit them with a shit ton of costs to sell in the U.S. and watch how quick they stop this shit.
Maybe the fact that the u.s. govt imposes the highest marginal corporate tax rate in the world has something to do with it. Neither Romney nor Obama want to change that. Romney's proposed rate cut is weak, and Obama thinks 35% is fine... so what happens is only the hospitals, a few other firms, and the people wind up getting fucked over while the corporations wealthy enough to evade can and do.
^This. However, many liberals want to blame Reaganomics instead...even though the problem started well before he took office. The effects of our trade imbalance on our economy has been profound. It all started in the mid-70s and hasn't abated since. When people talk about wealth disparity, they need to understand this.
He's going to "reward" them with higher taxes.
Easy to fix - abolish the corporate tax and tax all dividends and short term capital gains as wage income. Otherwise either American companies continue becoming non-American companies, or we tax them and penalize them until they either go under, or more likely get snapped up by non-American companies.
Tariffs
Hit them with a shit ton of costs to sell in the U.S. and watch how quick they stop this shit.
Are you and others still spouting this capitalistic, free-market horseshit lie?
Do yourself a favor and look up what ATT's EFFECTIVE tax rate was and all of the others of the Fourtune 500! I can guarantee you that you will see that the rate of taxes paid by these mega-corporations was less than they would have paid in almost every other country in the world.
The fact of the matter is that most other countries don't have all of the bullshit loopholes that are written into tax law by the corporations themselves so that they can claim that they are being taxed too heavily, all the while, getting hundreds of millions of dollars back in tax rebates/refunds.
If your base is the actual tax rate, then you are missing the forest for the trees. The only tax rate that matters is the effective tax rate if you are going to compare the US's tax rates vs. any other country's.
As I stated in the other thread complaining about AT&T's tax rate for 2011, their effective rate was somewhere around 37%.
LOL, you have no idea how a "free market" economy works, do you.
I think long term capital gains should be indexed for inflation and then taxed at a preferential rate, long term investment being something we legitimately need to encourage. I'd start at maybe two years though. Unless we have another Nixon/Ford/Carter period, inflation over two years shouldn't be that bad as the Fed is VERY good at fighting inflation, even to the point of damaging the economy as necessary.We really need to add LTCG's to that, as well. The current difference between STCG's & LTCG's is the difference between 364 days & 366 days. If we wanted to give progressive preferential treatment for capital gains realized over many years, that would be a different story, but even that shouldn't reduce rates to less than half of earned income at the same level.
I don't think we necessarily need to abolish corporate taxes all together, but rather set rates where we enjoy a competitive advantage.
Good point. I suspect that since government spending is not constrained by having less income, that side of the picture can be safely ignored. Eaton probably created more jobs by paying less in taxes, but there would be a net loss of American jobs. Which is why this is a problem.From the OP, those companies like Eaton mentioned above did not move its company to another country or its jobs, just its place of incorporation. A lot of companies do that for favorable laws as well, like Delaware is a favorite place of incorporation for many companies.
I wonder if Eaton saved more jobs (or created them) by paying less taxes?
No I'm not missing the forest for the trees. Look at how much Germany's tax revenue from corporations is and then that their top marginal corp rate is 15%. The American companies' "loopholes" are from offshoring. There really aren't a whole lot of general deductions for corporations other than offshoring, health care, and pensions.If your base is the actual tax rate, then you are missing the forest for the trees. The only tax rate that matters is the effective tax rate if you are going to compare the US's tax rates vs. any other country's.
Tariffs
Hit them with a shit ton of costs to sell in the U.S. and watch how quick they stop this shit.
LOL, you have no idea how a "free market" economy works, do you.
There is an argument to be made here but I don't think OP is up to it so I'll give it a go.
We do not have a "free-market" economy in the US. We have a capitalist economy. In the former everyone is free to engage in all kinds of commerce while competition, supply, and demand, do most of the regulation. In a capitalist economy economies of scale, pro-monopolist regulation, and other barriers to entry including collusion and overpriced capital prevent competition and stratify the population by economic class.
That's what I think the OP would probably say.