U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-14-2019, 05:02 PM
 
1,196 posts, read 616,848 times
Reputation: 329

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pfalz View Post
I don't think the corporate income tax is similar to either. Companies that are not profitable pay zero federal corporate income taxes. Also, a previosuly profitable tax paying corporation in recession years can carry-back their losses and get taxes previously paid refunded. They can also also carry losses forward. Carrybacks and carry forwards are an important source of recession liquidity for many companies and blunts the impact of recessions in the US. The amount collected is very cyclical.

Sales tax and VAT taxes are always paid by everyone and the amount paid is not cyclical.
Pfalz, my post's not discussing taxes on corporate incomes; it's discussing corporate taxes embedded within the prices of everything you purchase. Those embedded taxes effectively act as sales taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-14-2019, 05:06 PM
 
17,950 posts, read 12,668,007 times
Reputation: 13221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Pfalz, my post's not discussing taxes on corporate incomes; it's discussing corporate taxes embedded within the prices of everything you purchase. Those embedded taxes effectively act as sales taxes.
Itís not effectively a sales tax because itís not based on sales. Itís an increased cost to consumers but itís not effectively a sales tax. It is exactly what it is and there is zero reason to make believe itís effec something else
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 06:11 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
4,676 posts, read 1,545,044 times
Reputation: 6785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Pfalz, my post's not discussing taxes on corporate incomes; it's discussing corporate taxes embedded within the prices of everything you purchase. Those embedded taxes effectively act as sales taxes.
Even when the "corporate taxes" are zero, as suggested?

Methinks you are trying so hard to hammer out one point that all the others are eluding you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Ohio
18,504 posts, read 13,588,411 times
Reputation: 14468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
They're also likely to be opposed to corporate taxes and point out that customers, not businesses pay businesses taxes. I'm among those that accept to some extent that's certainly true. Then although not everyone pays federal income taxes, due to everyone directly or indirectly inducing purchases, don't we all pay some federal taxes?
No, not directly, which is the whole point, and which you are obviously trying to obfuscate.

Taxes are one component of Cost-push Inflation.

Corporate taxes in foreign States are higher, but those foreign States also heavily subsidize business, and quite often protect businesses.

The EU is a stellar example.

Like oils, the profit margin on raw agricultural products is very low, about 1%-3%.

A barrel of raw crude oil doesn't generate a lot of profit. The profit comes from processing the raw crude oil, or from refining the processed crude oil into constituent products.

The same is true for raw agricultural products. Raw sugar cane generates very little profit. The profit comes from processed sugar cane.

You should know that from history. US-owned National Sugar paid the workers at sugar cane processing facilities in Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatemala $4.50/day and field workers $0.90/day. But, in Castro's Cuba, National Sugar only paid processing workers $1.20/day and field workers $0.30/day (note that the Spanish paid field workers $0.30/day in 1898, so they hadn't seen a pay raise in 50 years).

When Castro demanded National Sugar pay Cuban workers the same wages it paid workers in similarly situated States, and Cuba, Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala were all the same with respect to Standard of Living and Cost-of-Living, National Sugar refused. Castro then reviewed National Sugar's tax record, and discovered that National Sugar had devalued its assets to reduce its tax liability, and then under the Batista Regime, had not paid the paltry amount of taxes it owed, so Castro seized National Sugar's assets, which was Castro's legal right under Cuban and international law.

Anyway, EU tariffs are designed to protect processed agricultural products in the EU, and African farmers cannot export processed agricultural products to the EU, because of the high tariffs, they can only export the raw agricultural products, so African farmers aren't deriving a lot of profits.

The low corporate tax rate in the US is specifically designed to offset the fact that corporations in foreign States are heavily subsidized by their governments and also very often protected by tariffs and other trade restrictions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 09:47 PM
 
1,196 posts, read 616,848 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
No, not directly, which is the whole point, and which you are obviously trying to obfuscate.
Mircea,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
... Then although not everyone pays federal income taxes, due to everyone directly or indirectly inducing purchases, don't we all pay some federal taxes?
Consider the corporate tax as effectively a federal flat rate sales tax we all pay. ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 10:01 PM
 
1,196 posts, read 616,848 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Even when the "corporate taxes" are zero, as suggested?

Methinks you are trying so hard to hammer out one point that all the others are eluding you.
Quietude, A substantial portions of the products you purchased in 2018 were not in any manner produced or processed or in some manner directly or indirectly not passed through a corporation that paid corporate taxes? Are you such an unusual shopper?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 10:08 PM
 
1,196 posts, read 616,848 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by LowExpectations View Post
Itís not effectively a sales tax because itís not based on sales. Itís an increased cost to consumers but itís not effectively a sales tax. It is exactly what it is and there is zero reason to make believe itís effec something else
It's EFFECTIVELY a sales tax!!! If it were a sales tax there'd be no need for the word "effectively". Refer to post #8.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 10:51 PM
 
1,196 posts, read 616,848 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCresident2014 View Post
I've always been confused by the people who get angry about the "47%" statistic. You're either in the 53%, paying all payroll taxes, sales taxes, state taxes, plus federal tax, or you're in the 47%, paying only sales taxes and possibly payroll and state taxes. No matter how you look at it, the 47% pay much less, both as a percentage of their income and as an absolute number, than the 53%.


Using the logic from the OP, the 53% are still paying more than the 47% because they are buying more stuff. Any way you look at it, the 47% are a net burden on the 53%. Some people have a weird concept of "fairness".
NYCresident2014, I had to reread my original post. I didn't mention percentages, or comparisons of purchasers, or of taxpayers, or of purchase volumes.
I didn't mention ďfairnessĒ, (although I do not believe that corporate income taxation is particularly unfair).

You're confused by the people who get angry about the "47%" statistic? Who's angry? My wife made soup and I'm content.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 10:57 PM
 
4,481 posts, read 1,673,283 times
Reputation: 5683
If you look at an SEC form 10-Q for publicly traded companies, corporate taxes are fully deducted from income attributed to shareholders.

Shareholders pay the tax. Consumers pay nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2019, 11:06 PM
 
17,950 posts, read 12,668,007 times
Reputation: 13221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
It's EFFECTIVELY a sales tax!!! If it were a sales tax there'd be no need for the word "effectively". Refer to post #8.
Itís not effectively a sales tax no matter how many times you repeat it
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top