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 01-15-2019, 01:14 PM
 
2,375 posts, read 1,512,774 times
Reputation: 5158

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DKM View Post
Anyone who works in this field at a high level knows that corporate taxes must be higher than individidual (net) otherwise you're going to see a lot of corporations created for tax evasion.
And they also know that the double corporate taxation effect is needed to account for TIMING because corporate earnings can flow out to tax deferred or tax exempt vehicles.

What is failed to be recognized over and over is that it’s not just who pays...but when. Corporate taxation is needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-15-2019, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
4,819 posts, read 1,581,829 times
Reputation: 7005
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKM View Post
Anyone who works in this field at a high level knows that corporate taxes must be higher than individidual (net) otherwise you're going to see a lot of corporations created for tax evasion.
We could assume this is not a one-variable problem and that if corporate taxes were eliminated, the bar would be much higher for forming and maintaining one.

But only in a simplistic model can transferring all taxes to individuals account for corporate income and profits. It's a nonsense scenario.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2019, 04:33 PM
 
247 posts, read 39,267 times
Reputation: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
I think it's false to claim that all corporate taxation somehow rests directly on the shoulders of their customers

You and I agree - not all rests directly on the shoulders of customers. Some rests directly on the shoulders of employees. The balance rests directly on the shoulders of owners. The sum of taxes borne by those sets of shoulders (customers, employees, owners) is 100%.


Economists of all denominations agree on the above, and the topic isn't particularly interesting - that is, it isn't subject to debate.



The interesting question is how much rests on each of the respective sets of shoulders? (Customers, employees, owners). That varies from industry to industry, and it also varies over time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2019, 05:40 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
4,819 posts, read 1,581,829 times
Reputation: 7005
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
You and I agree - not all rests directly on the shoulders of customers. Some rests directly on the shoulders of employees. The balance rests directly on the shoulders of owners. The sum of taxes borne by those sets of shoulders (customers, employees, owners) is 100%.
Only if you assume that the corporation itself is operated in non-profit mode: that none of its profit can be left within the company, unassigned to any meat popsicle's benefit.

Quote:
Economists of all denominations agree on the above, and the topic isn't particularly interesting - that is, it isn't subject to debate.
That may well be, but I can't think of an industrialized nation that has no corporate taxation, on this basis or any other. (There are nine micro-nations, all tax havens. Theory, practice, all that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2019, 07:38 PM
 
2,375 posts, read 1,512,774 times
Reputation: 5158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
NCole1, the issue is not sales tax but rather the effective consequences of corporate taxes.

There is a general relationship between corporate taxes embedded within the price, and the gross price of of the product.

The embedded corporate taxes continue to remain embedded within the prices of products as the product passes through the links that compose chains of transactions, in this manner corporate taxes embedded within the prices of products behave extremely similar to the behavior of sales tax.

It is not an exaggeration to state corporate taxes embedded within your total annual purchases effectively act very similarly to a flat rate sales tax.
You assume all costs can actually be passed onto customers without losing market share. Price modeling isn’t so simple. Tax is probably about the 74th (?) consideration in arriving at a price for the business units. I know this because of the howls the business units give when they get a corporate recharge for tax services that they “didn’t need” in their global region.


For example, how many corporations with losses or who were utilizing NOLs do you think reduced their prices because their federal income tax liability was eliminated? Did you notice price drops after the tax rate dropped from 35 to 21%? Did corporations raise prices to pay for their deemed repatriation of permanently reinvested and deferred foreign earnings last year? Nope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2019, 12:01 PM
 
247 posts, read 39,267 times
Reputation: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
That may well be, but I can't think of an industrialized nation that has no corporate taxation, on this basis or any other. (There are nine micro-nations, all tax havens. Theory, practice, all that.

Me neither. I didn't say there was.


I said it is highly inefficient in the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2019, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
4,819 posts, read 1,581,829 times
Reputation: 7005
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
Me neither. I didn't say there was.
Well, you made a point about how many economists line up behind the idea. Since no country on earth has implemented it, I suspect it has hidden downsides.

Quote:
I said it is highly inefficient in the USA.
As are many things we muddle along with. That nearly every economist has a completely different idea of how to un-muddle things is one of the reasons I pretty much ignore conventional economic thought. Herd mentality of individual psychoses, all rushing to the same unattainable goals on wacky-racers platforms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2019, 12:32 PM
 
12,476 posts, read 9,466,133 times
Reputation: 8995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
NCole1, the issue is not sales tax but rather the effective consequences of corporate taxes.

There is a general relationship between corporate taxes embedded within the price, and the gross price of of the product.

The embedded corporate taxes continue to remain embedded within the prices of products as the product passes through the links that compose chains of transactions, in this manner corporate taxes embedded within the prices of products behave extremely similar to the behavior of sales tax.

It is not an exaggeration to state corporate taxes embedded within your total annual purchases effectively act very similarly to a flat rate sales tax.
This depends on the price elasticity of the product. For products with high price elasticity, consumers have more control over the price than producers do, so what you say would not apply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2019, 12:46 PM
 
247 posts, read 39,267 times
Reputation: 313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Well, you made a point about how many economists line up behind the idea.

Perhaps my post wasn't clear as it should have been:


Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
You and I agree - not all rests directly on the shoulders of customers. Some rests directly on the shoulders of employees. The balance rests directly on the shoulders of owners. The sum of taxes borne by those sets of shoulders (customers, employees, owners) is 100%. Economists of all denominations agree on the above, and the topic isn't particularly interesting - that is, it isn't subject to debate.

What I meant to say was Economists of all denominations agree that "The sum of taxes borne by those sets of people's shoulders (customers, employees, owners) is 100% of all corporate taxes; people bear the ultimate burden always".

If I implied that most economists agreed with the idea of not taxing corporations and instead taxing people directly, well, that was unintended. Sorry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2019, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
4,819 posts, read 1,581,829 times
Reputation: 7005
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalExpectations View Post
What I meant to say was Economists of all denominations agree that "The sum of taxes borne by those sets of people's shoulders (customers, employees, owners) is 100% of all corporate taxes; people bear the ultimate burden always".
Well, okay, but that falls way down the "duh" end of the scale; despite all the complicated business and tax entities (and their new "personhood"), people are of course at the bottom of it all. If a company makes or loses fifty million, it's eventually in or out of someone's pocket.

Treating "corporations" as some kind of independent entity, wholly disconnected from people, is common but as wrong as treating "government" as something other than collective will and influence of... people.

In the end, it's all in our hands. We just have to recognize that to implement real change, and reject the fiction that the poor, poor people are separate from and either irrelevant to or under the irrevocable alient control of these "other" entities.
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