Corporate Taxes Too High, Think Again. (Corporate Profits, Ron Paul, spokesman, Obama)
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.
It would be more useful to learn why they didn't pay corporate taxes. Take GE, for example. They got out of paying taxes on billions in profits because their deductions for producing "energy efficient" appliances balanced out their tax obligation. So you can thank the green lobby for that boondoggle.
Business decisions are always based on the marginal tax rate.
If I earn ten dollars and manage to find enough loop holes to lower my taxes on that ten dollars to two dollars (20%), the marginal rate (35%) still applies to the next dollar I earn. If I earn that next dollar in a low tax nation, I'll pay their marginal rate (typically 15-25%). If I earn it in the US, I'll pay as much as 35%.
The objective is to have these international corporations earn all of their income in the US instead of shifting their costs here and paying taxes to some other nation with lower marginal rates.
Business decisions are always based on the marginal tax rate.
If I earn ten dollars and manage to find enough loop holes to lower my taxes on that ten dollars to two dollars (20%), the marginal rate (35%) still applies to the next dollar I earn. If I earn that next dollar in a low tax nation, I'll pay their marginal rate (typically 15-25%). If I earn it in the US, I'll pay as much as 35%.
The objective is to have these international corporations earn all of their income in the US instead of shifting their costs here and paying taxes to some other nation with lower marginal rates.
One of the billionaires who makes such decisions, vehemently disagrees with your assumptions...
When comparing numbers over time, two key factors must be included:
1- Inflation. The numbers presented ought to be in constant dollars. Are they?
2- Size of economy, measured as a percentage of GDP. Is it?
Those are irrelevant. The point made is by year. In the majority of those years, the corporations paid more in total tax than profit. It's comparing dollars in the same year and on a yearly basis.
Those are irrelevant. The point made is by year. In the majority of those years, the corporations paid more in total tax than profit. It's comparing dollars in the same year and on a yearly basis.
Let me say... Holy Cow!
NEVER present numbers without perspective. Its lame. After all, what would be your argument if I said... the private sector payroll today is identical to private sector payroll in Nov 2001. The unemployment rate back then was a little over 4% right?
NEVER present numbers without perspective. Its lame. After all, what would be your argument if I said... the private sector payroll today is identical to private sector payroll in Nov 2001. The unemployment rate back then was a little over 4% right?
That's not what it's saying. You're adding an angle of history that the data is not trying to present in a very weak effort to discredit it. It's comparing the amount spent on taxes with the amount of profit in the same year. It does this in each of 15 individual years and says that in the majority of those years (same year dollars) the amount going to taxes was more than the amount of profit. I'm sorry if that's hard to understand.
some people dont even realize that S-Corporations (1120-S) or Partnerships (1065) are not taxable entities. income or losses flow-through to shareholders and/or partners and is taxed on the indivdual 1040.
Now it is true that your typical big coporations like GE or Wal-Mart are taxable entites. But who is to blame for them not paying any tax? Tax planning is not illegel. Only tax evasion is.
Wal Mart paid around 30% as did most retail businesses.
That's not what it's saying. You're adding an angle of history that the data is not trying to present in a very weak effort to discredit it. It's comparing the amount spent on taxes with the amount of profit in the same year. It does this in each of 15 individual years and says that in the majority of those years (same year dollars) the amount going to taxes was more than the amount of profit. I'm sorry if that's hard to understand.
Your link also presented a graph of how taxes have fluctuated. What is your take on it? That would help you understand the nature of my effort that you call weak.
You can help the argument by providing specific details. Pick a few years from the data you present and then make an argument. I tried, but the data as presented is way too convulated to do so conveniently at this time. Lets do it at 5 year interval (or any interval of your choice), since you've already analyzed it.
then I will accept your logic that corporations should not be paying any taxes.
You and I pay ALL corporate taxes. It's just a sham that politicians use to make people think the big bad guys are paying billions in taxes.
In the end, consumers pay all corporate taxes.
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.
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.
