Should We End the Corporate Income Tax? (money, government, federal)
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.
Because its harms job creation, we have the highest Corporate income tax rate in the world and you wonder why companies leave to China and India.
That's only because you're looking at the statutory rate. The effective rate with the various deductions and benefits they get is on par with the developed world. Don't think that the Googles and Apples of the world would be idiots enough to headquarter here if they were being treated so unfairly compared to other parts of the world where they could set up shop. With offshoring and all kinds of other tax shelters, they can get their effective tax rates down well below the official rate on paper.
It does not seem like there will be any cuts as long as the Dems propose them, because the GOP will shoot them down like that did with the three proposal already made. It is ironic, because during the presidential race both Romney and Obama proposed cuts while also cutting subsidies and deductions, and GOP was all for it. When Romney lost the race, they opposed the cuts because they didn't' want Obama to get the credit for them. That's how bad the political situation is today.
The tax rate means nothing as long as the loop holes are in place, just look at the list of corporations that paid 0 in taxes and a couple received a refund. Mitt ran all over the country saying he was going to close loop holes but never did get around telling us which ones. That message is good populism rhetoric just like Obama used re negotiating NAFTA in 2008 and we have not heard him even mention NAFTA since. That is because it is good campaign rhetoric and Mitt and {R}s were never ever serious about closing loop holes, I laughed at Mitt the first time I heard it. I mean Mitt paid like 17.4% in taxes using said loop holes, a person would have to be lobotomized to fall for this type of populist rhetoric.
Obama proposed 28%, and the Republicans said that it was a TAX HIKE because the effective rate was lower than that.
These people won't be happy no matter what.
28% base and 25% for manufacturing. Somehow I am not surprised some people here never heard of theses repeated proposals to cut taxes, and of GOP repeated refusal to agree to it.
Why not make it a even playing field and have a 0% tax rate?
Because there is this thing called reality. I am with you I would love this idea and I am also with you on cutting spending big time. But there is another view on the direction of the country lead by the {D}s and neither idea will see the light of day. I do not think we are going to see one party in the majority of both houses and the POTUS for a long time, and the clock is ticking. So what is left? there has to be horse trading where one party gets this but gives up that.
Last edited by Swingblade; 11-26-2013 at 05:00 AM..
The tax rate means nothing as long as the loop holes are in place, just look at the list of corporations that paid 0 in taxes and a couple received a refund. Mitt ran all over the country saying he was going to close loop holes but never did get around telling us which ones. That message is good populism rhetoric just like Obama used re negotiating NAFTA in 2008 and we have not heard him even mention NAFTA since. That is because it is good campaign rhetoric and Mitt and {R}s were never ever serious about closing loop holes, I laughed at Mitt the first time I heard it. I mean Mitt paid like 17.4% in taxes using said loop holes, a person would have to be lobotomized to fall for this type of populist rhetoric.
Agreed. Both candidates said the same thing:
1. Cut the tax rate
2. Remove the loopholes
Ironically GOP supported it when Mitt said it, and opposed it as soon as Mitt lost the race. Whether or not Mitt would actually have cut the rates and loop holes is speculation. We will never know.
28% base and 25% for manufacturing. Somehow I am not surprised some people here never heard of theses repeated proposals to cut taxes, and of GOP repeated refusal to agree to it.
Finn...they heard about it. They're just playing dumb.
I haven't even attempted to look for the thread, but someone made one and it went a whole bunch of pages. The same crowd that is claiming that they've never heard of the proposal were all on deck in the other thread as being against it because they claimed that the effective rate was already lower than the Obama proposal....effectively making the statutory tax rate proposal a tax hike.
And they were quite trucculent in that thread too...
That's only because you're looking at the statutory rate. The effective rate with the various deductions and benefits they get is on par with the developed world. Don't think that the Googles and Apples of the world would be idiots enough to headquarter here if they were being treated so unfairly compared to other parts of the world where they could set up shop. With offshoring and all kinds of other tax shelters, they can get their effective tax rates down well below the official rate on paper.
You are aware the starts up and entrepreneurs don't have the money to spend on armies of lawyers and account, so who does that hurt? who supports high rates and loopholes?
Because there is this thing called reality. I am with you I would love this idea and I am also with you on cutting spending big time. But there is another view on the direction of the country lead by the {D}s and neither idea will see the light of day. I do not think we are going to see one party in the majority of both houses and the POTUS for a long time, and the clock is ticking. So what is left? there has to be horse trading where one party gets this but gives up that.
Corporations use public resources, why shouldn't they pay for the use of those resources?
Because they produce jobs, products, and services. All of which are necessary for the country. And the higher the tax rate they pay, the less competitive they are against the corporations of other nations, the more attractive outsourcing is, and the less attractive it is to be headquartered in America and keep profits in America. Perhaps you remember a couple of years ago the scandal with GM paying no tax because they kept billions of dollars outside the country? If the tax rate were lowered, those billions would be in our economy instead of in another nation's economy.
You remind me of Obama and capital gains tax. I saw a clip of him being asked about it. The guy said statistics show that higher capital gains taxes are shown to produce less revenue and then asked Obama how he felt. Obama said he'd still raise the taxes because of fairness.
He's going to raise a tax rate even though he knows beforehand that it will produce the opposite of the intended effect, and it will provide less revenue to the government, purely so that he can make a speech about how he's making the rich pay their fair share. Even though they aren't actually paying it. That's the moron we have in the White House.
we should end the payroll tax, because there's a tax on "job creators" if there ever was one ---
and then we should flatten out the rate between personal dividends, cap gains, and wage income, as well as corporate income
and then you've got a whole book's worth of loopholes and deductions to eliminate, both corporate and personal, at all income levels.
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.
