The U.S. Has the Highest Corporate Income Tax Rate in the world (Corporate Profit, lobby)
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.
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
In your example investing
That $1000 is wealth. $900 of the wealth is invested and produced an income of $100. Which is taxed? The $1000 in wealth or the $100 income?
The rich already have wealth which they invest to produce more wealth. The middle class is still trying to build their wealth. They are working to produce an income of say, $1000.00 which is taxed. After taxes they have $850.00 left.
The same people each starting with $1000 different ability to invest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan
Wealth is taxed. The most common are property taxes and car taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan
So what are you proposing? Their houses are taxed, their cars are taxed (depending on state), their income is taxed, their 401(k) contributions are either taxed, or will be taxed, their dividends are taxed and their stock will be taxed when they sell it. Are you saying everything they own they should be taxed simply because they own it?
You said that wealthy pay taxed based on property taxes insinuating that the wealthy pay according to their wealth (wealth tax).
wow, you get confused easily. The whole point is if you don't already have wealth and are trying to make it in this country (small business etc) you are screwed because of the high taxes. High taxes is killing the American dream. The wealthy are already wealthy and they can easily get around high taxes. I've shown a few examples of the hypocritical rich liberal doing just that. The little guy is paying the bill.
You said that wealthy pay taxed based on property taxes insinuating that the wealthy pay according to their wealth (wealth tax).
Um, no. Actually what I was insinuating is that "wealth taxes" aren't some new concept. We already have them and they are called property taxes. Are you now complaining that the wealthy might not be taxed enough because they might live in less expensive homes?
Um, no. Actually what I was insinuating is that "wealth taxes" aren't some new concept. We already have them and they are called property taxes. Are you now complaining that the wealthy might not be taxed enough because they might live in less expensive homes?
You are attempting to call property tax a "wealth tax"... wrong. "The Millionaire Next Door". Your jumping to another conclusion is simply an attempt to try to cover up that you were wr... wrroo... wrong.
Property taxes is a wealth tax.
It's based on the value of your home..a value the county puts on it.
Ok so lets say I am a millionaire but I own and live in a run down shack, valued at say 40k. It is not based on my wealth, it is based on the property I live in and own (a very small portion). If you want to say it is a wealth tax then it does not equate to my total wealth.
Lets say I am your average joe. I am in debt up to my eyeballs to buy a mcmansion but I am taxed on the property. This is not wealth, this is poor money management and poverty in my eyes.
France only taxes them on profits made in France.
The US taxes worldwide profits as soon as it hits our shores.
U.S. corporations theoretically owe U.S. corporate income tax on all of their profits, wherever they are earned, with two important caveats:
U.S. corporations never face “double taxation” by two different nations. They are entitled to a foreigntax credit that reduces their U.S. tax liability by the amount of tax paid to foreign jurisdictions, and
A provision known as “deferral” allows U.S. corporations to delay paying taxes on their foreign income for long periods of time or even indefinitely. This means that companies can avoid paying U.S. corporate tax on any profits that they book (record for tax accounting purposes) as overseas profits earned by controlled foreign subsidiaries. The deferred tax is only triggered if a U.S. parent corporation repatriates its foreign subsidiary’s profits, bringing them back onto the parent company’s balance sheet. This gives corporations an enormous incentive to shift profits onto the balance sheets of their foreign subsidiaries and leave them there as long as possible.
Than money is recorded on a foreign subsidiary's balance sheet does not mean the actual money sits in a bank in a foreign nation.
Trapped offshore profits are an accounting illusion.
Apple is a perfect example. They maintain and control two Irish subsidiaries. The balance sheets of these subs show more than $100 billion permanently invested overseas. Yet the actual funds are in a NY bank who in turn makes loans to other corporations and small businesses. And it's all legal.
The likes of big corporate America has no problem with the current tax code because it allows them to defer taxes on profits indefinitely, while investing those profits in the U.S.
Ok so lets say I am a millionaire but I own and live in a run down shack, valued at say 40k. It is not based on my wealth, it is based on the property I live in and own (a very small portion). If you want to say it is a wealth tax then it does not equate to my total wealth.
Lets say I am your average joe. I am in debt up to my eyeballs to buy a mcmansion but I am taxed on the property. This is not wealth, this is poor money management and poverty in my eyes.
It is a wealth tax on the value of your home.
That's why it pays for rich people to live in middle class or lower homes.
Go read The Millionaire Next Door.
Smart people keep their money.
It's the VALUE of your home which is part of your net worth which is WEALTH.
U.S. corporations theoretically owe U.S. corporate income tax on all of their profits, wherever they are earned, with two important caveats:
U.S. corporations never face “double taxation” by two different nations. They are entitled to a foreigntax credit that reduces their U.S. tax liability by the amount of tax paid to foreign jurisdictions, and
A provision known as “deferral” allows U.S. corporations to delay paying taxes on their foreign income for long periods of time or even indefinitely. This means that companies can avoid paying U.S. corporate tax on any profits that they book (record for tax accounting purposes) as overseas profits earned by controlled foreign subsidiaries. The deferred tax is only triggered if a U.S. parent corporation repatriates its foreign subsidiary’s profits, bringing them back onto the parent company’s balance sheet. This gives corporations an enormous incentive to shift profits onto the balance sheets of their foreign subsidiaries and leave them there as long as possible.
Than money is recorded on a foreign subsidiary's balance sheet does not mean the actual money sits in a bank in a foreign nation.
Trapped offshore profits are an accounting illusion.
Apple is a perfect example. They maintain and control two Irish subsidiaries. The balance sheets of these subs show more than $100 billion permanently invested overseas. Yet the actual funds are in a NY bank who in turn makes loans to other corporations and small businesses. And it's all legal.
The likes of big corporate America has no problem with the current tax code because it allows them to defer taxes on profits indefinitely, while investing those profits in the U.S.
Oh there's a lot more companies than Apple doing it.
Over $2 trillion in corporate profits are now being held in other countries.
And if the US didn't go after foreign profits there would be no need for any "credits" to offset profits not earned in the US.
investment? lololol, you do realize this is the "worst" recovery on record right? So where are all those jobs? Your theory is proven wrong. It encourages big companies moving main operations overseas to countries of lower corporate tax rates. It encourages companies keeping that money overseas and not bringing money back to the U.S. If you bring money back to the U.S. and the government takes a huge chunk you would keep it there too. Wake up!
For small business it encourages hoarding of what's left after the government take.
Actually each year under Obama more jobs are created then in the eight years of the shrub. Also gdp growth is better then under Bush.
Here is the thing gdp growth and often job growth was way higher when taxes were higher then they are now.
Crops paid more in taxes decades ago and more of the tax revenue was from corps. Now it's individuals not corps that pay the lion's shares of tax revenue.
Profits from corps is taxed not revenue. So in order to avoid paying the 90% marginal tax rate the rich would heavily invest and hire people in order to limit profits in the short term. Long term these investments and hiring of people would pay off.
Now due to the ridiculously low taxes we have corps and the rich see that they can get more money not by investing and hiring people but hording the money.
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.
