The White House and Congressional Democrats are supporting the Republican move for corporate tax cuts. Why? In a bit of perverse and idiotic logic: so corporations won’t hire creative accountants.
Republicans are looking to cut the corporate income tax from 35% to 25%, while Democrats are looking for a smaller rate cut, according to the Los Angeles Times. This despite the fact that corporations already pay a criminally low share of the federal taxes.
The move, apparently, is designed so that smaller corporations can remain competitive internationally. Whether this is true or not is rather irrelevant, because what will undoubtedly happen is that competitive corporations (those currently making great profits in the recession), will now have more money to sprinkle as bonuses to their employees.
And this will not stop them from lowering their effective tax rate even further through creative accountants, who make their business finding and exploiting loopholes. Not to worry, though, for Republicans and Democrats aim to close the loopholes. Nonsense. Poppycock.
If there is one truism in legislation, it’s that you can never entirely close loopholes. This is empty talk to appease American taxpayers, especially the middle class, who will be stuck forking over even more of the lion’s share of the taxes.
Should Americans be incensed at this move? Absolutely.
The oligarchical swindle continues.
April 20, 2011 at 7:29 pm, Zach Stein said:
How about we just criminalize tax accountancy and categorize all types of income the same way?
April 20, 2011 at 7:29 pm, Jared Karney said:
Not one piece of intellect in this poorly written editorial. What makes these taxes “criminally low?” Also, where do you think the money that is “sprinkled” to their employees goes? Does it just stay in their pockets to never see the light of day? No, it gets spent on products that are made by the middle class. Also, it is ignorant to think that these companies would simply spend the extra money on bonuses. Chances are they will use this money to expand and hire more middle class employees.
April 20, 2011 at 7:33 pm, Pegasus said:
Yeah, because that philosophy has worked so well over the last 30 years. Ever since Raygun started this “trickle down” nonsense, the middle-class has suffered. Real income falling for everyone but those in the upper stratosphere. Every honest graphic you look at says the same thing. But here’s an idea, lets give them more because it’s working so well.
April 20, 2011 at 7:40 pm, yep said:
The trickle down would of worked if it trickled down instead of trickled overseas.
April 20, 2011 at 7:45 pm, Ryan Wills said:
“But here’s an idea, lets give them more because it’s working so well.”
I’m not sure whether to be more baffled by the conflation of giving for not taking or the implicit assumption that the burden of corporate taxation lies squarely upon the shoulders of high-level employees/managers.
April 20, 2011 at 7:29 pm, Jared Karney said:
Not one piece of intellect in this poorly written editorial. What makes these taxes “criminally low?” Also, where do you think the money that is “sprinkled” to their employees goes? Does it just stay in their pockets to never see the light of day? No, it gets spent on products that are made by the middle class. Also, it is ignorant to think that these companies would simply spend the extra money on bonuses. Chances are they will use this money to expand and hire more middle class employees.
April 20, 2011 at 7:29 pm, Guest said:
This is a misrepresentation and a lie…
April 20, 2011 at 7:29 pm, Guest said:
This is a misrepresentation and a lie…
April 20, 2011 at 7:30 pm, tired of it all said:
I cant wait till the chinese take over cuz were just a bunch of dumb sobs
April 20, 2011 at 7:30 pm, Yeah! said:
Get rid of all corporations! They are ruining America!
April 20, 2011 at 7:49 pm, Vladimir said:
YES, AND PROCEED TO SOCIALISM,
Sorry you are complete ignorant.
April 20, 2011 at 7:30 pm, Yeah! said:
Get rid of all corporations! They are ruining America!
April 20, 2011 at 7:30 pm, Yeah! said:
Get rid of all corporations! They are ruining America!
April 20, 2011 at 7:33 pm, Ari Asulin said:
Article Summary:
I’m not going to explain why, or cite anything, but
closing loopholes is impossible to do in an absolute sense.
thus, we should never even try at all ever!
also democrats have perverse logic
also democrats want what republicans want anyway
so vote republican!
April 20, 2011 at 7:34 pm, Edandceil said:
Excuse me? Corporations need a tax cut like I need another hole in my head!
How about getting many of these corporations to pay taxes!
There really isn’t a budget problem, there is an income problem, FIX IT!
April 22, 2011 at 8:24 pm, Eddy said:
You are joking right? There is most definitely a spending problem. What don’t you get about the government spending more and more money. That is a fact and we could spend just as much as we did early on in the last decade and be totally comfortable as a nation financially. However, Obama and the Dems like to pretend they beat up on corporations but Wall Street donates more to Dems than Republicans and Obama is great friends with Jeffrey Imelt whose little company, ahem GE, paid $0 in taxes all the while getting sweet government contracts with this administration.
April 27, 2011 at 4:30 pm, Robbie C said:
You are joking right? You know the “spending” problem is that we spend TRILLIONS of dollars on the military industrial complex and corporate welfare, right? That’s what we’ve spent money on for the past decade. $300 for community health centers is not the problem, that’s less than $1 per person in this country. That is a drop in the bucket in a multi-trillion dollar economy. But it is a health care avenue for A LOT of struggling Americans. The spending problem is not on roads, health care for seniors or education for idiots like yourself (clearly), it’s SO THE RICH CAN CONTINUE TO LINE THEIR POCKETS AT OUR EXPENSE. But there’s no point in arguing this point any more. Hey, isn’t there a birth certificate for you to look into? Now I hear there’s something about college records that looks a little fishy. And Palin’s reality show. And Trump’s! Ooooh!
April 20, 2011 at 7:34 pm, Edandceil said:
Excuse me? Corporations need a tax cut like I need another hole in my head!
How about getting many of these corporations to pay taxes!
There really isn’t a budget problem, there is an income problem, FIX IT!
April 20, 2011 at 7:34 pm, Edandceil said:
Excuse me? Corporations need a tax cut like I need another hole in my head!
How about getting many of these corporations to pay taxes!
There really isn’t a budget problem, there is an income problem, FIX IT!
April 20, 2011 at 7:38 pm, Jmerritt said:
Corporation don’t pay taxes only people pay taxes. That has always been the case and will always be the case.
April 20, 2011 at 7:43 pm, tired of it all said:
I suggest we all buy the chinese version of rossetta stone so we can understand our new masters when they get here.This country needs to dissolve the people who call the shots dont care about the average american and just keep sellin us out,yet they wave the flag like they are bigger patriots then goerge washington and everything they do says open to the highest bidder.
April 20, 2011 at 9:29 pm, Ryan Wills said:
What is it exactly that you’d like to see the “people calling the shots” do?
April 21, 2011 at 1:15 am, tired of it all said:
get their heads outta their ass and quit giving tax breaks to corporations and passing it on to working people.There wont be enough revenue from the poorly paid workers to cover our debt to the chinese if they leave out the corporations.Hey I heard MCdonalds was hirin 50000 people today are they gettin a tax break for it?Pretty soon the mexicans and chinese will move the factorys back here because of all the cheap labor so I guess it will go full circle and maybe all the people in my comune will get a job.Did I spell that right?
April 21, 2011 at 1:16 pm, Ryan Wills said:
“quit giving tax breaks to corporations and passing it on to working people.”
And who is it, exactly, that you think pays corporate taxes? Where does that money come from?
“There wont be enough revenue from the poorly paid workers to cover our debt to the chinese if they leave out the corporations”
Well, not if they keep spending this much money at least. That being said, at least on the federal level, the effective income tax outlays from the bottom 40% are roughly negative….so it doesn’t seem like the poor are really going to have to pay directly. But if you manage to increase corporate taxes they will – with every single thing they buy.
“Pretty soon the mexicans and chinese will move the factorys back here because of all the cheap labor”
Doubtful (at least not with our system of minimum wage). Either way, I’m not sure what point you’re making there.
April 20, 2011 at 7:46 pm, LonewolfinAZ said:
I will support a lower tax ceiling if they agree to an absolute minimum. Like GE making billions and paying 0% taxes. Lets agree to the 10% drop and have a minimum of 10% payed. No matter what you have to at least pay 10%. Gas, oil, banking, who have made trillions over the last 10 years and paid very little is sickening.
April 20, 2011 at 8:04 pm, Conway The Contaminationist said:
Friend,
April 20, 2011 at 9:26 pm, Ryan Wills said:
Don’t even try to introduce logic or basic economics here – you won’t get very far.
April 20, 2011 at 11:55 pm, Officious_pedant said:
So, then, there is no corporate personhood, and all the wealth accumulated by the company is distributed to the bank accounts of employees and shareholders? Decisions like Citizens United and 118 US 394, which, while not declaring them a “person” specifically, did state that they were entitled to the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment, put paid to that line of thought.
But lets think about this: you seem to be saying that all costs to the corporation is passed on to the customer, as the cost of doing business. What about Pentagon contracts? This is the people’s business, and paid with the people’s business, yes? But any markups, cost overruns, or fraud get passed on directly, as they should be? It strike me that perhaps YOU may have a flawed grasp of economics.
April 21, 2011 at 7:36 am, Conway The Contaminationist said:
It strikes me that you are splitting hairs, and do not realize that, regardless of corporations attaining “personhood”, corporations are not people by any measure of the word, regardless of semantical sophistry promulgated by clever lawyers and politicians. Further, you seem to be the one with a very flawed grasp of economics, and prefer to employ straw arguments in a dubious attempt to cloud the issue.
In other words, one can call a bucket of feces gold if they wish, but in the end, it will still be excrement, just like your hackneyed, liberal argument seems to be.
April 20, 2011 at 8:05 pm, tired of it all said:
what did ya think of the learn chinese idea??Anybody??
April 20, 2011 at 8:38 pm, Conway The Contaminationist said:
The Chinese (read Asians) will eventually conquer the planet and exterminate those they consider a threat to their worldview and sub-species of hominid, e.g., Caucasoids, Negroids, and most anything else not considered “Asian”. Not a pleasing prospect for the above described “outsiders”, but it is seemingly inevitable if I read the race of man correctly – that is, mostly hairless, self-centered, apelike savages who enjoy killing each other, regardless of race or ethnicity. Darwin’s assertion that the fittest of man will supplant all other competitors will happen; there will be no need for the conquered to learn Chinese, unless they decide to keep some of the above chattel as slaves, which are easily replaced by machines anyway.
April 21, 2011 at 1:20 am, tired of it all said:
But I kinda dig chinese chicks
April 21, 2011 at 6:11 am, Conway The Contaminationist said:
A lot of them are cute, that’s a fact.
April 21, 2011 at 1:33 am, tired of it all said:
What about the muslims?Maybe they will beat them to the punch.What are the numbers 3billion chinese,2billion muslims?Were screwed.
April 21, 2011 at 6:19 am, Conway The Contaminationist said:
Moslems are too busy rioting or praying to their god, that is when not treating women like dirt, beheading folks or building suicide bombs – the Asians will simply employ atomic weapons on them when the time comes, you know, like neutron bombs – then it’s goodbye to impotent Allah, the Koran, and Mohammed’s delusional minions.
Oh well, if I’m still around when that draconian scenario happens, I can’t say I’ll miss our good natured, peace loving Moslem friends…not one bit.
April 21, 2011 at 1:45 am, Steve Foerster said:
My teenage son is learning Chinese in school. I’m glad it’s his favorite subject, since it may be the most important things he studies there.
April 21, 2011 at 2:07 am, tired of it all said:
wow smart kid steve.what do you think of chinese medicine it cant be any worse than our health care?Might be somthin to throw at your son for future reference.I do like my new chinese toolbox I bought at harbor freight this weekend for half the price of an american one too.
April 21, 2011 at 1:45 am, Steve Foerster said:
My teenage son is learning Chinese in school. I’m glad it’s his favorite subject, since it may be the most important things he studies there.
April 20, 2011 at 8:25 pm, Jack said:
The loopholes can be closed by simplifying the tax code. All that needs to be done is switch to a flat tax on corporate earnings (not profits). Lower the flat rate to something like 10 – 15% and wipe away all forms of deductions. If a corporation has 1 billion in sales for a quarter they have to pay 100 – 150 million in taxes that quarter, period.
Taxes then become a simple cost of doing business rather than something you spend large amounts of money and time trying to work around.
Decisions such as hiring employees, purchasing new equipment, opening new locations, etc. would be based solely on business needs/plans rather than how they impact taxes.
April 20, 2011 at 9:38 pm, Conway The Contaminationist said:
Jack,
The glaring problem with your scenario is that any taxes levied on any corporation will be passed on to the consumer in the next quarter, as a cost of doing business, period.
Once again, the people pay, and always will pay, regardless of the method employed.
The solution to the problem is simple – governments should live within their means, as all we lowly subjects are advised to do by our esteemed “leaders”.
Oh silly me – I forgot – “Do as I say, not as I do” – the very definition of the lying, power-mad, hypocritical politician, regardless of party.
April 21, 2011 at 2:03 am, Jack said:
Conway,
All cost of doing business is passed along to the customer, including taxes. Trying to make an argument that corporations shouldn’t be taxed simply due to them passing the cost along to consumers is just silly. You could say that about any cost a corporation has.
To take your argument a bit farther one could conclude that all things produced by corporations should be free to the consumer. Which is really closer to a socialist type economy.
Keep in mind that corporations/businesses are heavy users of public resources as well, think infrastructure/energy/environment type things here.
April 21, 2011 at 6:10 am, Conway The Contaminationist said:
I didn’t say and never once have said that corporations shouldn’t be taxed. Don’t try putting words in my mouth friend; I simply said that ALL costs of doing business, including taxes, are passed down to those use their products/services, period.
If you don’t understand that, try re-reading what I have written.
In other words, in the end, the consumer gets screwed, while politicians laugh at idiotic fools who cry “more corporate taxes”. Such stupidity gets them off the hook for being undisciplined spendthrifts, little more than lying scoundrels out only for themselves.
April 20, 2011 at 9:39 pm, Conway The Contaminationist said:
Ryan,
Truer words have not been said.
April 20, 2011 at 9:46 pm, Ryan Wills said:
If you’re aim is to soak the rich, whether for utilitarian or retributive purposes, then your best bet is to install solid non-exceptional tiers of progressive taxation on incomes and capital gains. I’m not into that kind of thing as I’m not the kind of guy who likes going around kicking over other peoples’ sand-castles simply because they make more/better ones. But the point still stands. If you’re dumb enough to hurt the average person indirectly with bad tax policies, at least have the tenacity to not hurt them directly through a simple misunderstanding of economics. Pushing for higher rates of corporate taxation to get at the rich is like flooding a baseball stadium to piss off the coaches.
April 20, 2011 at 11:44 pm, Officious_pedant said:
This may very well be the most cognitively dissonant thing I’ve read in a while. How is asking the wealthy to pay their share “soaking” them. You would think that a group controlling more than 40% of all the wealth in this country, and able to spend no little of it to put forward legislation that benefits them, could manage to pay more. Not out of some atavistic assault on them, but because they use more fuel to run their fleet of trucks, they put more wear on the roads, they get choice deals on land and mineral rights, etc. They consume more of this economy, and extract more from it. It says something about you, and people like you, that asking them to pay for the privilege of doing so is “soaking” them.
April 21, 2011 at 7:40 am, Conway The Contaminationist said:
Oh my, what a Marxian worldview you have.
April 21, 2011 at 1:05 pm, Ryan Wills said:
And, of course, I accidentally replied to my original post
April 21, 2011 at 1:04 pm, Ryan Wills said:
“How is asking the wealthy to pay their share “soaking” them.”
I didn’t say it was (although I believe more often than not it is). That’s why I started my response with “if.” It wasn’t a coincidence. But if you can get over the “soaking” terminology I’ll forgive your “their share” terminology and we can move on.
“You would think that a group controlling more than 40% of all the wealth in this country, and able to spend no little of it to put forward legislation that benefits them, could manage to pay more.”
Technically they already pay disproportionately more than almost anyone else. That being said, exactly how much theft do you think is appropriate? 30%? 50%? 80%? I suppose that leading up to %100 a thief can always take more – but I wasn’t aware that the point of government was to take as much as people can afford. Maybe we should be re-assessing the role of government if we’re asking what people can “manage to pay.”
That being said, the conversation was more specifically about corporate taxation – which, as many have pointed out, is a terrible proxy for extracting wealth from the rich if that’s your aim. That point still stands regardless of how you feel about the rich.
“Not out of some atavistic assault on them, but because they use more fuel to run their fleet of trucks, they put more wear on the roads, they get choice deals on land and mineral rights, etc. ”
Which (except for the first point) is precisely why much of that should be privatized – so the social/political externalities aren’t pushed onto the public. The public road system itself is a redistribution of wealth; transportation that disproportionately benefits businesses being largely subsidized by citizens. They get choice land deals because there is a dual standard of land ownership, and because there is an enormous amount of land which, in fact, isn’t public land but land homesteaded by the institution we call government – and there is a quite a distinction between the two.
Unfortunately the solution that seems to be put forth here is growing that same government’s reach and control and hoping that benevolent agents therein rise to the occasional. I guess I’m just more skeptical than most.
“They consume more of this economy, and extract more from it.”
Well, I’d hope so – they’re called “producers” and “capitalists” for a reason. do you think they’re just buying up empty warehouses and stockpiling rocks and dirt there?
“It says something about you, and people like you, that asking them to pay for the privilege of doing so is “soaking” them.”
Firstly, as far as I know, producing “stuff” to give the world isn’t a privilege. You have the right to mix your labor with the world around you and trade with others – yes, even if you’re particularly good at it. And regarding direct taxation, again, they already pay more than their fair share. The only relative “privilege” that I see is in the form of misguided government programs and policies that directly and indirectly subsidize them – but you don’t seem to want to address those problems.
Road usage, patent and copyright law, research subsidies, appropriation of public land, systematic inflation, monetary arbitrage, eminent domain, and on, and on, and on…
“It says something about you, and people like you, that asking them to pay for the privilege of doing so is “soaking” them.”
And it says something about you, and people like you, that you are so blinded by your class-warfare mentality that you can’t sort out the consequences of your misguided policy prescriptions.
If it doesn’t occur to you that corporate taxes are paid primarily by customers, shareholders, and employees, then you’re being naive.
If it doesn’t occur to you that increasing the cost of business will discourage people from investing or conducting business at the margin, then you’re being naive
If it doesn’t occur to you that, because of economies of scale, huge corporations generally benefit from competition-killing legislation (mandates, regulations, taxes, licensing, etc…) at the expense of employees, customers, and small businesses alike, then you’re being naive.
In summation, if your intention is to give people a more level playing-field then tax-policy is simply ineffectual. And if you don’t understand how closely tied business is to government, and how business uses the strong hand of government to channel capital, then you will always be a slave to those poor solutions, and you will continue to support policies that do roughly the opposite of what you’re trying to achieve. Then again you, like many other people who think along that narrow line, don’t seem to have “leveling the playing-field” as your primary intention either.
So yes, judging from your response, the terminology of “soaking” the rich is more than accurate – it’s apt.
April 20, 2011 at 10:29 pm, Stuhly said:
Is it possible that any company might spend their savings on creating more jobs? After all the more people they employ the even more money they can make….greedy sobs nonetheless. Also is it possible that the employees getting the bonuses are the middle class?
April 21, 2011 at 1:43 am, Steve Foerster said:
Will they create jobs to be nice people? No. Will they do it because they need more labor to expand their operations? Yes. They don’t have to be altruists to do that that are beneficial to others.
April 21, 2011 at 10:35 pm, john charles webb jr said:
The Law That Never Was: The Fraud of the 16th Amendment and Personal Income Tax is a 1985 book by William J. Benson and Martin J. “Red” Beckman which claims that the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, commonly known as the income tax amendment, was never properly ratified.
FROM : > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Law_that_Never_Was
The Premise
The authority of the federal government to collect its income tax depends upon the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the federal income tax amendment, which was allegedly ratified in 1913. After a year of extensive research, Bill Benson discovered that the 16th Amendment was not ratified by the required 3/4 of the states, but nevertheless Secretary of State Philander Knox fraudulently announced ratification.
FROM: > http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/new/home.asp
THE TRUTH IS THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT WOULD PERMIT THE “DIRECT TAX” (WAGES) OF CITIZENS WAS NEVER RATIFIED BY THE SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF STATES (AT THE TIME) :
WHO WOULD VOTE (?) TO HAVE THEIR INCOME TAXED ?
WE HAVE BEEN GIVING OUR INCOMES (UN-CONSTITUTIONALLY) TO THE GOVERNMENT , WHICH THEN TURNS IT OVER TO “GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS” (BIG BUSINESS).
April 21, 2011 at 10:45 pm, john charles webb jr said:
repeat : OUR GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN ‘HI-JACKED’ BY CAPITALIST BUSINESSMEN :
CALLED “SENATORS” AND “REPRESENTATIVES” .
(stockholders)
April 21, 2011 at 10:47 pm, john charles webb jr said:
makes you just “WANT TO GO BOWLING” .
April 22, 2011 at 2:53 pm, Zach Stein said:
It’s OK you can remove the tinfoil hat… I promise the government can hear your brainwaves regardless.
April 27, 2011 at 4:25 pm, Robbie C said:
I love seeing interweb comment boards littered with people arguing that corporations shouldn’t pay any taxes. Hahahaha.. Or that the rich should pay less! Absolutely hilarious. The education cuts have worked, Republicans! You have succeeded beautifully. The people are truly dumb, and you your cronies are getting wealthier and wealthier. And we will apparently gladly suffer for you. Congratulations. And our supposedly “liberal” – nay, MARXIST/SOCIALIST – president will give you MORE tax cuts, and will simultaneously cut tiny little drops-in-the-bucket aimed at feeding infants born into poverty, and community health centers. Wow. The republic is dead, folks. And there was never any saving it.