taxation

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Well duh. Wouldn't back up his argument if he didn't.

I would support a 9% sales tax on everything like in your tax heavy country similar to a VAT. So tell us how that has worked out for your country and it's current situation? Has it fixed your problems?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

How does a "tax holiday" benefit the country ...
other than giving the corporations that "avoided" US taxes yet one more freebie ?

How is it a "freebie" when we charge among the highest of tax rates for corps?

By giving them a tax holiday they are encouraged to bring their offshore dollars back into the country, at a low rate, to reinvest in their own countries which create jobs. Understand?

[classicman]

Lets just do whatever Greece isn't.

[BigV]

Hey mercy--I know words can have multiple meanings, I'm sure that's where we are failing to connect on this point. "most" (most of what?) "more" (more than what?) "taxes" (federal, income, payroll, excise, etc, etc).

Here are three simple pictures I hope will illustrate my point.

As you can see,

In illustration #1, 46.4% of Households Will Pay No Federal Income Tax for 2011

But as you can see in Illustration #2, Nearly Two-Thirds of Households That Will Pay No Income Tax Will Pay Payroll Taxes

Illustration #3 shows (here's the money shot, if you'll pardon the pun) Who Will Pay Neither Income Nor Payroll Taxes?

Here's my math on this.

53.6% pay fed income tax
28.3% pay fed payroll tax
-------------------------
81.9% pay federal tax

81.9% of households pay federal tax. "Most" of "those" paying "most" of the "taxes" are paying most of the taxes. Or, you know, whatever. When we sit down for pie and coffee, I'll let you cut the pie, but I'm gonna pick my piece first.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

How is it a "freebie" when we charge among the highest of tax rates for corps?

By giving them a tax holiday they are encouraged to bring their offshore dollars back into the country, at a low rate, to reinvest in their own countries which create jobs. Understand?

I think I should have a tax holiday too! I'm a corporation! No, wait, I'm a person, dammit.

Back to the tax holiday. What a crock of shit proposal. Why, tell me why again this money is out there, shivering in the cold, wanting to get "in"? Later, later. Look. The US Chamber of Commerce is suggesting that the law be changed to let these profits be repatriated and taxed at a rate of 5.25%. Why?

Why is 5.25% an acceptable figure for the corporations? Because it's a screamin deal, that's why. I alluded to a fair pie sharing algorithm in a recent post, here's my twist on that for this tax holiday.

Let's have a tax holiday for all these profits that have been expatriated. But tax them at a rate that they say they've been paying for the last few years already. I'm guessing that no corporation will claim that they've been paying 35%, the shareholders would arise with pitchforks and torches. In fact, I believe this number is already what they believe they have been paying, about 5%. They just want, you know, amnesty for being caught on the wrong side of the border.

Why should we offer a holiday at all? What fucking good have tax breaks for filers with kabillions of dollars done for me lately? Hey, why would the corps want the money back anyhow? Especially if they know it will be taxed? Isn't that a net loss for them? They already freakin earned the money, why offer it up to the government? What is their motivation? You know, the last time this was done for them, they used the money to buy back their own stock. They used the cash to increase the value of their shares, not to "create jobs". And that was a measly $400 billion. This is triple that amount. Why should we fall for that crap again?

And it's not liike the money is sitting in a sailboat in the marina in Bermuda. The actual money's on deposit in banks here, like in New York. It's just classified as owned by Offshore LLC or whatever.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I would support a 9% sales tax on everything like in your tax heavy country similar to a VAT. So tell us how that has worked out for your country and it's current situation? Has it fixed your problems?

That would suppose that there was a time just before our current major problems when we didn't have VAT, and attempted to counter that with the addition of VAT, the results of which are simple, measurable and ready to be trotted out on a message board.

We've had VAT for a very long time. Almost 40 years. During the time that we've had VAT our economy has been great and it's been awful, and great, and awful again.

We are currently dealing with an economic situation that has been created at an international level. Whether we add extra VAT is neither here nor there on the grand scale. It can help bring in some extra revenue (though not a masive amount) and likewise reductions in VAT can boost sales and encourage growth. But not by vast amounts.

The most noticable and contested taxes are income tax (per individual) council tax (per household) and National Insurance (per employee, and per employer).

So, no. VAT hasn't solved our economic problems. It's just there. It goes up and it goes down according to the needs of the economy, but it's just there. Good or bad, fair weather or fine, we still have VAT.

What changes is the rate of VAT. Currently it's pretty high. 20% on most stuff. With some stuff exempt (such as books) and some stuff charged at a lower rate (5%).

We don;t really tend to notice VAT that much in day to day shopping. We notice it on our bills for stuff (like utility bills). Or if we buy a high ticket item, such as a car or computer. But for lower end shopping, the VAT doesn't show on the price tag. It's just included in the price. We only notice it on high ticket items because they usually give an item value then an item value with VAT underneath.


Tell you what though: though our tax system hasn't 'solved' the problem(?) and though we do have areas of high deprivation, what we don't have is tent cities full of people who've been abandoned to their fate. Or sports halls playing host to drop in medicine for which the poor queue round the block for half a day for their occasional chance of diagnosis.

[Undertoad]

Those phenomenon were isolated incidents.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

How is it a "freebie" when we charge among the highest of tax rates for corps?

By giving them a tax holiday they are encouraged to bring their offshore dollars back into the country, at a low rate, to reinvest in their own countries which create jobs. Understand?

Here's how it's a freebie.

I (not a corporation) have a pool of money that has NOT been taxed by the government, it's called my 401k account. Shielding that money from taxes was done legally. I can't access that money to do things like pay my mortgage, or create jobs, or buy food or whatever. I want that money now though, and if I access it, I will have to pay taxes on it as regular income (at more than 5.25%).

A corporation (not me) has a pool of money that has NOT been taxed by the government, it's called their offshore profits. Shielding that money from taxes was done legally. It can't access that money to do things like buy outstanding shares of stock, or create jobs, or pay executive bonuses or whatever. It wants that money now though, and to access it, it will have to pay taxes on it as regular profit (at more than 5.25%).

A tax holiday is just a giveaway of revenue that was due to the government (yes, due) at the time it was moved. The move did two things, avoid taxes and lock up the money. Locked up money is not very useful, not useLESS, just of limited use. For example, it can't be spent. And that's the main function of money, to be spent. Now, to spend this money, it has to "re-enter" our system. We already have rules for that, why do we, "the people", need a new rule? I can see why we, "the corporation", or we, "the 401k holder", would want a new rule, because we don't like the "cost" of the current rule. But those "costs" (penalties, taxes due, etc) were already known by the corporations and people that moved the money "out" of the system in the first place. Now we need a ... a... do-over? Cause, waaah, I changed my mind, I don't like the deal I accepted in the first place. *Sigh*.

We have a system for establishing and changing our rules, our laws. That system is in play now with lobbying efforts like the letter from the US Chamber of Commerce to the Congress. I just don't agree with their point that they need relief. I've looked at "the numbers" and I don't see how they're suffering, despite the enormous tide of propaganda to the contrary.

I don't think a tax holiday is needed for the corporations to continue to prosper. If they want that money, let them repatriate it through the already functioning system we already have in place.

[SamIam]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

How is it a "freebie" when we charge among the highest of tax rates for corps?

By giving them a tax holiday they are encouraged to bring their offshore dollars back into the country, at a low rate, to reinvest in their own countries which create jobs. Understand?

Tell that to Wal Mart. All a tax holiday will do is put more money in the pockets of CEO's. Corps will continue to out source jobs to countries where they can get away with paying workers .50/hr.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by BigV

Here's how it's a freebie.

I (not a corporation) have a pool of money that has NOT been taxed by the government, it's called my 401k account. Shielding that money from taxes was done legally. I can't access that money to do things like pay my mortgage, or create jobs, or buy food or whatever. I want that money now though, and if I access it, I will have to pay taxes on it as regular income (at more than 5.25%).

A corporation (not me) has a pool of money that has NOT been taxed by the government, it's called their offshore profits. Shielding that money from taxes was done legally. It can't access that money to do things like buy outstanding shares of stock, or create jobs, or pay executive bonuses or whatever. It wants that money now though, and to access it, it will have to pay taxes on it as regular profit (at more than 5.25%).

A tax holiday is just a giveaway of revenue that was due to the government (yes, due) at the time it was moved. The move did two things, avoid taxes and lock up the money. Locked up money is not very useful, not useLESS, just of limited use. For example, it can't be spent. And that's the main function of money, to be spent. Now, to spend this money, it has to "re-enter" our system. We already have rules for that, why do we, "the people", need a new rule? I can see why we, "the corporation", or we, "the 401k holder", would want a new rule, because we don't like the "cost" of the current rule. But those "costs" (penalties, taxes due, etc) were already known by the corporations and people that moved the money "out" of the system in the first place. Now we need a ... a... do-over? Cause, waaah, I changed my mind, I don't like the deal I accepted in the first place. *Sigh*.

We have a system for establishing and changing our rules, our laws. That system is in play now with lobbying efforts like the letter from the US Chamber of Commerce to the Congress. I just don't agree with their point that they need relief. I've looked at "the numbers" and I don't see how they're suffering, despite the enormous tide of propaganda to the contrary.

I don't think a tax holiday is needed for the corporations to continue to prosper. If they want that money, let them repatriate it through the already functioning system we already have in place.

You fail to recognize that our tax on the corps is among the highest in the world and there is no incentive for them to stay here. Many have left, many are leaving. Ireland has become the new corp tax haven. If they leave they leave with what little we get. The money parked offshore was done through legal means. I understand all that. You think we should make them bring it back and they should give our broken system of government more money to waste, I am not so sure about that. I think it has less to do with suffering of the corps and more to do with the normal process of generating money, which is what all businesses do, it is why they exist. Governments want to tax corps, corps try to figure out ways to shelter it. Until our tax system is completely overhauled and the laws changed, that money is not coming back.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

Tell that to Wal Mart. All a tax holiday will do is put more money in the pockets of CEO's. Corps will continue to out source jobs to countries where they can get away with paying workers .50/hr.

I don't really think that Walmart's business model operates on Out Sourcing jobs. I have not heard of any Big Box Walmart's in the US and suddenly opening up in China. Have you?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by BigV

Hey mercy--I know words can have multiple meanings, I'm sure that's where we are failing to connect on this point. "most" (most of what?) "more" (more than what?) "taxes" (federal, income, payroll, excise, etc, etc).

Here are three simple pictures I hope will illustrate my point.

As you can see,

In illustration #1, 46.4% of Households Will Pay No Federal Income Tax for 2011

But as you can see in Illustration #2, Nearly Two-Thirds of Households That Will Pay No Income Tax Will Pay Payroll Taxes

Illustration #3 shows (here's the money shot, if you'll pardon the pun) Who Will Pay Neither Income Nor Payroll Taxes?

Here's my math on this.

53.6% pay fed income tax
28.3% pay fed payroll tax
-------------------------
81.9% pay federal tax

81.9% of households pay federal tax. "Most" of "those" paying "most" of the "taxes" are paying most of the taxes. Or, you know, whatever. When we sit down for pie and coffee, I'll let you cut the pie, but I'm gonna pick my piece first.

I understand all that. The point remains that all those people who are paying the majority of Federal Income tax also Pay Payroll taxes. The point remains the majority of people do not pay Federal Income tax and I think everyone should pay through a system of flattening the tax system and elimination of many deductions. Start with the Mortgage deduction, that one alone would pull in a ton of money. Most people don't need it and it would have a minimal impact on the amount of tax they pay since it is not an increase in money you get back but an adjustment to your total income. The fact remains that a small minority of people pay ALL the Federal Income tax. People are not invested in this country when they don't pay into it.

[TheMercenary]

Remember now this is Obama's guy. His personal pic. The guy who is actively sending and creating jobs overseas, not here in the US. The king of outsourcing and dodging taxes.....

GE HEAD CALLS FOR LOWER CORP TAXES; BUT GE PAID ZERO!
Fri Oct 07 2011 14:17:58 ET

The corporate titan President Obama picked to help create millions of new jobs thinks lowering corporate taxes and eliminating all tax loopholes for U.S. companies will put more Americans to work. General Electric Chairman Jeff Immelt sits down with Lesley Stahl to discuss the creation of jobs, the U.S. business climate and his own company, General Electric, in a 60 MINUTES segment to be broadcast Sunday, Oct. 9 (7:00-8:00 PM, ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.

General Electric makes 60 percent of its profit overseas, where the corporate taxes are lower than in the U.S. Immelt thinks the U.S. needs to follow suit. “I think we should have basically the same tax policy that Germany, Japan, the UK – everybody else has, which is a tax rate in the mid-20s and no loopholes. Zero,” he tells Stahl. “The U.S. has the most antiquated tax system. And that means some people are going to pay more taxes, and some people are going to pay less,” Immelt says.

But GE paid NO TAXES on $5 billion in profits last year!

Pressed by Stahl about whether this move would actually translate to American Jobs, Immelt admits the strategy is up for debate, but, “Personally, I think [lowering taxes] will create jobs.” Reminded that American corporations are sitting on piles of cash and that giving them more may be questionable, Immelt says, “Companies should invest in the United States. It’s still the world’s biggest economy. And if companies just are going to sit on cash, they’re going to lose,” he tells Stahl. “Because only the people that are going to invest their way through this crisis are going to win.”

It is also particularly important that the government focus all it efforts on creating jobs, says Immelt, because it’s not doing so now. “I think, Lesley, there needs to be a sense of national urgency around jobs…If you just looked at how many hours a day do Republicans spend on job creation, do Democrats spend on job creation, and does the White House. It’s no where close to 100 percent,” he says. “We’re not spending enough time on jobs.”

http://drudgereport.com/flashji.htm

[BigV]

The point remains the majority of people do not pay Federal Income tax

in 2009.

I concede the point, mercy, and I devoutly wish I could go back to 2009 and change things. And if I couldn't change things, perhaps I could bring you back to 2011 with me. You're stuck. You're stuck on a point that is correct and every time you say it, I agree with it. No matter how irrelevant it is to our situation now, I will still agree with you. You're right.

[classicman]

a tax rate in the mid-20s and no loopholes. Zero,” he tells Stahl. “The U.S. has the most antiquated tax system.

Shoot me now, cuz I agree with him on this ^^^.