Loopholes v. Patriotism

The loopholes that allow corporations like GE to not pay any taxes. I think it's genius of any company to take advantage of that. However, the only way to prevent this from happening is to cut out the loopholes. I'm not familiar enough with the tax code to list them but it's apparent there are many. Originally Posted by jenesys

This post caused me to wonder: what do the folks on this site think about corporate taxes?

Is it patriotic for a corporation to propose and then lobby for changes in the tax code that benefit the corporation at the expense of the US Treasury?

One of the common tactics for multinational corps (described better by others on this board) is to put a nominal "headquarters" in another country and pay that country's tax, thereby avoiding the US tax, even though the corp is a de facto US corp.

I am going to assume the "libertarians" and "Republicans" on this board fully back the corps who take advantage of the loopholes to the detriment of the US economy unless they post otherwise.

Weigh in on this issue.

I am going to assume the "libertarians" and "Republicans" on this board fully back the corps who take advantage of the loopholes to the detriment of the US economy unless they post otherwise.

Weigh in on this issue. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Don't assume nutn charlie!

People take advantage of what the law allows.

Political debate is usually over WTF is fair or not.

I for one do not think it fair for thiss to have happened. Was it legal? Probably. We need to change the laws. IMHO

Capitalists hold anyone hostage that they can to make money.

-Offshore offices.

-Major league sports teams extorting citizens into buying them new stadiums. [For their private business.] We are stuck with tax increases to pay for them.

-Cities, counties, states have to give tax breaks or businesses will leave and/or not move there. We are stuck with tax increases to pay what they don't.

-Employees give huge pay concessions or the place will move or sell off all assets. After the pay cuts upper management gets millions in bonuses. [Been there]

Now on the other hand, Boeing wants to relocate to the Carolinas but the Dept of Labor says, "No you can't!" That's BS.




-

We've kind of had this discussion before...

...but I'll play along....

The Board and Management have a duty to their shareholders to maximize returns and follow the laws where they do business. Period.

Don't like the laws, change the laws.

And, for the umpteenth time we/you are the shareholders

And, for multinationals, where should their loyalties lie? Other than to follow the laws (including tax code) where they do business?

Capitalists hold anyone hostage that they can to make money.

-Offshore offices.

-Major league sports teams extorting citizens into buying them new stadiums. [For their private business.] We are stuck with tax increases to pay for them.

-Cities, counties, states have to give tax breaks or businesses will leave and/or not move there. We are stuck with tax increases to pay what they don't.

-Employees give huge pay concessions or the place will move or sell off all assets. After the pay cuts upper management gets millions in bonuses. [Been there]

Now on the other hand, Boeing wants to relocate to the Carolinas but the Dept of Labor says, "No you can't!" That's BS.




- Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

Agree with you but what is the fix?

As long as a party has leverage it will (& probably should, if only to not be at a competitive disadvantage) use it.

Here's the irony: most of us want government at the lowest levels (e.g. "State's Rights")...if that is the case you can't also ask Congress to say outlaw municipalities paying for stadiums...

I agree that if a sports team owner can force a city to pay for his stadium so be it. It is not our place to make laws to stop it. It just sucks that's all.

It's not fair that NY and Boston can have such huge payrolls but there you go, it's not something that we should regulate.

A capitalist system works. It's just that if there is no regulation the capitalists will bleed you and fuck you in the ass. "For their shareholders of course."

Agree with you but what is the fix?

As long as a party has leverage it will (& probably should, if only to not be at a competitive disadvantage) use it.

Here's the irony: most of us want government at the lowest levels (e.g. "State's Rights")...if that is the case you can't also ask Congress to say outlaw municipalities paying for stadiums... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

If corps, no matter their "home" country, gets a benefit from doing business in the US, I think they should pay the maximum tax levied on corps in the US. If they then didn't make a profit, they'd leave.

If corps, no matter their "home" country, gets a benefit from doing business in the US, I think they should pay the maximum tax levied on corps in the US. If they then didn't make a profit, they'd leave. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Why?

Maybe you can give us an example

Are you trying to run business out of the US?

Are you trying to run business out of the US? Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Only business that doesn't pay its fair share.

As long as they're here making money and paying fewer taxes that they should, then they're a leech on society.

I think that is part of why Liberals want to increase the tax rates on the wealthiest percentage of Americans. Because, they work for the companies that make huge profits, but do not pay any of those profits towards the US Treasury.

Only business that doesn't pay its fair share.

As long as they're here making money and paying fewer taxes that they should, then they're a leech on society. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

What is "fair share" ??? What taxes "should" they be paying? Are you channeling your inner-WTF?

I mean this in the nicest way possible but you really don't understand how large corporations work if you think businesses won't move within or out of the country if it makes financial sense. They are all whores. They have small armies of well paid folks continiously evaluating opportunities. I have a schoolmate whose title/business card literally reads "Sr. Director of Financial Analysis - Outsourcing/Offshoring Opportunities." His group has 15-20 significant (like moving production from one factory to another; the "low hanging fruit" like moving call centers or transactional accounting was done over a decade ago) analyses going on at all times and if they get approval to move on something they hand the project off to an executional team and are on to their next study.

Point being if for sake of argument, XYZ Corp is making 10% margin after tax running a division out of say Detroit but they could move to Toronto and make 15%, is Detroit better off if they left or stayed even if they reached some sort of "arrangement" with Wayne County or the State of Michigan that abated taxes?

There are reasons why Europe had to go with VAT on business - they will always be an industry trying to get around income taxes.

In the US' tax system, corporations are paying less or no tax due to taking advantage of various tax laws: Those tax laws are meant to influence the business practices, investment, and timing of transactions of those corporations. That smacks of deep government regulation. We may call them loopholes, but they are generally designed to be used exactly how they are being claimed.

OR

Do we play a game where big business lobbies to get the tax breaks for the activities they were going to do anyway?

I won't even get into municipal / Economic Development Corporation competitions to win business among the states.

Do we play a game where big business lobbies to get the tax breaks for the activities they were going to do anyway?

I won't even get into municipal / Economic Development Corporation competitions to win business among the states. Originally Posted by Black Sedan

Agree with you but what is the fix?

As long as a party has leverage it will (& probably should, if only to not be at a competitive disadvantage) use it.

Here's the irony: most of us want government at the lowest levels (e.g. "State's Rights")...if that is the case you can't also ask Congress to say outlaw municipalities paying for stadiums... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

But to my earlier point....how do we fix this? So long as we mostly believe in State's Rights and recognize the sovereignty of other Nations and their ability to set their own policy?

At the end of the day we all make deals. Whether it is with the auto dealership or the lawn guy or a multimillion $ deal over a 10 year utilites contract. We always will. Companies will do the same because they can.

But to my earlier point....how do we fix this? .................. Originally Posted by atlcomedy

I think everyone can agree that GE not paying taxes isn’t really fair. Even they don’t think it’s fair: every news organization but NBC reported on it. How do you fix it? Well, the very first step wants to fix it. Our politicians and the industry capos that control them don’t want to. Ergo, until there’s a large, organized grass roots movement, it won’t be fixed.

Are you fargin' kidding? If you actually payed attention to what WE say and not the talking heads in the liberal media...

As a libertarian, I believe everyone needs to pay their fair share, including the lower half of the INDIVIDUAL income tax payers.

I personally think if they move their "headquarters" off shore they shouldn't be allowed on lobby road in the beltway. Nor should they be allowed to contribute to campaigns since they claim foreign entity status. I believe the gvmt should also move against companies with fines for moving jobs off-shore.

This post caused me to wonder: what do the folks on this site think about corporate taxes?

Is it patriotic for a corporation to propose and then lobby for changes in the tax code that benefit the corporation at the expense of the US Treasury?

One of the common tactics for multinational corps (described better by others on this board) is to put a nominal "headquarters" in another country and pay that country's tax, thereby avoiding the US tax, even though the corp is a de facto US corp.

I am going to assume the "libertarians" and "Republicans" on this board fully back the corps who take advantage of the loopholes to the detriment of the US economy unless they post otherwise.

Weigh in on this issue. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005