pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Well, we actually don't know what the deal was. But Republicans say that it included a huge tax hike. Which they couldn't agree to. Regardless, cutting for the sake of cutting, without actually reforming the structure problems means nothing. Cause you'll just be back in the same situation in a short period of time. There needs to be real reform. Raising retirement age, means testing medicare and social security, etc. Cuts without reform don't solve problems. That's where I disagree with Repubicans and Obama. Just cutting doesn't really solve the problem. How about plugging tax loopholes and allowing the Bush Tax cuts for the rich to expire? Quote
Shady Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 How about plugging tax loopholes and allowing the Bush Tax cuts for the rich to expire? I'm all for ending loopholes and subsidies. I wouldn't raise taxes though. The fact that General Electric paid zero dollars in taxes has nothing to do with tax rates. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 I'm all for ending loopholes and subsidies. I wouldn't raise taxes though. The fact that General Electric paid zero dollars in taxes has nothing to do with tax rates. So you support corporations avoiding taxes. That seems to suggest you aren't serious about the systemic fiscal issue the USA currently faces. Quote
Shady Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 So you support corporations avoiding taxes. That seems to suggest you aren't serious about the systemic fiscal issue the USA currently faces. How did you get that I support corporations avoiding taxes? I just said, I support closing loopholes and subsidies. That's how corporations avoid paying taxes. Not because of tax rates. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 How did you get that I support corporations avoiding taxes? I just said, I support closing loopholes and subsidies. That's how corporations avoid paying taxes. Not because of tax rates. Tax avoidance is a subsidy. You are now speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Quote
Shady Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Tax avoidance is a subsidy. You are now speaking out of both sides of your mouth. What I'm saying is that closing loopholes and subsidies would have corporations like General Electric paying the current tax rate, as oppose to the zero percent they paid last year. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 What I'm saying is that closing loopholes and subsidies would have corporations like General Electric paying the current tax rate, as oppose to the zero percent they paid last year. Then I take it you would agree with the Charles Schumer's proposal to plug tax loopholes. Quote
Shady Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Then I take it you would agree with the Charles Schumer's proposal to plug tax loopholes. Probably. Like I said, personally I'm for ending all loopholes and subsidies. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Probably. Like I said, personally I'm for ending all loopholes and subsidies. I believe The Washington Post had an article in the online version today. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 US Corporations alone were believed to hold a trillion dollars worth of untaxed foreign profits offshore in 2009. Quote
Shady Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 US Corporations alone were believed to hold a trillion dollars worth of untaxed foreign profits offshore in 2009. You can't tax profits they make in other countries. But you can get them to repatriate some of that money. That's why Canada and most European countries make it easy for people or businesses to bring money into their countries. For some reason, America does not. That has to change too. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 You can't tax profits they make in other countries. But you can get them to repatriate some of that money. That's why Canada and most European countries make it easy for people or businesses to bring money into their countries. For some reason, America does not. That has to change too. Here is a link to an article that may be helpful to you http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/business/20tax.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 There are many others on the topic. Quote
M.Dancer Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 US Corporations alone were believed to hold a trillion dollars worth of untaxed foreign profits offshore in 2009. Not untaxed....but untaxed by the US. Profits made in Canada by a foreign firm are taxed here.. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
punked Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 You can't tax profits they make in other countries. But you can get them to repatriate some of that money. That's why Canada and most European countries make it easy for people or businesses to bring money into their countries. For some reason, America does not. That has to change too. Yah because Obama offing a one time 5% tax holiday to bring all off shore monies on shore isn't a sweet sweet deal Shady. It is like you like looking like a fool in this thread Shady. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 (edited) Here is an article on the "Dutch Sandwich" which illustrates some of the methods used by Corporations. http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2010/10/google-reduced.html Google Inc. cut its taxes by $3.1 billion in the last three years using a technique that moves most of its foreign profits through Ireland and the Netherlands to Bermuda. Google’s income shifting -- involving strategies known to lawyers as the “Double Irish” and the “Dutch Sandwich” -- helped reduce its overseas tax rate to 2.4%, the lowest of the top five U.S. technology companies by market capitalization, according to regulatory filings in six countries. “It’s remarkable that Google’s effective rate is that low,” said Martin A. Sullivan, a tax economist who formerly worked for the U.S. Treasury Department. “We know this company operates throughout the world mostly in high-tax countries where the average corporate rate is well over 20%.” The U.S. corporate income-tax rate is 35%. In the U.K., Google’s second-biggest market by revenue, it’s 28%. Google, the owner of the world’s most popular search engine, uses a strategy that has gained favor among such companies as Facebook Inc. and Microsoft Corp. The method takes advantage of Irish tax law to legally shuttle profits into and out of subsidiaries there, largely escaping the country’s 12.5% income tax. The earnings wind up in island havens that levy no corporate income taxes at all. Companies that use the Double Irish arrangement avoid taxes at home and abroad. Edited July 13, 2011 by pinko Quote
Shady Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Yah because Obama offing a one time 5% tax holiday to bring all off shore monies on shore isn't a sweet sweet deal Shady. It is like you like looking like a fool in this thread Shady. It's not a particularly sweet deal. Considering Canada and most European countries already have a lower rate than that on repatriated funds. And it's not a one time holiday. It's permanent. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 ...Crazy crazy Republicans want to drive the US off a cliff and kill all jobs. Yep they got elected on Jobs and Republicans think that they got elected to kill jobs. That is how they are acting at least. How would it "kill all jobs"...or are you just being a drama queen? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 The Chinese hold a fair amount of American debt. Yes, but only about 10% of total US federal public debt, which is still majority held by Americans and social security. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 How about plugging tax loopholes and allowing the Bush Tax cuts for the rich to expire? Why just for the rich...why not let the Bush tax cuts expire for all taxpayers...hmmmmmmmmmmmmm? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
punked Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 How would it "kill all jobs"...or are you just being a drama queen? The easiest answer is because it would freeze credit markets. The longer answer has to do with the American economy depending on spending, Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 The easiest answer is because it would freeze credit markets. The longer answer has to do with the American economy depending on spending, Even so, it would not "kill all jobs". Even in the depths of the Great Depression, more adult Americans were employed than unemployed. Sorry for the reality check. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
BubberMiley Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 How is being a leechy financial planner more of a job than laying sewer pipes? Once again, I'm not at all surprised you didn't have the guts to answer the question. Perhaps I should play your bumping game. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Why just for the rich...why not let the Bush tax cuts expire for all taxpayers...hmmmmmmmmmmmmm? I think the threshhold proposed was at the million dollar level. Quote
Shady Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Once again, I'm not at all surprised you didn't have the guts to answer the question. Perhaps I should play your bumping game. It's a false choice. Quote
pinko Posted July 13, 2011 Report Posted July 13, 2011 Even so, it would not "kill all jobs". Even in the depths of the Great Depression, more adult Americans were employed than unemployed. Sorry for the reality check. Are you suggesting that you want a repeat of the depression era? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.