Corporate taxes suffocate growth.

[BaronVonBigmeat]

The historical and current belief is that taxes in America are low, compared to the world in general. America is the model of free markets, low regulation, and economic freedom. Right? This is simply not the case. The United States has high taxes in general and higher corporate taxes in particular.

The only nations who have a higher corporate tax rate than America are Suriname, Pakistan, Togo, Benin, Republic of Congo, Cameroon, Chad, Libya, and Vietnam. No information was available for The Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, North Korea, Montenegro, Serbia, or Sudan. I cannot imagine why.

.....

Corporate taxes reduce the profits of business owners. This is true because net income is reduced by the tax rate. For example, Firm X, with a $100 investment, earning a 7% return has an income — before taxes — of $7. With a 10% corporate tax rate, net income — after taxes — is $6.30. Firm X now has earned a 6.3% return. In contrast, a corporate tax rate of 40% reduces net income after taxes by $2.80 to $4.20, or a 4.2% after-tax return. This rise in taxes, on the margin, reduces the profit-seeking incentive to take business risks. Why risk starting a biotech company when inflation-protected T-bill's will give you the same return?

After theory and logic tell us what is true, empiricism can confirm our result.

Thankfully, Professors Young Lee (Hanyang University) and Rodger Gordon (UC — San Diego) have done the work for us. In a 2005 journal article they concluded,

This paper finds that the corporate tax rate is significantly negatively correlated with economic growth in a cross-section data set of 70 countries during 1970–1997, controlling for many other determinants/covariates of economic growth.

More specifically, they continue, "The estimates suggest that cutting the corporate tax rate by 10 percentage points can increase the annual growth rate by around 1.1%."[3]

Using these figures, Andrew Chamberlain of the Tax Foundation opines,

by cutting the U.S.'s combined federal and average state corporate tax rate from roughly 40 percent to 30 percent we could boost U.S. economic growth by around 1.1 percent per year — enough to double our nation's wealth every 63 years.[4]

Even better, a cut from the actual corporate tax rate of 35% to a rate of 10% would double our nation's wealth every 30 years.

...

These are examples of what can be seen. As Frédéric Bastiat reminds us, however, it is imperative to also account for what cannot be seen. What would the wealth of our nation be today if the corporate tax rate had always been 10% or less? What creature comforts would have been innovated? What new technologies brought to market? What diseases cured?

Due to a history of high corporate taxes these answers are not known, and we are worse off because of it.

http://mises.org/story/3024

 

[waltky]

Thanks Obama!...

U.S. Has Record 11th Straight Year Without 3% Growth in GDP
January 27, 2017 | - The United States has now seen a record 11 straight years without 3 percent growth in real Gross Domestic Product, according to the advance estimate published today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

“Real GDP increased 1.6 percent in 2016 (that is, from the 2015 annual level to the 2016 annual level), compared with an increase of 2.6 percent in 2015,” the BEA said in a release put out this morning. The BEA has calculated GDP for each year going back to 1929. Since 1930, it has calculated the inflation-adjusted annual change in GDP.

In the 86 complete years since then, there is only one eleven-year stretch—2006 through 2016—when annual growth in real GDP never hit 3 percent. During the last eleven years, real annual growth in GDP peaked in 2006 at 2.7 percent.

As CNSNews.com has reported before, prior to this period, the longest stretch of years when real GDP did not grow by at least 3.0 percent, as calculated by the BEA, was the four-year stretch from 1930 to 1933. That was during the Great Depression.

The United States has also seen four three-year stretches where real annual growth in GDP did not reach 3.0 percent: 1945-1947; 1956-1958; 1980-1982; and 2001-2003. America saw its longest stretch of years when real GDP grew by 3.0 percent or better in the seven years from 1983-89. President Ronald Reagan was inaugurated in January 1981 and left office in January 1989.

U.S. Has Record 11th Straight Year Without 3% Growth in GDP

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Thanks Obama!...

U.S. Has Record 11th Straight Year Without 3% Growth in GDP
January 27, 2017 | - The United States has now seen a record 11 straight years without 3 percent growth in real Gross Domestic Product, according to the advance estimate published today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

“Real GDP increased 1.6 percent in 2016 (that is, from the 2015 annual level to the 2016 annual level), compared with an increase of 2.6 percent in 2015,” the BEA said in a release put out this morning. The BEA has calculated GDP for each year going back to 1929. Since 1930, it has calculated the inflation-adjusted annual change in GDP.

In the 86 complete years since then, there is only one eleven-year stretch—2006 through 2016—when annual growth in real GDP never hit 3 percent. During the last eleven years, real annual growth in GDP peaked in 2006 at 2.7 percent.

As CNSNews.com has reported before, prior to this period, the longest stretch of years when real GDP did not grow by at least 3.0 percent, as calculated by the BEA, was the four-year stretch from 1930 to 1933. That was during the Great Depression.

The United States has also seen four three-year stretches where real annual growth in GDP did not reach 3.0 percent: 1945-1947; 1956-1958; 1980-1982; and 2001-2003. America saw its longest stretch of years when real GDP grew by 3.0 percent or better in the seven years from 1983-89. President Ronald Reagan was inaugurated in January 1981 and left office in January 1989.

U.S. Has Record 11th Straight Year Without 3% Growth in GDP

yes but Marx said corporations are evil so the least we can do is tax the hell out of them until we can take them over!!

 

[oldfart]

The historical and current belief is that taxes in America are low, compared to the world in general. America is the model of free markets, low regulation, and economic freedom. Right? This is simply not the case. The United States has high taxes in general and higher corporate taxes in particular.

The only nations who have a higher corporate tax rate than America are Suriname, Pakistan, Togo, Benin, Republic of Congo, Cameroon, Chad, Libya, and Vietnam. No information was available for The Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, North Korea, Montenegro, Serbia, or Sudan. I cannot imagine why.

.....

Corporate taxes reduce the profits of business owners. This is true because net income is reduced by the tax rate. For example, Firm X, with a $100 investment, earning a 7% return has an income — before taxes — of $7. With a 10% corporate tax rate, net income — after taxes — is $6.30. Firm X now has earned a 6.3% return. In contrast, a corporate tax rate of 40% reduces net income after taxes by $2.80 to $4.20, or a 4.2% after-tax return. This rise in taxes, on the margin, reduces the profit-seeking incentive to take business risks. Why risk starting a biotech company when inflation-protected T-bill's will give you the same return?

After theory and logic tell us what is true, empiricism can confirm our result.

Thankfully, Professors Young Lee (Hanyang University) and Rodger Gordon (UC — San Diego) have done the work for us. In a 2005 journal article they concluded,

This paper finds that the corporate tax rate is significantly negatively correlated with economic growth in a cross-section data set of 70 countries during 1970–1997, controlling for many other determinants/covariates of economic growth.

More specifically, they continue, "The estimates suggest that cutting the corporate tax rate by 10 percentage points can increase the annual growth rate by around 1.1%."[3]

Using these figures, Andrew Chamberlain of the Tax Foundation opines,

by cutting the U.S.'s combined federal and average state corporate tax rate from roughly 40 percent to 30 percent we could boost U.S. economic growth by around 1.1 percent per year — enough to double our nation's wealth every 63 years.[4]

Even better, a cut from the actual corporate tax rate of 35% to a rate of 10% would double our nation's wealth every 30 years.

...

These are examples of what can be seen. As Frédéric Bastiat reminds us, however, it is imperative to also account for what cannot be seen. What would the wealth of our nation be today if the corporate tax rate had always been 10% or less? What creature comforts would have been innovated? What new technologies brought to market? What diseases cured?

Due to a history of high corporate taxes these answers are not known, and we are worse off because of it.

Corporate Taxes Suffocate Growth

This and similar comparisons are worthless. Every country has its own corporate exclusions, deductions, and credits, so a comparison of maximum rates is meaningless. A meaningful measure would be the percentage of GDP that corporate income and profits taxes comprise. The OECD data is that among developed nations the US is lower (at 2.3%) than the non-US OECD average (2.7%), ranking 20th of 34 nations.

U.S. Corporate Taxes Are Below Developed Country Average | CTJReports

 

[oldfart]

Thanks Obama!...

U.S. Has Record 11th Straight Year Without 3% Growth in GDP
January 27, 2017 | - The United States has now seen a record 11 straight years without 3 percent growth in real Gross Domestic Product, according to the advance estimate published today by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

“Real GDP increased 1.6 percent in 2016 (that is, from the 2015 annual level to the 2016 annual level), compared with an increase of 2.6 percent in 2015,” the BEA said in a release put out this morning. The BEA has calculated GDP for each year going back to 1929. Since 1930, it has calculated the inflation-adjusted annual change in GDP.

In the 86 complete years since then, there is only one eleven-year stretch—2006 through 2016—when annual growth in real GDP never hit 3 percent. During the last eleven years, real annual growth in GDP peaked in 2006 at 2.7 percent.

As CNSNews.com has reported before, prior to this period, the longest stretch of years when real GDP did not grow by at least 3.0 percent, as calculated by the BEA, was the four-year stretch from 1930 to 1933. That was during the Great Depression.

The United States has also seen four three-year stretches where real annual growth in GDP did not reach 3.0 percent: 1945-1947; 1956-1958; 1980-1982; and 2001-2003. America saw its longest stretch of years when real GDP grew by 3.0 percent or better in the seven years from 1983-89. President Ronald Reagan was inaugurated in January 1981 and left office in January 1989.

U.S. Has Record 11th Straight Year Without 3% Growth in GDP

I've been away a while; good to see you're still here (a lot of my favorite posters seemed to have found real life). Do you subscribe to the view that this is secular slowing, land if so; what causes it?

 

[yiostheoy]

The historical and current belief is that taxes in America are low, compared to the world in general. America is the model of free markets, low regulation, and economic freedom. Right? This is simply not the case. The United States has high taxes in general and higher corporate taxes in particular.

The only nations who have a higher corporate tax rate than America are Suriname, Pakistan, Togo, Benin, Republic of Congo, Cameroon, Chad, Libya, and Vietnam. No information was available for The Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, North Korea, Montenegro, Serbia, or Sudan. I cannot imagine why.

.....

Corporate taxes reduce the profits of business owners. This is true because net income is reduced by the tax rate. For example, Firm X, with a $100 investment, earning a 7% return has an income — before taxes — of $7. With a 10% corporate tax rate, net income — after taxes — is $6.30. Firm X now has earned a 6.3% return. In contrast, a corporate tax rate of 40% reduces net income after taxes by $2.80 to $4.20, or a 4.2% after-tax return. This rise in taxes, on the margin, reduces the profit-seeking incentive to take business risks. Why risk starting a biotech company when inflation-protected T-bill's will give you the same return?

After theory and logic tell us what is true, empiricism can confirm our result.

Thankfully, Professors Young Lee (Hanyang University) and Rodger Gordon (UC — San Diego) have done the work for us. In a 2005 journal article they concluded,

This paper finds that the corporate tax rate is significantly negatively correlated with economic growth in a cross-section data set of 70 countries during 1970–1997, controlling for many other determinants/covariates of economic growth.

More specifically, they continue, "The estimates suggest that cutting the corporate tax rate by 10 percentage points can increase the annual growth rate by around 1.1%."[3]

Using these figures, Andrew Chamberlain of the Tax Foundation opines,

by cutting the U.S.'s combined federal and average state corporate tax rate from roughly 40 percent to 30 percent we could boost U.S. economic growth by around 1.1 percent per year — enough to double our nation's wealth every 63 years.[4]

Even better, a cut from the actual corporate tax rate of 35% to a rate of 10% would double our nation's wealth every 30 years.

...

These are examples of what can be seen. As Frédéric Bastiat reminds us, however, it is imperative to also account for what cannot be seen. What would the wealth of our nation be today if the corporate tax rate had always been 10% or less? What creature comforts would have been innovated? What new technologies brought to market? What diseases cured?

Due to a history of high corporate taxes these answers are not known, and we are worse off because of it.

Corporate Taxes Suffocate Growth

Nobody is talking about cutting the US corp tax rate to 10%. You must be dreaming.

Trump is talking about to 15%.

The GOP is talking about to 20%.

The DEM's are talking about to 25%.

The compromise will probably end up at 22 1/2% effective for 2017.

 

[yiostheoy]

The historical and current belief is that taxes in America are low, compared to the world in general. America is the model of free markets, low regulation, and economic freedom. Right? This is simply not the case. The United States has high taxes in general and higher corporate taxes in particular.

The only nations who have a higher corporate tax rate than America are Suriname, Pakistan, Togo, Benin, Republic of Congo, Cameroon, Chad, Libya, and Vietnam. No information was available for The Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, North Korea, Montenegro, Serbia, or Sudan. I cannot imagine why.

.....

Corporate taxes reduce the profits of business owners. This is true because net income is reduced by the tax rate. For example, Firm X, with a $100 investment, earning a 7% return has an income — before taxes — of $7. With a 10% corporate tax rate, net income — after taxes — is $6.30. Firm X now has earned a 6.3% return. In contrast, a corporate tax rate of 40% reduces net income after taxes by $2.80 to $4.20, or a 4.2% after-tax return. This rise in taxes, on the margin, reduces the profit-seeking incentive to take business risks. Why risk starting a biotech company when inflation-protected T-bill's will give you the same return?

After theory and logic tell us what is true, empiricism can confirm our result.

Thankfully, Professors Young Lee (Hanyang University) and Rodger Gordon (UC — San Diego) have done the work for us. In a 2005 journal article they concluded,

This paper finds that the corporate tax rate is significantly negatively correlated with economic growth in a cross-section data set of 70 countries during 1970–1997, controlling for many other determinants/covariates of economic growth.

More specifically, they continue, "The estimates suggest that cutting the corporate tax rate by 10 percentage points can increase the annual growth rate by around 1.1%."[3]

Using these figures, Andrew Chamberlain of the Tax Foundation opines,

by cutting the U.S.'s combined federal and average state corporate tax rate from roughly 40 percent to 30 percent we could boost U.S. economic growth by around 1.1 percent per year — enough to double our nation's wealth every 63 years.[4]

Even better, a cut from the actual corporate tax rate of 35% to a rate of 10% would double our nation's wealth every 30 years.

...

These are examples of what can be seen. As Frédéric Bastiat reminds us, however, it is imperative to also account for what cannot be seen. What would the wealth of our nation be today if the corporate tax rate had always been 10% or less? What creature comforts would have been innovated? What new technologies brought to market? What diseases cured?

Due to a history of high corporate taxes these answers are not known, and we are worse off because of it.

Corporate Taxes Suffocate Growth

This and similar comparisons are worthless. Every country has its own corporate exclusions, deductions, and credits, so a comparison of maximum rates is meaningless. A meaningful measure would be the percentage of GDP that corporate income and profits taxes comprise. The OECD data is that among developed nations the US is lower (at 2.3%) than the non-US OECD average (2.7%), ranking 20th of 34 nations.

U.S. Corporate Taxes Are Below Developed Country Average | CTJReports

What in the fokk does the GDP have to do with anything ???

 

[danielpalos]

U.S. corporate income taxes have declined sharply as a percentage of GDP since 1945. [2] Part of the reason corporations are paying less in taxes today than they did 70 years ago is due to copious changes in the tax code. Yet there is a growing and vocal movement among well-financed lobbying groups to push federal lawmakers to lower the corporate tax rate. These business-backed groups claim that the U.S. corporate tax rate is too high, citing the 35 percent federal statutory tax rate. But that narrow argument ignores critical facts such as the many large tax breaks, loopholes and other corporate tax exceptions that big businesses have successfully lobbied to embed in the tax code. A 2014 study by Citizens for Tax Justice examined five years of data and found that Fortune 500 companies paid an average federal effective corporate income tax rate of only 19.4 percent, which is just over half of the nominal U.S. statutory rate of 35 percent. That same study found that many profitable, large U.S. corporations such as Boeing, General Electric and Verizon paid no federal corporate income taxes at all. [3]

 

[oldfart]

The historical and current belief is that taxes in America are low, compared to the world in general. America is the model of free markets, low regulation, and economic freedom. Right? This is simply not the case. The United States has high taxes in general and higher corporate taxes in particular.

The only nations who have a higher corporate tax rate than America are Suriname, Pakistan, Togo, Benin, Republic of Congo, Cameroon, Chad, Libya, and Vietnam. No information was available for The Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, North Korea, Montenegro, Serbia, or Sudan. I cannot imagine why.

.....

Corporate taxes reduce the profits of business owners. This is true because net income is reduced by the tax rate. For example, Firm X, with a $100 investment, earning a 7% return has an income — before taxes — of $7. With a 10% corporate tax rate, net income — after taxes — is $6.30. Firm X now has earned a 6.3% return. In contrast, a corporate tax rate of 40% reduces net income after taxes by $2.80 to $4.20, or a 4.2% after-tax return. This rise in taxes, on the margin, reduces the profit-seeking incentive to take business risks. Why risk starting a biotech company when inflation-protected T-bill's will give you the same return?

After theory and logic tell us what is true, empiricism can confirm our result.

Thankfully, Professors Young Lee (Hanyang University) and Rodger Gordon (UC — San Diego) have done the work for us. In a 2005 journal article they concluded,

This paper finds that the corporate tax rate is significantly negatively correlated with economic growth in a cross-section data set of 70 countries during 1970–1997, controlling for many other determinants/covariates of economic growth.

More specifically, they continue, "The estimates suggest that cutting the corporate tax rate by 10 percentage points can increase the annual growth rate by around 1.1%."[3]

Using these figures, Andrew Chamberlain of the Tax Foundation opines,

by cutting the U.S.'s combined federal and average state corporate tax rate from roughly 40 percent to 30 percent we could boost U.S. economic growth by around 1.1 percent per year — enough to double our nation's wealth every 63 years.[4]

Even better, a cut from the actual corporate tax rate of 35% to a rate of 10% would double our nation's wealth every 30 years.

...

These are examples of what can be seen. As Frédéric Bastiat reminds us, however, it is imperative to also account for what cannot be seen. What would the wealth of our nation be today if the corporate tax rate had always been 10% or less? What creature comforts would have been innovated? What new technologies brought to market? What diseases cured?

Due to a history of high corporate taxes these answers are not known, and we are worse off because of it.

Corporate Taxes Suffocate Growth

This and similar comparisons are worthless. Every country has its own corporate exclusions, deductions, and credits, so a comparison of maximum rates is meaningless. A meaningful measure would be the percentage of GDP that corporate income and profits taxes comprise. The OECD data is that among developed nations the US is lower (at 2.3%) than the non-US OECD average (2.7%), ranking 20th of 34 nations.

U.S. Corporate Taxes Are Below Developed Country Average | CTJReports

What in the fokk does the GDP have to do with anything ???

Shares of GDP is the common way economists measure a lot of stock and flow measures like savings, tax burden, size of categories of expenditures, budget deficits, etc. In this case, it's the only accurate way to compare international taxation systems, as noted in my post, every nation allows different exclusions, deductions, and credits in computing corporate tax. For example, 20% of a VAT with no deductions except for the cost of incoming inventory is a lot more than 20% of profit after deducting labor, overhead, and indirect costs.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The compromise will probably end up at 22 1/2% effective for 2017.

corporate tax is passed on to us in higher prices. Corporations are tax collectors not tax payers. We have tax only to pander to pure ignorance of liberals who want to punish evil corporations. Business efficiency, competitiveness, and job creation would be greatly enhanced if business was free to conduct business rather than waste time money energy dodging taxes. 1+1=2

Most importantly , USA is at very top in terms of pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with the highest tax rate in the world that, after off shore deductions, collects little revenue but does provide great incentive to move off shore.

 

[danielpalos]

The compromise will probably end up at 22 1/2% effective for 2017.

corporate tax is passed on to us in higher prices. Corporations are tax collectors not tax payers. We have tax only to pander to pure ignorance of liberals who want to punish evil corporations. Business efficiency, competitiveness, and job creation would be greatly enhanced if business was free to conduct business rather than waste time money energy dodging taxes. 1+1=2

Most importantly , USA is at very top in terms of pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with the highest tax rate in the world that, after off shore deductions, collects little revenue but does provide great incentive to move off shore.

why not end the personal income tax; the rich don't pay it and the poor can't afford to pay it.

who cares about taxes being passed on when Firms are paying our income taxes?

 

[Jomama]

In the free market people pay top dollar for the best. The US is the best economy and market in the world and there is no reason we should lowball our price to corporations for all the benefits we as a nation give them.

Unlike the OP, I am an employer, business owner and payer of corporate taxes. I'd prioritize lowering the debt and draining the swamp over tax reduction. With a functioning government we wont need high taxes on anyone.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

there is no reason we should lowball our price to corporations for all the benefits we as a nation give them.
.

what????? we give them nothing!! They keep all 7 billion of us alive and well with their jobs and products!!! Are you nuts????

 

[Jomama]

there is no reason we should lowball our price to corporations for all the benefits we as a nation give them..

what????? we give them nothing!! They keep all 7 billion of us alive and well with their jobs and products!!! Are you nuts????

Compared to who? It's a competitive world out there Ed, market forces you know? Pricing is something entrepreneurs struggle with daily and that's all a tax is, price of a service. Service? Yes, the US provides rule of law, efficient courts, excellent UCC and IP laws, the world's best Bankruptcy codes, superb public and private debt and financing options, world's deepest most active capital markets, world's biggest consumer economy, world's best university system, free, democratic & independent with the world's biggest army on a protected land mass and tons of natural resources. All next to two friendly resource rich nations, one with cheap labor. Beat it - you can't. Where are you moving your pretend business to save tax dollars Ed? Jamaica? Ukraine? Turkey? They all have lower taxes than the US.

If Trump had balls he'd make it illegal to move a company from the US. Again, don't like it? Launch your new business in Kazakhstan.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the US provides rule of law, .

moronic liberal fool!! Jobs invents the iphone, pays 2 bucks to hire a sheriff, and you notice the sheriff??? The sheriff is lucky to have Jobs not the other way around!!
Keep trying until you get one thing right!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If Trump had balls he'd make it illegal to move a company from the US.

why???? so American corps could be free of competition and so we could then pay the highest poverty inducing prices in the world for everything? Shoud NYS make it illegal for corporations to move to other states too?? Keep trying till you get one right!, liberal!

 

[oldfart]

The compromise will probably end up at 22 1/2% effective for 2017.

corporate tax is passed on to us in higher prices. Corporations are tax collectors not tax payers. We have tax only to pander to pure ignorance of liberals who want to punish evil corporations. Business efficiency, competitiveness, and job creation would be greatly enhanced if business was free to conduct business rather than waste time money energy dodging taxes. 1+1=2

Most importantly , USA is at very top in terms of pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with the highest tax rate in the world that, after off shore deductions, collects little revenue but does provide great incentive to move off shore.

Ed, I'm answering you because I know you know a lot more real economics than you let on in your board persona. The incidence of corporate taxation is basically a function of monopoly and monopsony power. Any industry dominated by one, two, or three firms will be able to basically pass on most tax burdens to consumers. As industry structure approaches more competitive models, it gets harder to do this and shareholders will absorb more of a hit.

As for corporations investing offshore, they are also sitting on a few trillion dollars of uninvested funds domestically. It's more profitable to play financial games than to actually invest in producing goods and services, and this is true all over the world. The globe is awash in excess savings looking for decent investment returns.

 

[danielpalos]

The compromise will probably end up at 22 1/2% effective for 2017.

corporate tax is passed on to us in higher prices. Corporations are tax collectors not tax payers. We have tax only to pander to pure ignorance of liberals who want to punish evil corporations. Business efficiency, competitiveness, and job creation would be greatly enhanced if business was free to conduct business rather than waste time money energy dodging taxes. 1+1=2

Most importantly , USA is at very top in terms of pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with the highest tax rate in the world that, after off shore deductions, collects little revenue but does provide great incentive to move off shore.

Ed, I'm answering you because I know you know a lot more real economics than you let on in your board persona. The incidence of corporate taxation is basically a function of monopoly and monopsony power. Any industry dominated by one, two, or three firms will be able to basically pass on most tax burdens to consumers. As industry structure approaches more competitive models, it gets harder to do this and shareholders will absorb more of a hit.

As for corporations investing offshore, they are also sitting on a few trillion dollars of uninvested funds domestically. It's more profitable to play financial games than to actually invest in producing goods and services, and this is true all over the world. The globe is awash in excess savings looking for decent investment returns.

should we drug test capitalists and deny them steak and lobster privileges when they don't create a Jobs Boom, with their capital gains preference?

 

[anotherlife]

The OP sounds like the usual Reaganean woodoonomics.

There is no correlation between individual shareholder profits and economic investment.

 

[anotherlife]

The compromise will probably end up at 22 1/2% effective for 2017.

corporate tax is passed on to us in higher prices. Corporations are tax collectors not tax payers. We have tax only to pander to pure ignorance of liberals who want to punish evil corporations. Business efficiency, competitiveness, and job creation would be greatly enhanced if business was free to conduct business rather than waste time money energy dodging taxes. 1+1=2

Most importantly , USA is at very top in terms of pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with the highest tax rate in the world that, after off shore deductions, collects little revenue but does provide great incentive to move off shore.

Yes, corporations are tax collectors. But eliminating the tax on them will have no consequence on trade or wages, or employment, or anything you put here. This has been proven by history many times, most recently by the bush tax cuts.