How trade deficits reduce their nation’s annual GDPs and numbers of jobs.

Discussion in 'Economy' started by Supposn, May 7, 2017.

  1. anotherlife
    Offline

    anotherlife Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Messages:
    5,955
    Thanks Received:
    288
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    Cross-Atlantic
    Ratings:
    +1,507
    In a plea bargain, at least in the contemporary USA, the bargain is managed by the public servants, it is not the crime itself that is managed by the public servants, so your analogy is incorrect.
     
  2. danielpalos
    Offline

    danielpalos Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2015
    Messages:
    53,603
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Location:
    Alta California, federalist.
    Ratings:
    +8,182
    Your post is not relevant. Employers have to provide data for any deductions.
     
  3. Supposn
    Offline

    Supposn VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,688
    Thanks Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +190
    AnotherLife, we’ve strayed far away from this thread’s topic, “How trade deficits reduce their nation’s annual GDPs and numbers of jobs”. We’re not even discussing a sub-topic of that.

    I’ve opened another thread, “Prosecution of Nazi war crimes”. If my title displeases you or you find it at all objectionable, I’ll post any additional comments on an alternative thread you may choose to open.

    Respectfully, Supposn
     
  4. EdwardBaiamonte
    Offline

    EdwardBaiamonte Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    32,279
    Thanks Received:
    1,320
    Trophy Points:
    1,100
    Ratings:
    +4,524
    a trade deficit doesn't reduce GDP it's just a measure. GDP is reduced when nobody wants to buy your products!!!
     
  5. danielpalos
    Offline

    danielpalos Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2015
    Messages:
    53,603
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Location:
    Alta California, federalist.
    Ratings:
    +8,182
    Why are US employers getting a tax break for hiring foreign labor?
     
  6. Toddsterpatriot
    Offline

    Toddsterpatriot Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    52,964
    Thanks Received:
    6,477
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +29,090
    They aren't.
     
  7. Supposn
    Offline

    Supposn VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,688
    Thanks Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +190
    [QUOTE="danielpalos, post: 17256601, member: 53092]Your post is not relevant. Employers have to provide data for any deductions.[/QUOTE]

    Transcript of 10:16 11May2017 post:

    DanielPalos & ToddsterPatriot, that’s the purpose of the “destination based tax” concept. Currently enterprises’ expenditures for acquiring and importing goods into the USA or benefitting from foreign services are entitled to reduce their enterprises’ incomes subject federal corporate taxes.

    DBT would no longer reduce taxable income in consideration for such expenses.
    I’m a proponent of the concepts purpose but I doubt if the IRS could effectively enforce it at reasonable enforcement expenses.
    If they cannot do that, the proposed destination based tax method is of no worth.

    There are many legitimate reasons for USA enterprises to transfer wealth to entities beyond our borders. I question the feasability (at reasonable enforcement costs) for parsing out compensations to foreign entities for the foreign goods or performed services provided.

    Those expenditures can be mingled with expenditures for royalties, uses of patents, loans to foreigners, debt service of loans made by foreign lenders, ... etc. ... etc.
    Wealth leaving the USA is usually through both USA and foreign financial enterprises but they can be made by couriers.

    Respectfully, Supposn
    ////////////////////////////////////

    DanielPalos, enterprises currently receive tax reductions for their foreign labor expenditures because the federal government taxes foreign earnings brought back to the USA. That’s another proposed destination based income tax; the federal government will cease taxing income earned beyond our borders. That may be acceptable if destination based taxation could be reasonably enforced.

    It’s much more common for global enterprises to receive reductions of their U.S. federal taxes due to their expenditures for the products they import into the USA or for services on behalf of their enterprises that are performed overseas. The foreign labor costs are imbedded within the expenditures for those foreign goods and service products.

    If the federal tax regulations are based upon the "destination based tax concept", (which is precisely what you're advocating), no enterprise will show payments for foreign labor.

    If circumstances prevent an enterprise from entirely concealing payments made to enterprises beyond our borders for foreign goods or service products, those payments will be extremely understated and that will be compensated by overstating other intermingled expenses that are directly or indirectly paid to the same recipients.
    Recipients receiving full payments are not concerned as to how those payments are itemized.

    Similar to many other tax evasion schemes, despite much greater enforcement expenditures, a good portion of our federal tax revenue will not be realized.

    Respectfully, Supposn
     
  8. danielpalos
    Offline

    danielpalos Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2015
    Messages:
    53,603
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Location:
    Alta California, federalist.
    Ratings:
    +8,182
    Labor costs are tax deductible. Are you claiming the right wing distinguishes between native labor and foreign labor?
     
  9. danielpalos
    Offline

    danielpalos Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2015
    Messages:
    53,603
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Location:
    Alta California, federalist.
    Ratings:
    +8,182
    Transcript of 10:16 11May2017 post:

    DanielPalos & ToddsterPatriot, that’s the purpose of the “destination based tax” concept. Currently enterprises’ expenditures for acquiring and importing goods into the USA or benefitting from foreign services are entitled to reduce their enterprises’ incomes subject federal corporate taxes.

    DBT would no longer reduce taxable income in consideration for such expenses.
    I’m a proponent of the concepts purpose but I doubt if the IRS could effectively enforce it at reasonable enforcement expenses.
    If they cannot do that, the proposed destination based tax method is of no worth.

    There are many legitimate reasons for USA enterprises to transfer wealth to entities beyond our borders. I question the feasability (at reasonable enforcement costs) for parsing out compensations to foreign entities for the foreign goods or performed services provided.

    Those expenditures can be mingled with expenditures for royalties, uses of patents, loans to foreigners, debt service of loans made by foreign lenders, ... etc. ... etc.
    Wealth leaving the USA is usually through both USA and foreign financial enterprises but they can be made by couriers.

    Respectfully, Supposn
    ////////////////////////////////////

    Labor is either, US or foreign; it should be that way for tax purposes.
     
  10. Toddsterpatriot
    Offline

    Toddsterpatriot Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    52,964
    Thanks Received:
    6,477
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +29,090
    Labor costs are tax deductible.

    Yup.
     

Share This Page