Is there or i'snt there a tax break for going abroad

[Jarhead]

Romney seemed pretty confident that there is not a tax break when he used the "I dont know what you are talking about" line.

However, apparently Obama has been very busy "being president" doing things like deficit reduction planning; who to tax; who not to tax, etc......so I am sure he must know if there truly is a tax break as he asserted last night and many times during the campaign.

So either Romney is an idiot and wrong
or
Obama is a lair and knew what he was saying was wrong
or
Obama is not doing the things as president daily that he says he is "busy doing".

Which is it?

 

[SniperFire]

Closing plants, opening plants and all related costs are just that - costs of doing business that are deductible.

Librards are lying as usual, and this is just one of several Lefty memes Romney destroyed last night.

 

[g5000]

If you move a factory from Indiana to Alabama, you get a tax writeoff.

If you move that same factory from Indiana to China, you get the same tax writeoff.

It would not be difficult to take away the latter and keep the former.

.

 

[edthecynic]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

BTW, Obama tried to get rid of the deduction for business expenses for moving a company abroad, and the GOP, of course, blocked it.

Full Text of S. 3364: Bring Jobs Home Act - GovTrack.us

SEC. 3. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

‘SEC. 280I. OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
‘(a) In General- No deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter shall be allowed for any specified outsourcing expense.

‘(b) Specified Outsourcing Expense- For purposes of this section--

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘specified outsourcing expense’ means--

‘(A) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the elimination of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located within the United States, and

‘(B) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the establishment of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located outside the United States,

if such establishment constitutes the relocation of the business unit so eliminated. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a relocation shall not be treated as failing to occur merely because such elimination occurs in a different taxable year than such establishment.

‘(2) APPLICATION OF CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND RULES-

‘(A) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this section, the terms ‘eligible expenses’, ‘business unit’, and ‘expanded affiliated group’ shall have the respective meanings given such terms by section 45S(b).

‘(B) OPERATING EXPENSES NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT- A rule similar to the rule of section 45S(b)(6) shall apply for purposes of this section.

‘(c) Special Rules-

‘(1) APPLICATION TO DEDUCTIONS FOR DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION- In the case of any portion of a specified outsourcing expense which is not deductible in the taxable year in which paid or incurred, such portion shall neither be chargeable to capital account nor amortizable.

‘(2) POSSESSIONS TREATED AS PART OF THE UNITED STATES- For purposes of this section, the term ‘United States’ shall be treated as including each possession of the United States (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).

‘(d) Regulations- The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations which provide (or create a rebuttable presumption) that certain establishments of business units outside the United States will be treated as relocations (based on timing or such other factors as the Secretary may provide) of business units eliminated within the United States.’.

(b) Limitation on Subpart F Income of Controlled Foreign Corporations Determined Without Regard to Specified Outsourcing Expenses- Subsection (c) of section 952 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘(4) EARNINGS AND PROFITS DETERMINED WITHOUT REGARD TO SPECIFIED OUTSOURCING EXPENSES- For purposes of this subsection, earnings and profits of any controlled foreign corporation shall be determined without regard to any specified outsourcing expense (as defined in section 280I(b)).’.

(c) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

‘Sec. 280I. Outsourcing expenses.’.

 

[Katzndogz]

If you move a factory from Indiana to Alabama, you get a tax writeoff.

If you move that same factory from Indiana to China, you get the same tax writeoff.

It would not be difficult to take away the latter and keep the former.

.

It wouldn't make any difference. The company would still move to China. They would pay the tax this year, knowing they won't have to pay the tax anymore.

When Eduardo Saverin moved to Singapore to avoid our excessive taxation, he didn't get a write off. He paid the tax. He was moving to avoid future taxes.

When companies leave the US, it is seldom because of taxes. Companies pay the tax and pass the increase along to customers. When they leave the US it's because regulation has made it impossible to continue to operate here.

Eric Cantor: Red Tape Is Stifling Job Creation - US News and World Report

The president of Virginia's Valley Bank in Roanoke tells me that new rules and regulations are flooding community banks almost daily. "Community banks find themselves so internally-focused on compliance related activities that they cannot attend to the job of extending credit," he says, adding that it is hurting hopes for a sustained economic recovery

Excessive regulations aren't only impacting small businessmen and women. Major manufacturers like Richmond, Va.-based MeadWestvaco are facing a barrage of regulations from the EPA. The company's senior expert on environmental regulations testified before a congressional panel that, "The current wave of regulations is unsustainable. Living with such an uncertain regulatory environment not only costs current jobs, but also prevents new jobs from being created."

Companies that find it unprofitable to comply with regulations leave the country.

 

[Toro]

No.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

BTW, Obama tried to get rid of the deduction for business expenses for moving a company abroad, and the GOP, of course, blocked it.

Full Text of S. 3364: Bring Jobs Home Act - GovTrack.us

SEC. 3. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

‘SEC. 280I. OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
‘(a) In General- No deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter shall be allowed for any specified outsourcing expense.

‘(b) Specified Outsourcing Expense- For purposes of this section--

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘specified outsourcing expense’ means--

‘(A) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the elimination of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located within the United States, and

‘(B) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the establishment of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located outside the United States,

if such establishment constitutes the relocation of the business unit so eliminated. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a relocation shall not be treated as failing to occur merely because such elimination occurs in a different taxable year than such establishment.

‘(2) APPLICATION OF CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND RULES-

‘(A) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this section, the terms ‘eligible expenses’, ‘business unit’, and ‘expanded affiliated group’ shall have the respective meanings given such terms by section 45S(b).

‘(B) OPERATING EXPENSES NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT- A rule similar to the rule of section 45S(b)(6) shall apply for purposes of this section.

‘(c) Special Rules-

‘(1) APPLICATION TO DEDUCTIONS FOR DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION- In the case of any portion of a specified outsourcing expense which is not deductible in the taxable year in which paid or incurred, such portion shall neither be chargeable to capital account nor amortizable.

‘(2) POSSESSIONS TREATED AS PART OF THE UNITED STATES- For purposes of this section, the term ‘United States’ shall be treated as including each possession of the United States (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).

‘(d) Regulations- The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations which provide (or create a rebuttable presumption) that certain establishments of business units outside the United States will be treated as relocations (based on timing or such other factors as the Secretary may provide) of business units eliminated within the United States.’.

(b) Limitation on Subpart F Income of Controlled Foreign Corporations Determined Without Regard to Specified Outsourcing Expenses- Subsection (c) of section 952 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘(4) EARNINGS AND PROFITS DETERMINED WITHOUT REGARD TO SPECIFIED OUTSOURCING EXPENSES- For purposes of this subsection, earnings and profits of any controlled foreign corporation shall be determined without regard to any specified outsourcing expense (as defined in section 280I(b)).’.

(c) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

‘Sec. 280I. Outsourcing expenses.’.

So was this around during Obama's first 2 years, why was this not closed?

 

[Babbleon]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

BTW, Obama tried to get rid of the deduction for business expenses for moving a company abroad, and the GOP, of course, blocked it.

Full Text of S. 3364: Bring Jobs Home Act - GovTrack.us

SEC. 3. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

‘SEC. 280I. OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
‘(a) In General- No deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter shall be allowed for any specified outsourcing expense.

‘(b) Specified Outsourcing Expense- For purposes of this section--

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘specified outsourcing expense’ means--

‘(A) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the elimination of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located within the United States, and

‘(B) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the establishment of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located outside the United States,

if such establishment constitutes the relocation of the business unit so eliminated. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a relocation shall not be treated as failing to occur merely because such elimination occurs in a different taxable year than such establishment.

‘(2) APPLICATION OF CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND RULES-

‘(A) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this section, the terms ‘eligible expenses’, ‘business unit’, and ‘expanded affiliated group’ shall have the respective meanings given such terms by section 45S(b).

‘(B) OPERATING EXPENSES NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT- A rule similar to the rule of section 45S(b)(6) shall apply for purposes of this section.

‘(c) Special Rules-

‘(1) APPLICATION TO DEDUCTIONS FOR DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION- In the case of any portion of a specified outsourcing expense which is not deductible in the taxable year in which paid or incurred, such portion shall neither be chargeable to capital account nor amortizable.

‘(2) POSSESSIONS TREATED AS PART OF THE UNITED STATES- For purposes of this section, the term ‘United States’ shall be treated as including each possession of the United States (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).

‘(d) Regulations- The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations which provide (or create a rebuttable presumption) that certain establishments of business units outside the United States will be treated as relocations (based on timing or such other factors as the Secretary may provide) of business units eliminated within the United States.’.

(b) Limitation on Subpart F Income of Controlled Foreign Corporations Determined Without Regard to Specified Outsourcing Expenses- Subsection (c) of section 952 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘(4) EARNINGS AND PROFITS DETERMINED WITHOUT REGARD TO SPECIFIED OUTSOURCING EXPENSES- For purposes of this subsection, earnings and profits of any controlled foreign corporation shall be determined without regard to any specified outsourcing expense (as defined in section 280I(b)).’.

(c) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

‘Sec. 280I. Outsourcing expenses.’.

So was this around during Obama's first 2 years, why was this not closed?

It was killed. Because of stupid, bipartisan politics in the Senate it fell four votes short. There were other things in the bill that they could not reach an agreement on.

There is this thing called legislation that the president isn't solely responsible for....

 

[SniperFire]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

.

Just like any other expense.


You are a lying piece of shit, aren't you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Romney seemed pretty confident that there is not a tax break when he used the "I dont know what you are talking about" line.

However, apparently Obama has been very busy "being president" doing things like deficit reduction planning; who to tax; who not to tax, etc......so I am sure he must know if there truly is a tax break as he asserted last night and many times during the campaign.

So either Romney is an idiot and wrong
or
Obama is a lair and knew what he was saying was wrong
or
Obama is not doing the things as president daily that he says he is "busy doing".

Which is it?

I have stated more than once on this board that no such deduction exists, no one has ever tried to prove me wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If you move a factory from Indiana to Alabama, you get a tax writeoff.

If you move that same factory from Indiana to China, you get the same tax writeoff.

It would not be difficult to take away the latter and keep the former.

.

You do not get the same tax write off for moving the plant to China that you do if you move it to Alabama.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

BTW, Obama tried to get rid of the deduction for business expenses for moving a company abroad, and the GOP, of course, blocked it.

Full Text of S. 3364: Bring Jobs Home Act - GovTrack.us

SEC. 3. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

‘SEC. 280I. OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
‘(a) In General- No deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter shall be allowed for any specified outsourcing expense.

‘(b) Specified Outsourcing Expense- For purposes of this section--

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘specified outsourcing expense’ means--

‘(A) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the elimination of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located within the United States, and

‘(B) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the establishment of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located outside the United States,

if such establishment constitutes the relocation of the business unit so eliminated. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a relocation shall not be treated as failing to occur merely because such elimination occurs in a different taxable year than such establishment.

‘(2) APPLICATION OF CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND RULES-

‘(A) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this section, the terms ‘eligible expenses’, ‘business unit’, and ‘expanded affiliated group’ shall have the respective meanings given such terms by section 45S(b).

‘(B) OPERATING EXPENSES NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT- A rule similar to the rule of section 45S(b)(6) shall apply for purposes of this section.

‘(c) Special Rules-

‘(1) APPLICATION TO DEDUCTIONS FOR DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION- In the case of any portion of a specified outsourcing expense which is not deductible in the taxable year in which paid or incurred, such portion shall neither be chargeable to capital account nor amortizable.

‘(2) POSSESSIONS TREATED AS PART OF THE UNITED STATES- For purposes of this section, the term ‘United States’ shall be treated as including each possession of the United States (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).

‘(d) Regulations- The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations which provide (or create a rebuttable presumption) that certain establishments of business units outside the United States will be treated as relocations (based on timing or such other factors as the Secretary may provide) of business units eliminated within the United States.’.

(b) Limitation on Subpart F Income of Controlled Foreign Corporations Determined Without Regard to Specified Outsourcing Expenses- Subsection (c) of section 952 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘(4) EARNINGS AND PROFITS DETERMINED WITHOUT REGARD TO SPECIFIED OUTSOURCING EXPENSES- For purposes of this subsection, earnings and profits of any controlled foreign corporation shall be determined without regard to any specified outsourcing expense (as defined in section 280I(b)).’.

(c) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

‘Sec. 280I. Outsourcing expenses.’.

Let me get this straight, the part where it says "No deduction ... shall be allowable" actually means that deductions are allowed.

 

[Old Rocks]

If you move a factory from Indiana to Alabama, you get a tax writeoff.

If you move that same factory from Indiana to China, you get the same tax writeoff.

It would not be difficult to take away the latter and keep the former.

.

So, once again Romney was lying. There is a tax break for moving a factory to China.

Yes, it would be very difficult to take away the latter. You have to get it through the House, and if the President is for it, the GOP controled House is going to be against it.

 

[SniperFire]

If you move a factory from Indiana to Alabama, you get a tax writeoff.

If you move that same factory from Indiana to China, you get the same tax writeoff.

It would not be difficult to take away the latter and keep the former.

.

So, once again Romney was lying. There is a tax break for moving a factory to China.

Yes, it would be very difficult to take away the latter. You have to get it through the House, and if the President is for it, the GOP controled House is going to be against it.

No. There are deductible expenses, and location is meaningless.


Fail.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

.

Just like any other expense.


You are a lying piece of shit, aren't you?

Once more a 'Conservative' defends the rich moving the factories to China. Then says what a bunch of moochers the people on unemployment are after the factory has been moved.

 

[SniperFire]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

.

Just like any other expense.


You are a lying piece of shit, aren't you?

Once more a 'Conservative' defends the rich moving the factories to China. Then says what a bunch of moochers the people on unemployment are after the factory has been moved.

Liberals are the least likely demographic to buy an American made union worker product.

Liberals are more responsible for where products are made than anyone else.

Project much?


LOL

 

[SniperFire]

See, Old Rocks, if we were in a debate and you said stupid shit like that, I would shove it right back up your ass, just like Romney shoved Obama's empty Libtards soundbites right back up his brownhole.


LOL

 

[edthecynic]

Yes there is, it is Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

BTW, Obama tried to get rid of the deduction for business expenses for moving a company abroad, and the GOP, of course, blocked it.

Full Text of S. 3364: Bring Jobs Home Act - GovTrack.us

SEC. 3. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION FOR OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
(a) In General- Part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

‘SEC. 280I. OUTSOURCING EXPENSES.
‘(a) In General- No deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter shall be allowed for any specified outsourcing expense.

‘(b) Specified Outsourcing Expense- For purposes of this section--

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The term ‘specified outsourcing expense’ means--

‘(A) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the elimination of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located within the United States, and

‘(B) any eligible expense paid or incurred by the taxpayer in connection with the establishment of any business unit of the taxpayer (or of any member of any expanded affiliated group in which the taxpayer is also a member) located outside the United States,

if such establishment constitutes the relocation of the business unit so eliminated. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a relocation shall not be treated as failing to occur merely because such elimination occurs in a different taxable year than such establishment.

‘(2) APPLICATION OF CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AND RULES-

‘(A) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this section, the terms ‘eligible expenses’, ‘business unit’, and ‘expanded affiliated group’ shall have the respective meanings given such terms by section 45S(b).

‘(B) OPERATING EXPENSES NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT- A rule similar to the rule of section 45S(b)(6) shall apply for purposes of this section.

‘(c) Special Rules-

‘(1) APPLICATION TO DEDUCTIONS FOR DEPRECIATION AND AMORTIZATION- In the case of any portion of a specified outsourcing expense which is not deductible in the taxable year in which paid or incurred, such portion shall neither be chargeable to capital account nor amortizable.

‘(2) POSSESSIONS TREATED AS PART OF THE UNITED STATES- For purposes of this section, the term ‘United States’ shall be treated as including each possession of the United States (including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands).

‘(d) Regulations- The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations or other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section, including regulations which provide (or create a rebuttable presumption) that certain establishments of business units outside the United States will be treated as relocations (based on timing or such other factors as the Secretary may provide) of business units eliminated within the United States.’.

(b) Limitation on Subpart F Income of Controlled Foreign Corporations Determined Without Regard to Specified Outsourcing Expenses- Subsection (c) of section 952 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

‘(4) EARNINGS AND PROFITS DETERMINED WITHOUT REGARD TO SPECIFIED OUTSOURCING EXPENSES- For purposes of this subsection, earnings and profits of any controlled foreign corporation shall be determined without regard to any specified outsourcing expense (as defined in section 280I(b)).’.

(c) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

‘Sec. 280I. Outsourcing expenses.’.

Let me get this straight, the part where it says "No deduction ... shall be allowable" actually means that deductions are allowed.

You couldn't get anything straight if you lay down on reinforced concrete under a steamroller. The part where it says "No deduction ... shall be allowable" actually means that the presently ALLOWED deductions will be repealed upon passage of the new bill.

 

[Old Rocks]

See, Old Rocks, if we were in a debate and you said stupid shit like that, I would shove it right back up your ass, just like Romney shoved Obama's empty Libtards soundbites right back up his brownhole.


LOL

We are in a debate. For with the internet, we are all part of the debate now. And the results thus far do not favor you;

President Obama 332 Governor Romney 206

RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map No Toss Ups

 

[PassMeBy2]

Closing plants, opening plants and all related costs are just that - costs of doing business that are deductible.

Librards are lying as usual, and this is just one of several Lefty memes Romney destroyed last night.

No, one debate does not make the world go around. Obama is going to win by a HUGE landslide. This election will go down in history and the most lopsided election in our history.

get used to it

Or don't