Obama & The Treasury Go After "inversions"

[Mac1958]

The officers of a corporation are mandated by law to work in a fiduciary capacity at all times.

American law.

American law.

That means their job is to maximize shareholder value.

If they do not, they can and will be sued by their shareholders.

And they will lose.

If you want to change that law, and I know you do, great. Do it. We can trust the government to run stuff.

.

They can sue all day.

HUGE tarriffs on companies that offshore. And they are outed publically.

Betcha they find a way to make it work after that.

Here's a crazy idea. I know you won't like it, but just for fun:

Instead of punishing American companies for doing what they're supposed to do, maximize shareholder value, let's drop corporate tax rates to levels just a bit below the rest of the world, maybe to 15% with a 10% effective minimum.

Then we'll watch hundreds of billions, if not a trillion or two, re-patriated by American companies to our shores and invested here.

But that's just the beginning. We'll also watch foreign companies that are based elsewhere move their operations here, the most dynamic place on earth, a place where businesses are really welcome and grow and thrive and employ and innovate. Why? Two reasons: First, global corporate capital is like water, it follows the path of least resistance. Second, America used to be a very attractive place for business capital investment because it's still such a great place, and we can still get some of that back even in a hyper-competitive global marketplace.

Then, when those who run the corporations make zillions of dollars as a result (I know this is a sticking point), they'll see their personal income taxes increased somewhat. Perhaps we add two new margins, maybe 44.9% and 49.9%, maybe even one or two more margins. Higher income taxes would also incentivize them to do some public-oriented, tax-advantaged investing to decrease exposure, such as in municipal bonds for cities and treasury bonds. Excellent! Fuck potholes!

Maybe we could even make laws that restrict corporate executives from putting their companies at too much risk, and/or from playing fast and loose with stock options when the company is under-performing. There is still a need for improved regulation, as long we can understand the difference between MORE regulation and BETTER regulation, a distinction which is still somehow completely evading us. Corporate cheats and thugs hurt the company, the employer. This isn't about the government.

I know how much we love punishing and intimidating Americans and issuing "consequences", but perhaps that would be another option. Maybe we could just back off (while carefully and efficiently regulating) and attract businesses and watch them create wealth and growth for everyone. The hardcore right wingers who can only talk about lowering income taxes will have to live with the effects of improved public environments.

And by the way: If the deal is my plan in exchange for a $15 minimum wage, I'm there, all day long. No, not $10, not $12. $15.

Yeah, I know, I know. Let's not do that. More fun to punish. Let other countries attract business. Hell, they already are. Just doing a little daydreaming there.

.

 

[JoeB131]

[


Here's a crazy idea. I know you won't like it, but just for fun:

Instead of punishing American companies for doing what they're supposed to do, maximize shareholder value, let's drop corporate tax rates to levels just a bit below the rest of the world, maybe to 15% with a 10% effective minimum.

Then we'll watch hundreds of billions, if not a trillion or two, re-patriated by American companies to our shores and invested here.

But that's just the beginning. We'll also watch foreign companies that are based elsewhere move their operations here, the most dynamic place on earth, a place where businesses are really welcome and grow and thrive and employ and innovate. Why? Two reasons: First, global corporate capital is like water, it follows the path of least resistance. Second, America used to be a very attractive place for business capital investment because it's still such a great place, and we can still get some of that back even in a hyper-competitive global marketplace.

.

I'm going to cut you off here because this is sort of retarded. No matter how much you cut taxes, regulations, and environmental protections in order to get the corporatists to maybe throw you a bone, there will always be some third world shithole that will throw them a couple more bones.

No, what we and other countries need to do is get these corporations back on a leash. And the ones that get out of hand need to be shot like Old Yeller.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Nobody enjoys punishing corporations. Your entire basis for outrage is false.

You accused another poster of being simplistic earlier. You just said that dropping the corporate tax rate to 15% will cause corporations who currently pay far less than 15% to want to stay in America. Simple.

The other stuff....those higher personal income taxes, those regulations and that $15 minimum wage.........will absolutely get the support of the corporations who own our legislators. Absolutely.

Existing as a corporation in this country is a privilege. It isn't a right. It carries with it responsibility to the community and the nation. Corporations need to be motivated as much by that responsibility as they are by their bottom line.

Take a look at a few corporate mission statements. They often speak to this responsibility. The is a reason for that.

 

[Mac1958]

[


Here's a crazy idea. I know you won't like it, but just for fun:

Instead of punishing American companies for doing what they're supposed to do, maximize shareholder value, let's drop corporate tax rates to levels just a bit below the rest of the world, maybe to 15% with a 10% effective minimum.

Then we'll watch hundreds of billions, if not a trillion or two, re-patriated by American companies to our shores and invested here.

But that's just the beginning. We'll also watch foreign companies that are based elsewhere move their operations here, the most dynamic place on earth, a place where businesses are really welcome and grow and thrive and employ and innovate. Why? Two reasons: First, global corporate capital is like water, it follows the path of least resistance. Second, America used to be a very attractive place for business capital investment because it's still such a great place, and we can still get some of that back even in a hyper-competitive global marketplace.

.

I'm going to cut you off here because this is sort of retarded.
.

And there ya go. This is what I'm dealing with.

I knew I was wasting my time, but it was enjoyable to write.

When a mind is closed, snapped shut, locked tight, no light gets in.

.

 

[JoeB131]

And there ya go. This is what I'm dealing with.

I knew I was wasting my time, but it was enjoyable to write.

When a mind is closed, snapped shut, locked tight, no light gets in.

.

Guy, a mind is closed when the results are seen.

Frankly, we've been hearing this shit about how we 'just need to get rid of these taxes on rich people" for 30 years now.

And we did.

And we never got the promised prosperity. It never fucking happened. We let them bust the unions, tear out the regulations, drop the tariffs and shift the tax burden onto working people and oddly, those good paying jobs never showed up.

 

[LoneLaugher]

[


Here's a crazy idea. I know you won't like it, but just for fun:

Instead of punishing American companies for doing what they're supposed to do, maximize shareholder value, let's drop corporate tax rates to levels just a bit below the rest of the world, maybe to 15% with a 10% effective minimum.

Then we'll watch hundreds of billions, if not a trillion or two, re-patriated by American companies to our shores and invested here.

But that's just the beginning. We'll also watch foreign companies that are based elsewhere move their operations here, the most dynamic place on earth, a place where businesses are really welcome and grow and thrive and employ and innovate. Why? Two reasons: First, global corporate capital is like water, it follows the path of least resistance. Second, America used to be a very attractive place for business capital investment because it's still such a great place, and we can still get some of that back even in a hyper-competitive global marketplace.

.

I'm going to cut you off here because this is sort of retarded.
.

And there ya go. This is what I'm dealing with.

I knew I was wasting my time, but it was enjoyable to write.

When a mind is closed, snapped shut, locked tight, no light gets in.

.

And there it is! Mac is again "wasting his time". He knew he was....but he did it anyway. Very efficient. This has nothing to do with Mac being ineffective with his posts. It's all about the other guy. It always is.

 

[JoeB131]

And the it is! Mac is again "wasting his time". He knew he was....but he did it anyway. Very efficient. This has nothing to do with Mac being ineffective with his posts. It's all about the other guy. It always is.

We are not as amazed by Mac's wisdom as he is.

I'm still waiting for him to identify the "PC Police" he keeps talking about.

 

[gipper]

And the it is! Mac is again "wasting his time". He knew he was....but he did it anyway. Very efficient. This has nothing to do with Mac being ineffective with his posts. It's all about the other guy. It always is.

We are not as amazed by Mac's wisdom as he is.

I'm still waiting for him to identify the "PC Police" he keeps talking about.

I like the pic Lil Joe, but anyone who tries to explain political correctness to you, is wasting their time.

I would have a better chance of explaining it to my dog.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I like the pic Lil Joe, but anyone who tries to explain political correctness to you, is wasting their time.

I would have a better chance of explaining it to my dog.

Funny thing, though. Dogs don't engage is racism, sexism or homophobia. Dogs just sniff each other's butts and they are usually totally cool with each other.

 

[gipper]

[

I like the pic Lil Joe, but anyone who tries to explain political correctness to you, is wasting their time.

I would have a better chance of explaining it to my dog.

Funny thing, though. Dogs don't engage is racism, sexism or homophobia. Dogs just sniff each other's butts and they are usually totally cool with each other.

I am totally cool with you Lil Joe, but you can't sniff my butt.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I like the pic Lil Joe, but anyone who tries to explain political correctness to you, is wasting their time.

I would have a better chance of explaining it to my dog.

Funny thing, though. Dogs don't engage is racism, sexism or homophobia. Dogs just sniff each other's butts and they are usually totally cool with each other.

I am totally cool with you Lil Joe, but you can't sniff my butt.

Come on, guy, like most homophobes, it's probably a fantasy you have.

 

[gipper]

[

I like the pic Lil Joe, but anyone who tries to explain political correctness to you, is wasting their time.

I would have a better chance of explaining it to my dog.

Funny thing, though. Dogs don't engage is racism, sexism or homophobia. Dogs just sniff each other's butts and they are usually totally cool with each other.

I am totally cool with you Lil Joe, but you can't sniff my butt.

Come on, guy, like most homophobes, it's probably a fantasy you have.

Why do you hate homosexuals Lil Joe? That is very un-PC of you....

 

[JoeB131]

[

I like the pic Lil Joe, but anyone who tries to explain political correctness to you, is wasting their time.

I would have a better chance of explaining it to my dog.

Funny thing, though. Dogs don't engage is racism, sexism or homophobia. Dogs just sniff each other's butts and they are usually totally cool with each other.

I am totally cool with you Lil Joe, but you can't sniff my butt.

Come on, guy, like most homophobes, it's probably a fantasy you have.

Why do you hate homosexuals Lil Joe? That is very un-PC of you....

Naw, man, I'm cool with the gays. But it was scientifically proven that most rabid homophobes like yourself are in the closet.

 

[Freewill]

Funny shit you all write. Hey someone show me where the POTUS has a legal obligation to protect corporate profits.

Seems to me those job creators failed in their duty to produce jobs for Americans. And seems to me the POTUS (of any party) has a responsibility to protect the well being of ALL American citizens. If the POTUS determines that allowing corporations to further reduce their tax obligations is working against the citizens, he is obligated to try and stop it.

Cry about it all you want. But if you want to claim CEO's have this "obligation" then certainly Presidents have an obligation as well. Just not to the corporations.

No one has claimed POTUS has an obligation to maximize corporate profits. It would be a good thing though as profitable corporations hire people and spend money of capital improvements, real estate and inventory.

Corporations have no duty to create jobs. They would love to be in a position where they needed to fill new positions, but in a hostile business environment like Dear Leader has given us, it's a wise decision to hold onto their cash.

Nails it.

At this point, anyone who claims this is not a hostile environment for employers is ignorant or lying.

.

Care to elaborate on this "bumper sticker slogan?".

 

[Freewill]

I don't know why I am pursuing this, maybe because Mac is being so damn disingenuous.

Here is the first post of this thread:

And away we go:

Treasury unveils measures to combat tax inversions - MarketWatch

That'll teach those corporations to follow their legal mandate to maximize shareholder value.

I responded, after reading the article, a cut and paste of the article wording asking for elaboration on mac's OP which is nothing more then a cut and paste and full of "bumper sticker slogans."

Which I responed with again asking for elaboration when I am then accused of posting cut and pastes and "bumper sticker slogans." Apparently obvious responses are "bumper sticker slogans.

So lets see one of Mac's responses:

Good thing this administration is so business-friendly.

And almost every other response is the same, except the ones attacking me for just asking questions and providing links to information.

But there may be a reason for Mac's response found in this post of his:

I'm not really sure what that story means.
But whatever we can do to punish American corporations is OK by me!

So he admittedly doesn't know what the story, HE posted means, but he is more then happy to use it to bludgeon Obama. (or some other story if not his OP) Now everyone knows I am no friend of democrats. But this seems to be something that should be done. I don't think Obama even has the knowledge of economics to come up with the idea.

That said, the only posts that I see that even addresses the subject of inversion is the OP and where I questioned mac on why he thinks that it is a bad idea, other then "bumper sticker slogans."

 

[Freewill]

Hey Mac, how about using your software to tell us if this is true or not:

For example, after-tax corporate profits in the third quarter topped 11% of gross domestic product for the first time since the records started in 1947. At the same time, taxes paid by corporations has declined nearly 5% in the third quarter compared with a year earlier.

How to Measure Corporate America s Huge Profits - Real Time Economics - WSJ

That was from Dec of last year and things have not really changed only got better for corporations, but check your software. I used this because it has some good information on how corporate performance is measured.

 

[asterism]

Is Obama going to go after his own staff?

Obama Aides Let Delphi Use Tax Tactic President Assails - Bloomberg

 

[Stephanie]

was just reading this: Jack Lew looks like a little weasel.

SNIP;

September 23, 2014 3:00 PM
The Inversion Diversion
By The Editors

Treasury secretary Jack Lew (Alex Wong/Getty Image)

4
‘While there’s no substitute for congressional action, my administration will act wherever we can to protect the progress the American people have worked so hard to bring about.” With this nonsensical statement, President Obama brought about an easy change to the tax code, as substitute for congressional action, that doesn’t represent any progress at all.
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew announced last night that the IRS will change its rules for “tax inversions,” deals in which American corporations acquire or merge with foreign businesses for tax purposes. The new rules won’t make such deals illegal, but they will make them less profitable, or harder to profit from.
Advertisement
The Treasury Department has a good deal of leeway in how it interprets the ambiguities of tax law, but this decision is clearly a political usurpation. The IRS justification says that inversions may be eroding the tax base, but that’s only true in the most marginal way. The deals have attracted a great deal more political controversy than they have ever mattered in terms of federal revenue.
The rule changes will apply only to mergers and acquisitions that occur in the future. This is still disruptive, since some corporations (the infamous Burger King included) have been working on such deals in light of the existing tax code for some time. Congressional Democrats, though, had an even worse idea, demanding an ex post facto change that would raise taxes on deals corporations have been doing since the 1990s.
There’s only one way to make American companies stop fleeing the tax code: Create a tax code they don’t want to flee. Some Democrats admit that fundamental tax reform is necessary — even President Obama has a plan — but say that staunching the flow of inversions is a pressing concern. It isn’t, and it reinforces the undesirable aspects of our tax code. American companies shouldn’t have to pay U.S. taxes on overseas earnings — the driving concern in the Burger King deal — and shouldn’t have to deal with the highest statutory corporate tax rate in the world.

ALL of it here:
The Inversion Diversion National Review Online

ONE of the comments with this article at site:
Just remember, Obama thought inversion was just fine in 2009.
As part of the bailout of the auto industry in 2009, Obama’s Treasury Department authorized spending $1.7 billion of government funds to get a bankrupt Michigan parts-maker back on its feet -- as a British company. While executives continue to run Delphi Automotive Plc (DLPH) from a Detroit suburb, the paper headquarters in England potentially reduces the company’s U.S. tax bill by as much as $110 million a year.

 

[Mac1958]

Guy, a mind is closed when the results are seen.

Frankly, we've been hearing this shit about how we 'just need to get rid of these taxes on rich people" for 30 years now.

And we did.

And we never got the promised prosperity. It never fucking happened. We let them bust the unions, tear out the regulations, drop the tariffs and shift the tax burden onto working people and oddly, those good paying jobs never showed up.

Maybe if you had read my post, you would know that I'm against lowering taxes on rich people. Quite the opposite.

You would know that I'm for improving regulations.

I'm against busting the unions.

You're fighting with a ghost, Joe.

You're much better off "debating" with a counterpart, a right wing partisan ideologue, not me.

.

 

[Mac1958]

@Freewill, tell ya what.

Clearly, I've struck a nerve.

Instead of rolling multiple posts at me, why don't you just ask me a direct question? Or one post with multiple questions?

I think I have some kind of message board ADD. I get bored and distracted quickly. But unlike partisan ideologues, I'm more than happy to answer questions.

.