130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

[whoisit]

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

OK, think about it.

A company has say a profit of $100 million. They plan to pay their shareholders $50 million. That means they have a $50 million profit.

They don't want to pay taxes on $50 million. Let's say their tax rate is 20%, so they would pay $10 million in taxes.

They have already calculated all their taxes and they can't get out of paying less unless they reduce profit and the only way to do that is spend the money.

OK, now they don't want to throw the money away, so what is the other option? To INVEST the money. That means there are higher future profits by investing in positive NPV profits.

Frankly it's pretty obvious, I can't believe you're creating threads and leading discussions on this without even knowing the basics about how companies operate

How does the practice of multinationals making profit domestically and then expatriating those profits to foreign tax havens factor into your investment equation?

Corporate taxes should be zero. Investors pay taxes now on their profits. Either dividend taxes (distributed profits) or capital gains taxes (retained profits).

Corporate taxes are money taken out of the shareholders' pockets. Those taxes are taken before the money gets to the shareholders's pockets, but amounts to the same.

How about being fair and stopping taxation of everybody?

It would work well for the first month until the bills start coming in.

All of which is a silly joke anyway! Hahahaha!

Who's to blame for America's corporations taking their business to China where the markets are the most lucrative? Should government have interfered and demanded that corporations stay in America where they would have had to employ Americans to manufacture made in America goods?

Had government done that, would that be 'socialist' interference in capitalism?

Capitalism grants corporations the right to take their business anywhere they choose!

I think for past few decades we are now under chrony capitalism. And thats why all our industry is now sold off to the highest bidders.

 

[bripat9643]

Is there anything in the world that these stupid uneducated greedy Libtards like better than taxes? I don't think so. It has to be tops on their list.

Most government spending, so then most taxes, are for the military. Which is right wing, not liberal or left wing.

Military spending consumes only 18% of the budget, so that claim is obviously false.

 

[Rigby5]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

When you tax corporations you take part of their revenue. They pass along that shortfall to their employees and raise the prices of their goods and services.

Not really.
When you have a high corporate tax, that encourages companies to raise wages and lower prices, so that they don't have to pay any corporate taxes.
Where do people get the mistaken idea that corporate taxes are based on gross instead of net earnings?

You need to explain net and gross.

Gross income is the total you take in, before figuring out how much you paid out in order to make that gross income.
No one is, or has ever been taxed on gross income.
Net profit is the excess income you made that was greater than expenditures.
And expenditures include wages, dividends, capital improvements, paying off debt, paying taxes, etc.
You are only taxed on the net profit after all your costs and pay outs are subtracted.
Which for any corporation, is almost always zero.
All accountants try to make it so that no corporation ever has to pay any corporate income tax.
There is never any reason to.
Just paying out employee bonuses makes more sense, and eliminates any corporate tax debt.

 

[Rigby5]

That's only partially accurate Tommy , generally speaking a corporation will only invest profits back into itself if the Internal Rate of Return makes sense to shareholders for it to do so, otherwise it will distribute those profits back to shareholders in the form of dividends so that shareholders can invest in other assets that offer higher rates of return.

But either way, the corporate tax rate does not matter because both actions can make corporate taxable income to be zero.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

To be enforced by whom?

Dunno, there aren’t any details of the enforcement mechanisms that have been made available yet. If I had to guess, the enforcement mechanisms will center around tariffs.

Does national sovereignty mean anything at all to you?

Where is the problem with “sovereignty” here? This is something that nations are free to agree to or not agree to, not to mention each nation still retains direct authority over its own tax code. It’s no more a violation of sovereignty than an international arms limitation treaty.

God damn bro they are making up a number out of thin air, that you must pay

Are you referring to the proposed 15% minimum GMT? If so, are you aware that’s significantly LOWER than the current U.S. corporate tax rate? Are you also aware that there is a possibility that U.S. citizens will pay LESS in taxes and retain MORE domestic business activity from this proposal. Again, why do you want to pay taxes to subsidize foreign countries?

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

Higher taxes always kill investment, moron. The money collected in additional taxes would have been invested. Even a fifth grader can understand that.

You seem to be very confused about taxation and its effects.

A tax like this will actually increase investment because corporations would rather spend money on their company than pay it in taxes. Any management that didnt feel like that would not be in place for long.

So the money gets invested in R and D or new plant or refurbs or more people. Its all good as it generates growth in the economy.

Do you understand this or shall I try and simplify it for you ?

That's only partially accurate Tommy , generally speaking a corporation will only invest profits back into itself if the Internal Rate of Return makes sense to shareholders for it to do so, otherwise it will distribute those profits back to shareholders in the form of dividends so that shareholders can invest in other assets that offer higher rates of return.

Its a bit different over here. You would need to be pretty dumb to pay tax on your dividens . Most folk invest through their pensions or ISAs which are tax free.
Companies are more likely to invest,pay down debt or buy back shares. that would depend on their position at the time.

You can't invest what the government has taxed away. What debt would Apple pay off? Companies buy back shares only when the price is declining. That means they aren't in good shape.

This debt you idiot Go and play with your lego.

Apple Debt to Equity Ratio 2010-2023 | AAPL

Current and historical debt to equity ratio values for Apple (AAPL) over the last 10 years. The debt/equity ratio can be defined as a measure of a company's financial leverage calculated by dividing its long-term debt by stockholders' equity. Apple debt/equity for the three months ending...

www.macrotrends.net

 

[Flash]

Is there anything in the world that these stupid uneducated greedy Libtards like better than taxes? I don't think so. It has to be tops on their list.

Most government spending, so then most taxes, are for the military. Which is right wing, not liberal or left wing.

You are confused Moon Bat.

The US spends more on defense than any other country on the face of the earth and it is typically about $500 billion out of about $4-5 trillion in Federal spending. Even in times of military buildup like Trump had to do after Obama fucked up the military to get back to strength is never more than $700-800 billion.

I know you stupid uneducated Moon Bats are not very good in math but that is not "most" spending as you claim. It becomes even a lower percentage when you throw in a like amount of State and Local spending.

By the way dipshit. Defense is one of the very few legtimate expenditures of the Federal government. A lot more legtimate than giving Illegals welfare, bailing out GM and Chrysler or giving grants to companies like Solyndra..

Pull your head out of your Libtard ass. You are just embarrassing yourself by showing your ignorance.

 

[Rigby5]

Entire global warming thing is a giant massive fraud that is all about $$$$

Tell that to people in the state of Washington and Canada, with 125 degree F weather this week.

There is no money to be made by trying to stop Global Warming.
The only way to stop Global Warming is to burn less fossil fuel, and that makes no money for anyone else.

 

[bripat9643]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

To be enforced by whom?

Dunno, there aren’t any details of the enforcement mechanisms that have been made available yet. If I had to guess, the enforcement mechanisms will center around tariffs.

Does national sovereignty mean anything at all to you?

Where is the problem with “sovereignty” here? This is something that nations are free to agree to or not agree to, not to mention each nation still retains direct authority over its own tax code. It’s no more a violation of sovereignty than an international arms limitation treaty.

God damn bro they are making up a number out of thin air, that you must pay

Are you referring to the proposed 15% minimum GMT? If so, are you aware that’s significantly LOWER than the current U.S. corporate tax rate? Are you also aware that there is a possibility that U.S. citizens will pay LESS in taxes and retain MORE domestic business activity from this proposal. Again, why do you want to pay taxes to subsidize foreign countries?

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

Higher taxes always kill investment, moron. The money collected in additional taxes would have been invested. Even a fifth grader can understand that.

You seem to be very confused about taxation and its effects.

A tax like this will actually increase investment because corporations would rather spend money on their company than pay it in taxes. Any management that didnt feel like that would not be in place for long.

So the money gets invested in R and D or new plant or refurbs or more people. Its all good as it generates growth in the economy.

Do you understand this or shall I try and simplify it for you ?

That's only partially accurate Tommy , generally speaking a corporation will only invest profits back into itself if the Internal Rate of Return makes sense to shareholders for it to do so, otherwise it will distribute those profits back to shareholders in the form of dividends so that shareholders can invest in other assets that offer higher rates of return.

Its a bit different over here. You would need to be pretty dumb to pay tax on your dividens . Most folk invest through their pensions or ISAs which are tax free.
Companies are more likely to invest,pay down debt or buy back shares. that would depend on their position at the time.

You can't invest what the government has taxed away. What debt would Apple pay off? Companies buy back shares only when the price is declining. That means they aren't in good shape.

This debt you idiot Go and play with your lego.

Apple Debt to Equity Ratio 2010-2023 | AAPL

Current and historical debt to equity ratio values for Apple (AAPL) over the last 10 years. The debt/equity ratio can be defined as a measure of a company's financial leverage calculated by dividing its long-term debt by stockholders' equity. Apple debt/equity for the three months ending...

www.macrotrends.net

Your chart has no units. IT's worthless.

Apple owes about $100 billion in short and long term loans. Apple is worth over $1 trillion. Their debt is trivial.

 

[bripat9643]

Entire global warming thing is a giant massive fraud that is all about $$$$

Tell that to people in the state of Washington and Canada, with 125 degree F weather this week.

There is no money to be made by trying to stop Global Warming.
The only way to stop Global Warming is to burn less fossil fuel, and that makes no money for anyone else.

All the so-called climate scientists are making money hand over foot. So are the so-called "green industries."

 

[NightFox]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

To be enforced by whom?

Dunno, there aren’t any details of the enforcement mechanisms that have been made available yet. If I had to guess, the enforcement mechanisms will center around tariffs.

Does national sovereignty mean anything at all to you?

Where is the problem with “sovereignty” here? This is something that nations are free to agree to or not agree to, not to mention each nation still retains direct authority over its own tax code. It’s no more a violation of sovereignty than an international arms limitation treaty.

God damn bro they are making up a number out of thin air, that you must pay

Are you referring to the proposed 15% minimum GMT? If so, are you aware that’s significantly LOWER than the current U.S. corporate tax rate? Are you also aware that there is a possibility that U.S. citizens will pay LESS in taxes and retain MORE domestic business activity from this proposal. Again, why do you want to pay taxes to subsidize foreign countries?

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

Higher taxes always kill investment, moron. The money collected in additional taxes would have been invested. Even a fifth grader can understand that.

You seem to be very confused about taxation and its effects.

A tax like this will actually increase investment because corporations would rather spend money on their company than pay it in taxes. Any management that didnt feel like that would not be in place for long.

So the money gets invested in R and D or new plant or refurbs or more people. Its all good as it generates growth in the economy.

Do you understand this or shall I try and simplify it for you ?

That's only partially accurate Tommy , generally speaking a corporation will only invest profits back into itself if the Internal Rate of Return makes sense to shareholders for it to do so, otherwise it will distribute those profits back to shareholders in the form of dividends so that shareholders can invest in other assets that offer higher rates of return.

Its a bit different over here. You would need to be pretty dumb to pay tax on your dividens .

Not at all, if the IRR for reinvestment is 2% in a mature market company why would I want to lock away capital in that when I can make say a compounding 10% elsewhere just to avoid one off capital gains? This is why you see most companies in mature markets paying out substantial portions of profits in dividends, their IRR is generally too low to justify not paying them out, if they didn't pay them out people wouldn't want to invest in them in the first place (i.e. lower demand for equity shares = lower stock price).

You see Amazon reinvesting profits because their growth rate and thus IRR is so high, you see General Motors distributing attractive dividends because its growth rate is so low (mature market), if GM wasn't offering an attractive dividend yield who the heck would want to invest in them over investing in Amazon?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

To be enforced by whom?

Dunno, there aren’t any details of the enforcement mechanisms that have been made available yet. If I had to guess, the enforcement mechanisms will center around tariffs.

Does national sovereignty mean anything at all to you?

Where is the problem with “sovereignty” here? This is something that nations are free to agree to or not agree to, not to mention each nation still retains direct authority over its own tax code. It’s no more a violation of sovereignty than an international arms limitation treaty.

God damn bro they are making up a number out of thin air, that you must pay

Are you referring to the proposed 15% minimum GMT? If so, are you aware that’s significantly LOWER than the current U.S. corporate tax rate? Are you also aware that there is a possibility that U.S. citizens will pay LESS in taxes and retain MORE domestic business activity from this proposal. Again, why do you want to pay taxes to subsidize foreign countries?

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

Higher taxes always kill investment, moron. The money collected in additional taxes would have been invested. Even a fifth grader can understand that.

You seem to be very confused about taxation and its effects.

A tax like this will actually increase investment because corporations would rather spend money on their company than pay it in taxes. Any management that didnt feel like that would not be in place for long.

So the money gets invested in R and D or new plant or refurbs or more people. Its all good as it generates growth in the economy.

Do you understand this or shall I try and simplify it for you ?

That's only partially accurate Tommy , generally speaking a corporation will only invest profits back into itself if the Internal Rate of Return makes sense to shareholders for it to do so, otherwise it will distribute those profits back to shareholders in the form of dividends so that shareholders can invest in other assets that offer higher rates of return.

Its a bit different over here. You would need to be pretty dumb to pay tax on your dividens . Most folk invest through their pensions or ISAs which are tax free.
Companies are more likely to invest,pay down debt or buy back shares. that would depend on their position at the time.

You can't invest what the government has taxed away. What debt would Apple pay off? Companies buy back shares only when the price is declining. That means they aren't in good shape.

This debt you idiot Go and play with your lego.

Apple Debt to Equity Ratio 2010-2023 | AAPL

Current and historical debt to equity ratio values for Apple (AAPL) over the last 10 years. The debt/equity ratio can be defined as a measure of a company's financial leverage calculated by dividing its long-term debt by stockholders' equity. Apple debt/equity for the three months ending...

www.macrotrends.net

Your chart has no units. IT's worthless.

Apple owes about $100 billion in short and long term loans. Apple is worth over $1 trillion. Their debt is trivial.

Well to break it down into simple talk - fucking loads.

Apple Share Price (NASDAQ:AAPL) | AJ Bell

View share price quotes, updates and the latest stock news for Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL). Explore historical charts, financials and dividends.

www.youinvest.co.uk

 

[Burgermeister]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

To be enforced by whom?

Dunno, there aren’t any details of the enforcement mechanisms that have been made available yet. If I had to guess, the enforcement mechanisms will center around tariffs.

Does national sovereignty mean anything at all to you?

Where is the problem with “sovereignty” here? This is something that nations are free to agree to or not agree to, not to mention each nation still retains direct authority over its own tax code. It’s no more a violation of sovereignty than an international arms limitation treaty.

God damn bro they are making up a number out of thin air, that you must pay

Are you referring to the proposed 15% minimum GMT? If so, are you aware that’s significantly LOWER than the current U.S. corporate tax rate? Are you also aware that there is a possibility that U.S. citizens will pay LESS in taxes and retain MORE domestic business activity from this proposal. Again, why do you want to pay taxes to subsidize foreign countries?

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

Higher taxes always kill investment, moron. The money collected in additional taxes would have been invested. Even a fifth grader can understand that.

You seem to be very confused about taxation and its effects.

A tax like this will actually increase investment because corporations would rather spend money on their company than pay it in taxes. Any management that didnt feel like that would not be in place for long.

So the money gets invested in R and D or new plant or refurbs or more people. Its all good as it generates growth in the economy.

Do you understand this or shall I try and simplify it for you ?

That's only partially accurate Tommy , generally speaking a corporation will only invest profits back into itself if the Internal Rate of Return makes sense to shareholders for it to do so, otherwise it will distribute those profits back to shareholders in the form of dividends so that shareholders can invest in other assets that offer higher rates of return.

Its a bit different over here. You would need to be pretty dumb to pay tax on your dividens . Most folk invest through their pensions or ISAs which are tax free.
Companies are more likely to invest,pay down debt or buy back shares. that would depend on their position at the time.

You can't invest what the government has taxed away. What debt would Apple pay off? Companies buy back shares only when the price is declining. That means they aren't in good shape.

This debt you idiot Go and play with your lego.

Apple Debt to Equity Ratio 2010-2023 | AAPL

Current and historical debt to equity ratio values for Apple (AAPL) over the last 10 years. The debt/equity ratio can be defined as a measure of a company's financial leverage calculated by dividing its long-term debt by stockholders' equity. Apple debt/equity for the three months ending...

www.macrotrends.net

Your chart has no units. IT's worthless.

Apple owes about $100 billion in short and long term loans. Apple is worth over $1 trillion. Their debt is trivial.

Interest rates are so low that debt money is practically free to these corporations. Only reason to pay back debt is if the debt ratios were affecting stock price.

 

[kaz]

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

OK, think about it.

A company has say a profit of $100 million. They plan to pay their shareholders $50 million. That means they have a $50 million profit.

They don't want to pay taxes on $50 million. Let's say their tax rate is 20%, so they would pay $10 million in taxes.

They have already calculated all their taxes and they can't get out of paying less unless they reduce profit and the only way to do that is spend the money.

OK, now they don't want to throw the money away, so what is the other option? To INVEST the money. That means there are higher future profits by investing in positive NPV profits.

Frankly it's pretty obvious, I can't believe you're creating threads and leading discussions on this without even knowing the basics about how companies operate

How does the practice of multinationals making profit domestically and then expatriating those profits to foreign tax havens factor into your investment equation?

Corporate taxes should be zero. Investors pay taxes now on their profits. Either dividend taxes (distributed profits) or capital gains taxes (retained profits).

I agree, the concept of income taxes is second only to fiat currency in terms of the most heinous, exploitive and invasive practices ever invented by the institution of the state. However in order to make them zero you would have to eliminate ALL income taxes since how can you justify levying taxes on the incomes of one group (wage earners) while not doing so on another group (businesses)? Do you see that happening any time soon? I don't. Thus in the meantime I'll consider a proposal that has the potential to materially benefit me and my fellow citizens at the expense of foreigners using differential tax rates in order to foster capital outflows that benefit THEIR citizens. As a former President of the blonde persuasion once said "AMERICA FIRST", foreigners attempting to use their domestic tax code to manipulate comparative advantage come in a DISTANT second in my book, how about yours?

The reason companies go to "tax havens" is to escape belligerent government.

LOL, really? doesn't have anything to do with privatizing profits and socializing costs? If they're going there to escape "belligerent government" why do they choose to generate profits in markets controlled by those "belligerent governments"?

I always find people like you who think you're an expert in economics and finance based on nothing fasinating. You have no business education or experience, yet you know everything about everything.

LOL, talk about PROJECTION. You're the one that doesn't appear to understand the basics of what you're arguing against, which explains your penchant for attempting to deflect any question that would cause you to actually defend your own argument.

Do you talk to doctors this way about medicine? Do you give them what fer based on your utter lack of medical knowledge?

ROFLMAO! so you're a doctor now?

You disappoint me kaz, I thought you capable of formulating an argument based on reason and evidence, not this hodgepodge of non-sequitur fluff mixed with invective, oh well.

You are master of everything, you know everything about everything. Not knowing anything about something doesn't deter you from believing you know everything about it.

You have repeatedly proven you don't even understand basic business concepts

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

To be enforced by whom?

Dunno, there aren’t any details of the enforcement mechanisms that have been made available yet. If I had to guess, the enforcement mechanisms will center around tariffs.

Does national sovereignty mean anything at all to you?

Where is the problem with “sovereignty” here? This is something that nations are free to agree to or not agree to, not to mention each nation still retains direct authority over its own tax code. It’s no more a violation of sovereignty than an international arms limitation treaty.

God damn bro they are making up a number out of thin air, that you must pay

Are you referring to the proposed 15% minimum GMT? If so, are you aware that’s significantly LOWER than the current U.S. corporate tax rate? Are you also aware that there is a possibility that U.S. citizens will pay LESS in taxes and retain MORE domestic business activity from this proposal. Again, why do you want to pay taxes to subsidize foreign countries?

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

Higher taxes always kill investment, moron. The money collected in additional taxes would have been invested. Even a fifth grader can understand that.

You seem to be very confused about taxation and its effects.

A tax like this will actually increase investment because corporations would rather spend money on their company than pay it in taxes. Any management that didnt feel like that would not be in place for long.

So the money gets invested in R and D or new plant or refurbs or more people. Its all good as it generates growth in the economy.

Do you understand this or shall I try and simplify it for you ?

That's only partially accurate Tommy , generally speaking a corporation will only invest profits back into itself if the Internal Rate of Return makes sense to shareholders for it to do so, otherwise it will distribute those profits back to shareholders in the form of dividends so that shareholders can invest in other assets that offer higher rates of return.

Its a bit different over here. You would need to be pretty dumb to pay tax on your dividens .

Not at all, if the IRR for reinvestment is 2% in a mature market company why would I want to lock away capital in that when I can make say a compounding 10% elsewhere just to avoid one off capital gains? This is why you see most companies in mature markets paying out substantial portions of profits in dividends, their IRR is generally too low to justify not paying them out, if they didn't pay them out people wouldn't want to invest in them in the first place (i.e. lower demand for equity shares = lower stock price).

You see Amazon reinvesting profits because their growth rate and thus IRR is so high, you see General Motors distributing attractive dividends because its growth rate is so low (mature market), if GM wasn't offering an attractive dividend yield who the heck would want to invest in them over investing in Amazon?

It depends on the circs of the company at that point in their cycle. Most investors would prefer the cash in their account than, for example, a share buyback. Well I would anyway.

 

[NightFox]

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

OK, think about it.

A company has say a profit of $100 million. They plan to pay their shareholders $50 million. That means they have a $50 million profit.

They don't want to pay taxes on $50 million. Let's say their tax rate is 20%, so they would pay $10 million in taxes.

They have already calculated all their taxes and they can't get out of paying less unless they reduce profit and the only way to do that is spend the money.

OK, now they don't want to throw the money away, so what is the other option? To INVEST the money. That means there are higher future profits by investing in positive NPV profits.

Frankly it's pretty obvious, I can't believe you're creating threads and leading discussions on this without even knowing the basics about how companies operate

How does the practice of multinationals making profit domestically and then expatriating those profits to foreign tax havens factor into your investment equation?

Corporate taxes should be zero. Investors pay taxes now on their profits. Either dividend taxes (distributed profits) or capital gains taxes (retained profits).

The reason companies go to "tax havens" is to escape belligerent government.

I always find people like you who think you're an expert in economics and finance based on nothing fasinating. You have no business education or experience, yet you know everything about everything.

Do you talk to doctors this way about medicine? Do you give them what fer based on your utter lack of medical knowledge?

Corporate taxes should be zero.

Likewise, individual income taxes should be zero.

If there are to be any taxes at all (a premise I reject) gubmint should be limited to surviving off of lawful fees, imposts, and duties, which are specific charges levied to pay for specific services.....This idea of having taxes thrown into a big pot, where politicians and bureaucrats wrangle over them, has given us the mess we have now.

Great, what's the probability of this happening in your lifetime? Do you see any indications of society and public opinion going in this direction?

Wishful thinking is comforting and all but it doesn't really have any relationship to reality.

 

[Rigby5]

Is there anything in the world that these stupid uneducated greedy Libtards like better than taxes? I don't think so. It has to be tops on their list.

Most government spending, so then most taxes, are for the military. Which is right wing, not liberal or left wing.

Military spending consumes only 18% of the budget, so that claim is obviously false.

Depends on how well one tries to hide the real cost of military spending?
First of all, one can hide military spending by talking about total federal spending instead of discretionary spending.
That is because then you can include things like Social Security, which really should not be included because it is self funded and not paid for by taxes.
Then one can also hide military spending, like VA, GIBill, etc., by calling them social service, and hiding them under welfare when they really are military spending.

This is more accurate at 54% instead of the 18% you suggested.
But even then, the dark blue should also have the grey, Veterans' Benefits of 6% added, to give you 60% going to the military.
It still is even more than that, but that much should be obvious and not controversial.

 

[kaz]

Source: CNBC.COM
Link to story: 130 nations agree to support U.S. proposal for global minimum tax on corporations

“WASHINGTON - Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced Thursday that a group of 130 nations has agreed to a global minimum tax on corporations, part of a broader agreement to overhaul international tax rules.

If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.

“For decades, the United States has participated in a self-defeating international tax competition, lowering our corporate tax rates only to watch other nations lower theirs in response. The result was a global race to the bottom: Who could lower their corporate rate further and faster? No nation has won this race,” said Yellen in a statement on the accord.

“Today’s agreement by 130 countries representing more than 90 percent of global GDP is a clear sign: the race to the bottom is one step closer to coming to an end,” Yellen said.

The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.

In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered”

Interesting, I’m surprised the GMT proposal is moving this quickly after it was endorsed by the G-7 just a short time ago, looks like that now 90% of the worlds GDP has agreed to it in principle. Frankly I didn’t really believe it would get this far given all the hurdles. The agreement on digital service taxes is also an important plus for the American Tech Sector, surprised the EU is going along with it.

This will be a big foreign policy win for the Biden Administration if it does actually come to fruition, of course there is still a long way to go.

To be enforced by whom?

Dunno, there aren’t any details of the enforcement mechanisms that have been made available yet. If I had to guess, the enforcement mechanisms will center around tariffs.

Does national sovereignty mean anything at all to you?

Where is the problem with “sovereignty” here? This is something that nations are free to agree to or not agree to, not to mention each nation still retains direct authority over its own tax code. It’s no more a violation of sovereignty than an international arms limitation treaty.

God damn bro they are making up a number out of thin air, that you must pay

Are you referring to the proposed 15% minimum GMT? If so, are you aware that’s significantly LOWER than the current U.S. corporate tax rate? Are you also aware that there is a possibility that U.S. citizens will pay LESS in taxes and retain MORE domestic business activity from this proposal. Again, why do you want to pay taxes to subsidize foreign countries?

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

Higher taxes always kill investment, moron. The money collected in additional taxes would have been invested. Even a fifth grader can understand that.

You seem to be very confused about taxation and its effects.

A tax like this will actually increase investment because corporations would rather spend money on their company than pay it in taxes. Any management that didnt feel like that would not be in place for long.

So the money gets invested in R and D or new plant or refurbs or more people. Its all good as it generates growth in the economy.

Do you understand this or shall I try and simplify it for you ?

He said that companies invest in part to avoid taxes. You didn't disagree with that.

But they need the availability of positive NPV projects for their investment to be economically efficient. Higher tax rates warp that calculation

 

[initforme]

If american corporations don't want to pay american labor more than what other nations pay then we'll to heck with em. They should move out.

 

[NightFox]

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

OK, think about it.

A company has say a profit of $100 million. They plan to pay their shareholders $50 million. That means they have a $50 million profit.

They don't want to pay taxes on $50 million. Let's say their tax rate is 20%, so they would pay $10 million in taxes.

They have already calculated all their taxes and they can't get out of paying less unless they reduce profit and the only way to do that is spend the money.

OK, now they don't want to throw the money away, so what is the other option? To INVEST the money. That means there are higher future profits by investing in positive NPV profits.

Frankly it's pretty obvious, I can't believe you're creating threads and leading discussions on this without even knowing the basics about how companies operate

How does the practice of multinationals making profit domestically and then expatriating those profits to foreign tax havens factor into your investment equation?

Corporate taxes should be zero. Investors pay taxes now on their profits. Either dividend taxes (distributed profits) or capital gains taxes (retained profits).

I agree, the concept of income taxes is second only to fiat currency in terms of the most heinous, exploitive and invasive practices ever invented by the institution of the state. However in order to make them zero you would have to eliminate ALL income taxes since how can you justify levying taxes on the incomes of one group (wage earners) while not doing so on another group (businesses)? Do you see that happening any time soon? I don't. Thus in the meantime I'll consider a proposal that has the potential to materially benefit me and my fellow citizens at the expense of foreigners using differential tax rates in order to foster capital outflows that benefit THEIR citizens. As a former President of the blonde persuasion once said "AMERICA FIRST", foreigners attempting to use their domestic tax code to manipulate comparative advantage come in a DISTANT second in my book, how about yours?

The reason companies go to "tax havens" is to escape belligerent government.

LOL, really? doesn't have anything to do with privatizing profits and socializing costs? If they're going there to escape "belligerent government" why do they choose to generate profits in markets controlled by those "belligerent governments"?

I always find people like you who think you're an expert in economics and finance based on nothing fasinating. You have no business education or experience, yet you know everything about everything.

LOL, talk about PROJECTION. You're the one that doesn't appear to understand the basics of what you're arguing against, which explains your penchant for attempting to deflect any question that would cause you to actually defend your own argument.

Do you talk to doctors this way about medicine? Do you give them what fer based on your utter lack of medical knowledge?

ROFLMAO! so you're a doctor now?

You disappoint me kaz, I thought you capable of formulating an argument based on reason and evidence, not this hodgepodge of non-sequitur fluff mixed with invective, oh well.

You are master of everything, you know everything about everything.

LOL, thanks, would you like an autograph? Or perhaps I should ask for yours since you're an such an all-pro, future hall of famer in deflection and prevarication.

Not to mention your amazing talent for getting exceedingly angry and overtly hostile towards anyone that deigns to disagree with your unsubstantiated, highly subjective arguments.

You have repeatedly proven you don't even understand basic business concepts

Such as?

 

[Oddball]

You don't see anything wrong with this?

I see all kinds of potential things wrong with it, however I see A LOT more wrong with the current system of exploitation being practiced by large multinational corporations.

Killing investment is a great way to increase jobs. I see why you like it

How does this proposal “kill investment”?

OK, think about it.

A company has say a profit of $100 million. They plan to pay their shareholders $50 million. That means they have a $50 million profit.

They don't want to pay taxes on $50 million. Let's say their tax rate is 20%, so they would pay $10 million in taxes.

They have already calculated all their taxes and they can't get out of paying less unless they reduce profit and the only way to do that is spend the money.

OK, now they don't want to throw the money away, so what is the other option? To INVEST the money. That means there are higher future profits by investing in positive NPV profits.

Frankly it's pretty obvious, I can't believe you're creating threads and leading discussions on this without even knowing the basics about how companies operate

How does the practice of multinationals making profit domestically and then expatriating those profits to foreign tax havens factor into your investment equation?

Corporate taxes should be zero. Investors pay taxes now on their profits. Either dividend taxes (distributed profits) or capital gains taxes (retained profits).

The reason companies go to "tax havens" is to escape belligerent government.

I always find people like you who think you're an expert in economics and finance based on nothing fasinating. You have no business education or experience, yet you know everything about everything.

Do you talk to doctors this way about medicine? Do you give them what fer based on your utter lack of medical knowledge?

Corporate taxes should be zero.

Likewise, individual income taxes should be zero.

If there are to be any taxes at all (a premise I reject) gubmint should be limited to surviving off of lawful fees, imposts, and duties, which are specific charges levied to pay for specific services.....This idea of having taxes thrown into a big pot, where politicians and bureaucrats wrangle over them, has given us the mess we have now.

Great, what's the probability of this happening in your lifetime? Do you see any indications of society and public opinion going in this direction?

Wishful thinking is comforting and all but it doesn't really have any relationship to reality.

What the probability of slavery ending in what time frame, is irrelevant to the fact that you are a slave, Buckwheat.

And you have Stockholm syndrome so badly that you are whining and crying that others aren't as equally enslaved.

Your economic and historical illiteracy are only exceeded by your weapons grade know-it-all haughtiness.