9 - 9 - 9 for a business owner

[Charles_Main]

Why would a corporation be expected to pay a higher tax on profits in this country than other places? Any thoughts?

Because you're doing business in the USA. Should we tell corporations you don't have to pay workers here any higher than you would elsewhere? You make money here, you pay our taxes. You don't want to make money here, go about your business. Someone else will gladly make money here.

You just showed massive Ignorance. Lets examine your Statement. In a Nut shell you are saying if Companies do not like the System here, they can go somewhere else.

News Flash- They are, ever heard of Out sourcing?

Then you say someone else will take their place.

News Flash- No they wont, as long as we make it difficult to do business and make a Profit in the US, companies will move jobs over seas, and nobody will "Gladly make money here" Because the reason the Jobs left in the first place is it is to difficult to make money here.

 

[Inthemiddle]

But when it becomes far more profitable to do business elsewhere than it is to do business here, the companies, both those American born and everybody else, will go about their business elsewhere.

So ask yourself. Which is more important? The government imposing ever more expensive taxes, mandates, and regulation on American business? Or for American business to have as much freedom as possible to make profits and therefore hire and pay people here?

The political class answers that question much differently than does mainstream America. You call yourself inthemiddle. Are you really?

This argument is always a load of horse shit. It's a hypothetical that is always thrown out for propaganda purposes to raise alarms, but never comes true. Because in actuality, it's an absurdity.

Do you think that Wal-Mart will make more money by operating in the US, or less money? How about McDonald's? How about Exxon? How about AT&T? How about Darden Restaurants (parent corporation for Red Lobster and Olive Garden)? How about Gap Stores? Of course, the answer is that they are going to make more money. And if they decide to close down all US operations, they will make less money. We live in a global market where large corporations already operate in other regions. Many of them have even failed to expand into certain parts of the globe, making their current markets their venues by necessity. For example, Wal-Mart failed in China.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter if we so over-taxed these corporations so much they each only made $10,000 in profit at the end of each year. That's still a profit they would lose if they ever decided to close down operations in the US that they would not be able to replace elsewhere.

And even if all these corporations decided to go ahead and close down, that's not going to eliminate demand in our country. You still need clothes. You still gotta eat. You still need communication. You still need gas in your car. You still want a television. As long as there is a market, there will be someone willing to do business. Mostly, it would be smaller businesses that would fill the void. And I have to be honest with you, I'm alot more interested in seeing small businesses be successful than I am any corporation because thriving small businesses are 100x more valuable to our economy than any big INC.

 

[Money]

While it's cool to talk about, the 999 thing is a tactic to run a profitable race in a sure-to-lose election... by proposing a never-to-be-implemented suggestion for tax reform. Even if the president likes a plan like this, hell would have frozen over twice before it becomes a bill.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Its really much worse then that. 9-9-9 is a tax plan written by wall street and the federal reserve.

It will shift all corporate taxation to the companies that provide real goods and services while companies that generate huge profits while supplying nothing tangable to the market will pay the least.

And what will change with big business hiding money and beating the system by any means??? Nothing, they will continue to pay very little compared to smaller business without the same resources.

I'm unsure what you mean by "It will shift all corporate taxation....". My understanding is that the 9% business tax rate applies equally to all business's and their profit, incorporated or otherwise.

The part I think is brilliant about Mr Cain's plan is that the 9% tax rate applies to both the business and the business owner, regardless of where that money ends up.
I am very anti-tax, but I am also a realist and understand that some monies need to be paid in order to support the operation of the federal government. 9% income tax seems to be a somewhat reasonable rate for all to pay. The 9% sales tax seems a bit high to me. I currently don't spend 100% of what I earn, but if I did, the combined 9% income tax and 9% sales tax is less than what I currently pay.

Another thing about a federal sales tax (coupled with a reduction in income tax) is that the underground economy will start paying some federal taxes that they currently avoid, because they have no "declared income" or undeclared income. The obvious example is the drug dealer that pays no income tax because his earnings are hidden. Less obvious are people like the guy that mows my yard. I pay him cash, I don't fill out a 1099 form for him and I guarantee you that he doesn't declare that $30 every other week as income on his federal tax return.

It doesn't mean anything. It's simply having something contrary to post.
Another typical "profit is evil" response.
Interesting how they want job creation yet look to punish the job creators. Why? Because they believe the job creators' primary interest is turning a profit.
Well...DUHHHHH...The primary function of a business is to turn a profit. Business does not exist to break even. That would be a pointless existence

 

[Foxfyre]

But when it becomes far more profitable to do business elsewhere than it is to do business here, the companies, both those American born and everybody else, will go about their business elsewhere.

So ask yourself. Which is more important? The government imposing ever more expensive taxes, mandates, and regulation on American business? Or for American business to have as much freedom as possible to make profits and therefore hire and pay people here?

The political class answers that question much differently than does mainstream America. You call yourself inthemiddle. Are you really?

This argument is always a load of horse shit. It's a hypothetical that is always thrown out for propaganda purposes to raise alarms, but never comes true. Because in actuality, it's an absurdity.

Do you think that Wal-Mart will make more money by operating in the US, or less money? How about McDonald's? How about Exxon? How about AT&T? How about Darden Restaurants (parent corporation for Red Lobster and Olive Garden)? How about Gap Stores? Of course, the answer is that they are going to make more money. And if they decide to close down all US operations, they will make less money. We live in a global market where large corporations already operate in other regions. Many of them have even failed to expand into certain parts of the globe, making their current markets their venues by necessity. For example, Wal-Mart failed in China.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter if we so over-taxed these corporations so much they each only made $10,000 in profit at the end of each year. That's still a profit they would lose if they ever decided to close down operations in the US that they would not be able to replace elsewhere.

And even if all these corporations decided to go ahead and close down, that's not going to eliminate demand in our country. You still need clothes. You still gotta eat. You still need communication. You still need gas in your car. You still want a television. As long as there is a market, there will be someone willing to do business. Mostly, it would be smaller businesses that would fill the void. And I have to be honest with you, I'm alot more interested in seeing small businesses be successful than I am any corporation because thriving small businesses are 100x more valuable to our economy than any big INC.

We have a 9.1% official unemployment rate in this country and have been stuck on or near that number for more than a year now. The effective unemployment rate is nearing 20%. With the economy stalled, we are spending so much more than we are taking in, the edge of cliff of bankruptcy is right under our feet. Every day you hear about another major operation moving overseas or to another country--just recently G.E. announced it was moving it's entire x-ray division to China along with thousands of jobs. G.E. has even more recently announced a cooperative venture with the Government of China to build airliners that will compete with our own Boeing, Lockheed, and other large manufacturers. That operation will be in China of course. No jobs for America and another hit on the American economy.

(Is this a good time to mention that the CEO of G.E. is Obama' jobs 'czar'?)

You can spin it as all good political class spinners spin, but you can't get around numbers like that. The Obama administration is the most business hostile administration in my increasingly long memory.

Cain may not have the exact formula we will wind up with, but he at least has the right idea of how to make doing business attractive in America again, how to bring the jobs back home, how to get Americans back to work, and how to get the economy rolling again.

You can sneer and scorn and ridicule and denigrate that til the cows come home, and you will only look like an unAmerican idiot. Cain does not look like an UnAmerican idiot.

 

[Inthemiddle]

You just showed massive Ignorance. Lets examine your Statement. In a Nut shell you are saying if Companies do not like the System here, they can go somewhere else.

News Flash- They are, ever heard of Out sourcing?

Try something....Go to the grocery store, pick out a few groceries, go pay for them at the register, and then ask yourself how the company is going to be able to possibly outsource the business transaction that just took place. Now, go to the barber shop and get a haircut, and ask yourself how that business transaction can possibly be outsourced. Then, go to the mechanic and get your oil changed and ask yourself how that transaction can possibly be outsourced. Outsourcing happens only in certain areas where it is possible, largely manufacturing. And the reason it happens is because the US has very poor trade policy which allows products to be imported, but prevents our products from being exported anywhere near as easily or economically.

Then you say someone else will take their place.

News Flash- No they wont, as long as we make it difficult to do business and make a Profit in the US, companies will move jobs over seas, and nobody will "Gladly make money here" Because the reason the Jobs left in the first place is it is to difficult to make money here.

Really? So you mean to tell me that as long as there are people in the US who need food, nobody is going to be willing to grow food and sell it? You're telling me that the US lives or dies on the profits of corporations? That's a ridiculous comment. What did we do before big corporations were as rampant as they are today? We relied on small businesses alot more, that's what we did.

Nobody is making it difficult to make a profit in the US. That kind of babbling is absolute horse shit. The problem is that our culture has moved into a place where those at the top of large corporations insist that billions of dollars worth of post tax yearly profit is not enough, and demand tax breaks.

The United States of America is the best place in the world to do business, and it is a VERY FAR way from being difficult to make a profit. If a big corporation doesn't want to do business here, that's their own stupidity. And like I said, in my opinion we'll probably be better off anyway, because it will just leave room for small businesses to fill the void, and small business fuels our economy much more than large corporations ever could.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Profit is profit whether it is based on 'tangibles' or not. The plan is that business will pay 9% of their profit. And because that 9% is lower than or very competitive with overseas markets, it will provide a huge incentive for corporations to bring their operations, and the jobs associated with them, back home. In many cases it would even offset the higher wages that Americans normally earn.

Actually, you're neglecting something, which is that national sales tax. The concept of a national sales tax is intended to place an increased comparative tax burden on lower and middle class individuals, a comparatively weak tax burden on the wealthy, and especially a negligible tax burden on companies that do not deal in "tangibles."

'Scuse me?....A national sales tax would be applied with no such intent.
That tax would insure that pruchases and not earnings would be taxed. I cannot think of anything more equitable than that.
People of means buy more goods. They buy more expensive goods. Therefore they would bear a heavier burden than their less well off counterparts.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why would a corporation be expected to pay a higher tax on profits in this country than other places? Any thoughts?

Well we could get by with a higher tax if we had more to offer then the competition. For example, if we had a better educated workforce. Better cleaner cities etc.

But we have nothing because we would rather go to war. So we must race to the bottom on taxing to keep all business here.

Your idea presupposes the existence of a revenue flow problem for government.
Cain clearly stated many times that government does not have a revenue problem. Government has a spending problem.
For too long legislatures in Washington and the states have had free reign to simply increase taxes to feed their insatiable appetite to spend. That must stop.
The only way without legislation to the contrary to stop deficit spending is to cut government off from the endless supply of tax dollars.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why would a corporation be expected to pay a higher tax on profits in this country than other places? Any thoughts?

Well we could get by with a higher tax if we had more to offer then the competition. For example, if we had a better educated workforce. Better cleaner cities etc.

But we have nothing because we would rather go to war. So we must race to the bottom on taxing to keep all business here.

You just ran off track here. Now you're posting nonsense.

 

[Money]

'Scuse me?....A national sales tax would be applied with no such intent.
That tax would insure that pruchases and not earnings would be taxed. I cannot think of anything more equitable than that.
People of means buy more goods. They buy more expensive goods. Therefore they would bear a heavier burden than their less well off counterparts.

I think that you are confused.

1: Taxing income has a preferred outcome to taxing expenditure.

2: By far and away, people of lesser means are more likely to spend a larger share of their earnings than do wealthier folks. They (we), overall, account for the largest share of expenditure in the marketplace.

3: When looking at burden cast by tax and regulation, 'heavy' should represent proportions of overall strength... like how a basketball is heavy for a toddler, not for an adult.

4: If this is the US, how would our constitution accommodate a fed sales tax?

 

[Inthemiddle]

No, that is the Inaccurate Liberal propaganda about a National Sales Tax. The Truth is most National Sales tax plans that have been discussed. Exempt Things like basic Groceries, and house Hold goods. It will be people who have money to spend, to eat out, buy large ticket Items, and Buy the stuff that is not a Necessity of life and there for is not Exempt from the Tax, that will pay the lions share of the Tax.

It's a consumption tax, and simple math tells you those who consume less, will pay less of it. especially when your Basic Necessities of life like Unprepared Food are Exempt from the Tax.

It also has another big benefit that no other tax plan has. A national Sales tax would be paid by everyone who buys items in the US. All the 50 Million Tourists who come here each year, All the Illegal Aliens, anyone who who lives abroad buy buys stuff in the US. All would pay the 9% national Sales Tax.

The Real Reason so man Oppose the 999 plan is that the 49% Of americans that current pay 0 Federal Income tax after all Deductions, and Credits, will actually have to pay a small % of their income in Taxes.

Now they libs can explain to us all how everyone paying their Fair share jives with 49% of all workers paying 0 or actually getting more back than they paid in, when it comes to federal Income tax Withholding.

You're talking about people's past proposals. We're talking about Cain's current proposal. Though he has yet to offer full specifics, the way I've understood him in the debates, etc. is that the sales tax would be a flat sales tax on everything. Cain's whole plan is premised on getting rid of exceptions to the rules and laying out a set of very simple that apply all the time to everyone.

My main objection to Cain's 9-9-9 proposal is that it is too simplistic for the reality. No plan will be perfect, but Cain presents it as if it were damn near a perfect plan. Truth is that by its design there will still be those who benefit unfairly, in ways that will continue current trends that lead to the development of a fragile economic structure. To me, it's a political ploy. It's a catchy sound bite that appeases the desires of voters, but fails to get the job done. That being said, Cain's proposal does hit some very important key points. 1) We need to essentially start over with our taxation methods and simply our approach, 2) A consumption tax if executed well could be a vital improvement to our taxation system.

 

[Greenbeard]

No, that is the Inaccurate Liberal propaganda about a National Sales Tax. The Truth is most National Sales tax plans that have been discussed. Exempt Things like basic Groceries, and house Hold goods.

Does the 999 plan? Or is this an article of faith, like "the 999 plan is revenue neutral"?

 

[Inthemiddle]

We have a 9.1% official unemployment rate in this country and have been stuck on or near that number for more than a year now. The effective unemployment rate is nearing 20%. With the economy stalled, we are spending so much more than we are taking in, the edge of cliff of bankruptcy is right under our feet. Every day you hear about another major operation moving overseas or to another country--just recently G.E. announced it was moving it's entire x-ray division to China along with thousands of jobs. G.E. has even more recently announced a cooperative venture with the Government of China to build airliners that will compete with our own Boeing, Lockheed, and other large manufacturers. That operation will be in China of course. No jobs for America and another hit on the American economy.

(Is this a good time to mention that the CEO of G.E. is Obama' jobs 'czar'?)

You can spin it as all good political class spinners spin, but you can't get around numbers like that. The Obama administration is the most business hostile administration in my increasingly long memory.

Cain may not have the exact formula we will wind up with, but he at least has the right idea of how to make doing business attractive in America again, how to bring the jobs back home, how to get Americans back to work, and how to get the economy rolling again.

You can sneer and scorn and ridicule and denigrate that til the cows come home, and you will only look like an unAmerican idiot. Cain does not look like an UnAmerican idiot.

Sounds to me like what I said already, that we have deficiencies in our trade policy. Of course, the problems go well beyond that. But improving our trade deficit would go a long way. The point is, though, that no single factor (like corporate taxation) can be pinned as the source problem. Because really, it's just a small part of the problem.

 

[thereisnospoon]

So now were talking about exceptions, were talking regulating every business. Were creating a huge loophole for everyone to walk through.

That doesnt really help the case.

No, we are talking about applying taxes to business as they are now applied but at a 9% rate rather than the second highest corporate tax rate in the world. (And that is only a fraction of a percentage below the highest corporate tax rate in the world.)

you really like that talking point, don't you? Wouldn't it be nice if you could add the facts regarding the rate that is actually paid by US corporations. But...then it wouldn't be as much fun.

The US Corp tax rate is 39.2%...Now that is a raw number. Government itself offers tax incentives and breaks to companies as incentives to do certain things. However, the raw number is the focus. If the tax rate were lower, the incentives and breaks would disappear and that would attract new business, expand existing business and at the end of the day, that is good for job creation and the overall economy.
How anyone could object to that is a mystery.
corp tax rate link..........U.S. to have Highest Corporate Tax Rate in the World
To be fair...here is a link from a liberal website....
The claim of 55% of all companies pay no tax comes with no data to support that claim. I will stipulate that effective rates are probably lower but I will require stipulation that those nations who rates are lower also offer breaks and incentives. The possibility of this being inaccurate is remote.

 

[thereisnospoon]

While it's cool to talk about, the 999 thing is a tactic to run a profitable race in a sure-to-lose election... by proposing a never-to-be-implemented suggestion for tax reform. Even if the president likes a plan like this, hell would have frozen over twice before it becomes a bill.

That is prescisely the "inside the little box" thinking that causes us to have an expansive and complicated tax code.
People without vision, willingness to take risks and desire to enlarge their paradigm have controlled things for much too long. They need to be kicked out.

 

[Foxfyre]

Here is the problem folks, and why we need a President with the savvy and the conviction to turn it around. Our current Fearless Leader has demonstrated that he has neither.

And it is NOT lack of demand that is creating the phenomenon:

American multinationals have long tapped foreign markets to take advantage of lower labor costs, looser regulations, and simpler tax structures that can make doing business overseas more cost-efficient than in the U.S. But it's not just jobs migrating abroad—it's now tax dollars too, a senior index analyst at Standard & Poor's says. (S&P, like BusinessWeek, is owned by The McGraw-Hill Companies

Last year marked the first time that American companies contributed more to the tax pools of foreign governments than they did domestically, according to analyst Howard Silverblatt's annual S&P 500 Global Sales report, released July 14. The study was based on income taxes paid and reported to the U.S. government by just over half the companies on the S&P 500. Companies are not obligated to provide such detailed breakdowns of foreign sales. In 2008 foreign income tax payouts accounted for more than 55% of their total income tax expenditures, up from 45% in 2007—an $11.5 billion increase. Federal income tax payouts declined 29%, or almost $44 billion, over the same period.

This trend has been occurring for some time. Over the past four years, U.S. companies have increasingly paid a higher percentage of their total income taxes to foreign governments, which accounted for 45% in 2007, up from 39% in 2005. But Silverblatt's findings represent another data point among many showing that the U.S. was hit harder than many foreign countries in 2008 as the global financial crisis picked up steam. While the U.S. economy contracted, emerging economies grew to take market share. Just as important, he notes, the results further prove that an enormous middle class is emerging for products that U.S. companies provide
U.S. Companies Paid More Taxes Overseas - BusinessWeek

 

[hortysir]

Profit is profit whether it is based on 'tangibles' or not. The plan is that business will pay 9% of their profit. And because that 9% is lower than or very competitive with overseas markets, it will provide a huge incentive for corporations to bring their operations, and the jobs associated with them, back home. In many cases it would even offset the higher wages that Americans normally earn.

Actually, you're neglecting something, which is that national sales tax. The concept of a national sales tax is intended to place an increased comparative tax burden on lower and middle class individuals, a comparatively weak tax burden on the wealthy, and especially a negligible tax burden on companies that do not deal in "tangibles."

With a 9% sales tax, the lower income people aren't going to be buying the higher priced items.
Their income tax, right now, isn't as low as 9% so they'd be taxed less there and a bit more at the store.
Mybe the prices at the store will be less if we stop punishing the suppliers of goods

 

[Foxfyre]

Profit is profit whether it is based on 'tangibles' or not. The plan is that business will pay 9% of their profit. And because that 9% is lower than or very competitive with overseas markets, it will provide a huge incentive for corporations to bring their operations, and the jobs associated with them, back home. In many cases it would even offset the higher wages that Americans normally earn.

Actually, you're neglecting something, which is that national sales tax. The concept of a national sales tax is intended to place an increased comparative tax burden on lower and middle class individuals, a comparatively weak tax burden on the wealthy, and especially a negligible tax burden on companies that do not deal in "tangibles."

With a 9% sales tax, the lower income people aren't going to be buying the higher priced items.
Their income tax, right now, isn't as low as 9% so they'd be taxed less there and a bit more at the store.
Mybe the prices at the store will be less if we stop punishing the suppliers of goods

That's a good point. The more balanced tax structure will so reduce the cost of producing many of the things that we buy that a lower cost may offset all or most of the sales tax.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You just showed massive Ignorance. Lets examine your Statement. In a Nut shell you are saying if Companies do not like the System here, they can go somewhere else.

News Flash- They are, ever heard of Out sourcing?

Try something....Go to the grocery store, pick out a few groceries, go pay for them at the register, and then ask yourself how the company is going to be able to possibly outsource the business transaction that just took place. Now, go to the barber shop and get a haircut, and ask yourself how that business transaction can possibly be outsourced. Then, go to the mechanic and get your oil changed and ask yourself how that transaction can possibly be outsourced. Outsourcing happens only in certain areas where it is possible, largely manufacturing. And the reason it happens is because the US has very poor trade policy which allows products to be imported, but prevents our products from being exported anywhere near as easily or economically.

Then you say someone else will take their place.

News Flash- No they wont, as long as we make it difficult to do business and make a Profit in the US, companies will move jobs over seas, and nobody will "Gladly make money here" Because the reason the Jobs left in the first place is it is to difficult to make money here.

Really? So you mean to tell me that as long as there are people in the US who need food, nobody is going to be willing to grow food and sell it? You're telling me that the US lives or dies on the profits of corporations? That's a ridiculous comment. What did we do before big corporations were as rampant as they are today? We relied on small businesses alot more, that's what we did.

Nobody is making it difficult to make a profit in the US. That kind of babbling is absolute horse shit. The problem is that our culture has moved into a place where those at the top of large corporations insist that billions of dollars worth of post tax yearly profit is not enough, and demand tax breaks.

The United States of America is the best place in the world to do business, and it is a VERY FAR way from being difficult to make a profit. If a big corporation doesn't want to do business here, that's their own stupidity. And like I said, in my opinion we'll probably be better off anyway, because it will just leave room for small businesses to fill the void, and small business fuels our economy much more than large corporations ever could.

The dispensary( grocery store) cannot be relocated. But the manufacture or processing of those good can certainly be moved. And that is the point.
Stop insisting this is the best place to do business. If it were, we would not be losing our manufacturing sector. That's a fact.
BTW, for decades now, our federal government has been paying farmers to NOT grow certain crops for fear of flooding the market with a particular crop and thus suppressing market prices.
In certain states such as New York, there are price controls in dairy products.
This is to protect NY based dairy producers from those in other states.
Corporate tax rates are just one item that the federal government burden placed on small and large business that makes it very expensive and this very difficult to turn a profit.
Have you ever run a business? Trust me, it isn't fun. You don't just do the work of the business. Then there's the jobs you do for the state and federal governments to insure they get theirs and to make sure you follow their plethora of confusing and mind mangling rules and regulations.

 

[Money]

Here is the problem folks, and why we need a President with the savvy and the conviction to turn it around. Our current Fearless Leader has demonstrated that he has neither.

And it is NOT lack of demand that is creating the phenomenon:

But the article itself says that it is from a drop-off in relative demand.

I think that looking at the raw tax rate and presuming that that communicates into most European tax systems is where the confusion comes in. I know Germany offers a lot of shelter in their tax system, while running a higher rate.. like the US.

In the UK, the government offers little or no shelter and a lower (corp) rate. They offer little or no shelter and a massive income tax rate for earners, however. 40%-50% from the 30k sterling mark, I think.

The grass seems greener, but what did grandma say about that?