Burger King Moves North to Canada for Tax Reasons.

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No other western power is that stupid to prevent their companies from repatriating money earned overseas.

thats because our liberals are the stupidest of all. Imagine the boom if we eliminated the tax. Ireland dropped their tax to 12% and collected 10 times the revenue. How's that for supply side economics.

 

[blackhawk]

I like whataburger myself.

 

[Darkwind]

The point of the thread is that corporations are looking to protect their shareholders by fleeing an oppressive tax structure and that if we did away with governmental greed, they'd continue to do business in this country.

Yet no evidence has been presented that taxes have anything to do with this. The point of this thread is pure speculation.

Very true. However, its not a bad piece of reasoning to concluded that a higher taxation rate is a factor in the decision to move out of country.

I'm not even sure that BK is moving, as they have a statement out that they will continue to operate out of Florida. I don't know where I read that, and I'm too lazy to go look for it right now.

I will say, however. On the issue of inversion (I guess that's what they call it) a company would be guilty of malfeasance if the opportunity to save shareholders significant costs was not pursued.

A bit off point. Contrary to that other poster in this thread, trying to save shareholders and a company's profit line is not unpatriotic, or we'd have to start charging people who use loop holes as unpatriotic as well.

 

[OnePercenter]

One of the reasons why our actual tax rate is lower than our nominal tax rate is because American corporations do things like inversions to lower their tax rate.

Deductions lower taxes, inversion eliminates taxes.

Halliburton is a great example. http://www2.deloitte.com/content/da...ttl-tax-unitedarabemirateshighlights-2014.pdf

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The point of the thread is that corporations are looking to protect their shareholders by fleeing an oppressive tax structure and that if we did away with governmental greed, they'd continue to do business in this country.

Yet no evidence has been presented that taxes have anything to do with this. The point of this thread is pure speculation.

Very true. However, its not a bad piece of reasoning to concluded that a higher taxation rate is a factor in the decision to move out of country.

I'm not even sure that BK is moving, as they have a statement out that they will continue to operate out of Florida. I don't know where I read that, and I'm too lazy to go look for it right now.

I will say, however. On the issue of inversion (I guess that's what they call it) a company would be guilty of malfeasance if the opportunity to save shareholders significant costs was not pursued.

A bit off point. Contrary to that other poster in this thread, trying to save shareholders and a company's profit line is not unpatriotic, or we'd have to start charging people who use loop holes as unpatriotic as well.

They're not physically moving anything, but the newly merged corporation will be registered in Canada. There's no reason for Burger King to move their offices.

As to the second part of your post, I agree.

 

[Pogo]

The point of the thread is that corporations are looking to protect their shareholders by fleeing an oppressive tax structure and that if we did away with governmental greed, they'd continue to do business in this country.

Yet no evidence has been presented that taxes have anything to do with this. The point of this thread is pure speculation.

Very true. However, its not a bad piece of reasoning to concluded that a higher taxation rate is a factor in the decision to move out of country.

I'm not even sure that BK is moving, as they have a statement out that they will continue to operate out of Florida. I don't know where I read that, and I'm too lazy to go look for it right now.

I will say, however. On the issue of inversion (I guess that's what they call it) a company would be guilty of malfeasance if the opportunity to save shareholders significant costs was not pursued.

A bit off point. Contrary to that other poster in this thread, trying to save shareholders and a company's profit line is not unpatriotic, or we'd have to start charging people who use loop holes as unpatriotic as well.

Has anyone demonstrated that there would be any such tax advantage?

OTOH the benefits of buying up a wildly popular and profitable brand of 3600 stores already known from border to border in a country bigger than we are stand readily obvious...

Methinks the thrust here is yet another case of a poster seeing what they want to see without needing or waiting for a confirmation.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Well, then, I strongly advise republicans to write their representatives and ask them to pass a bill lowering corporate taxes on foreign earnings, and send it to the senate. That way, if the senate does not pass it, they can blame the democrats.

I write them frequently about lowering taxes across the board, not just for corporations.

the irony is that the tax can be eliminated altogether with no issues whatsoever since it is passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. Corporations are tax collectors not tax payers!!

 

[OnePercenter]

Really? I mean really???

You think Congress is going to reign in corporate greed. Too funny.

Congress set up and approves of the flawed crony capitalist system we suffer under..and did so, so they could benefit by receiving lots of campaign cash from those greedy corporations, so as to keep them in office for life.

Wake UP!!!

Which Democrat in Congress authored a bill to allow 'yacht as a second home' and 'private jet deductions' to name two.

 

[thereisnospoon2]

...and yet, the president does not set tax rates. Congress does, and the House is controlled by Republicans....

Hey wise guy...It takes both houses of Congress to write legislation send it through committee then to the President for his signature.
Nice try.
BTW, the executive branch sets the legisltaive agenda separate from the leadership of the Senate and House.
If High corp tax rates were a concern of the administration, the issue would have been part of Obama's legislative agenda.
Also, if the House leadership had any confidence the DEMOCRAT controlled Senate would pass a House measure to lower the corp tax rate, it would have been done already.

 

[Agit8r]

I'm an asthmatic, so they are already on my boycott list.

 

[thereisnospoon2]

What is Burger King's "effective" tax rate in the U.S.? What will it be in Canada?

Lower than here. Canada is very business friendly.

 

[Zander]

Can't blame them. They have a duty to their shareholders. Capitalism 101...

This is a failure of leadership by the Federal government. They need to simplify the tax code by eliminating deductions and lowering the rate.

Burger King only paid 27.5% in 2013.

Only 27.5%? That seems very high to me. The can pay 15%
or less in other countries.

Did they pay tax on their overseas earnings?

 

[HenryBHough]

I generally don't eat burgers but this week I've gotta seek out a Burger King to spend a few bucks showing my appreciation of their patriotism in doing something positive to wake up America to the tax problem that's costing so many jobs.

 

[Pogo]

I generally don't eat burgers but this week I've gotta seek out a Burger King to spend a few bucks showing my appreciation of their patriotism in doing something positive to wake up America to the tax problem that's costing so many jobs.

Can't blame them. They have a duty to their shareholders. Capitalism 101...

This is a failure of leadership by the Federal government. They need to simplify the tax code by eliminating deductions and lowering the rate.

Burger King only paid 27.5% in 2013.

Only 27.5%? That seems very high to me. The can pay 15%
or less in other countries.

Did they pay tax on their overseas earnings?

Doesn't matter. For again, there is zero evidence whatever BK is doing has anything to do with any kind of taxes.
Zero.

Just as there's, again Zero evidence that any jobs are being lost.
Once again for you scoring at home, or even if you're alone, that number is... 0.

 

[thereisnospoon2]

If Burger King is looking to infect destroy castrate buy Tim Horton's -- then yes they are the bad guy.
Tim Horton's is LCD enough; leave 'em alone, eh?

Nothing will change. Tim Horton's will be Tim Horton's. No worries. The brand stays. The restaurants stay.

 

[thereisnospoon2]

What is Burger King's "effective" tax rate in the U.S.? What will it be in Canada?

In spite of Flagg's claim that it is 40%, the corporate marginal tax rate in the USA is 35%

There are other taxes corporations pay to states. As well as other fees.

 

[thereisnospoon2]

Burger King is just a typical greedy American capitalist corporation with no allegiance to America - unless it's BOUGHT.

Burger King Fans Call For Boycott Over Tax Dodge

Yeah...That boyoctt and 50 cents gets you a cookie.
Meaning...There is no boycott. Except by a few people who never saw a tax they didn't like.
And every single one of those alleged boycotters have most likely taken great pains to reduce their personal tax liability. Hypocrites.

 

[Lakhota]

Many large corporations are freeloading on the backs of regular taxpayers.

Why the rich should pay more taxes

Over 10 Percent Of America's Largest Companies Pay Zero Percent Tax Rates

Corporations should be paying more not less in taxes

 

[thereisnospoon2]

Burger King's overall effective tax rate was 27.5% in 2013, according to its annual report. Ontario has a provincial corporate tax rate of 26.5%.

IRS Eh Tim Hortons Deal Could Lower Burger King's Tax Bill Fox Business

I don't see any big tax advantage.

LOL, crap. Burger King is moving and they didn't do the math? Wow, will they be upset when they find out. You people are ridiculous, obviously they did, Homey.

I'm fairly certain that the "math" involved has a lot more to do with Tim Horton's profits, not the tax rate.

One in the same. Taxes and the bottom line are both in the mind of the financial people.
Reduce tax liability and labor costs. Increase sales.

Last year, Burger King paid an effective tax rate of 27.5% (in the US), and Tim Hortons paid an effective tax rate of 28% (in Canada).

Pretending that the merger is because of tax reasons is just silly.

Pretending that you know the truth from what you read and they are idiots who didn't think it through is just silly.

I don't think Burger King are "idiots who didn't think it through". I'm sure they did think it through.


On the other hand, I think everyone who believes the purpose of the merger was to avoid taxes are idiots who didn't think it through.

What you think is immaterial.

 

[blackhawk]

A business deciding to move somewhere with lower taxes dam what are the odds?