CDZ Corporate taxes--worth bothering with?

Agit8r

Gold Member
Dec 4, 2010
12,141
2,209
245
Presently, corporate taxes make up around 11% of all federal revenue. The tax falls upon different businesses unequally, at least in practice. Some large corporations like GE pay a very tiny rate. Mom-and-pop stores typically pay around 15%.

At this point, does the corporate tax rate provide enough revenue to make it worth the burden it places on small businesses? Or could we replace the revenue as easily by other means, like legalizing and taxing cannabis?
 
Just to clarify, I'm talking about corporate income taxes. Not payroll, excise, or whatever else.
 
Presently, corporate taxes make up around 11% of all federal revenue. The tax falls upon different businesses unequally, at least in practice. Some large corporations like GE pay a very tiny rate. Mom-and-pop stores typically pay around 15%.

At this point, does the corporate tax rate provide enough revenue to make it worth the burden it places on small businesses? Or could we replace the revenue as easily by other means, like legalizing and taxing cannabis?

I don't think you understand corporate taxes

A Mom and Pop business as you call it are most likely not a C corp but an S corp and S corps do not pay corporate taxes as all the profit and loss is reported on the shareholders personal tax returns
 
Just to be clear, GE keeps their profits overseas. Over 100B worth.
Then then claim its not coming back over here and get assigned patented and licensed foreign subsidies.
Hell, I remember in 2012 or 13', corporations moved like 15% of their money overseas!
Johnson and Johnson saves a couple billion a year doing shit like this.
 
Now what would you do, pay taxes on goods and services in one country you are conducting business and then repatriate those funds to be taxed once again at the highest rate in the industrialized world? You can't be that naive. Once the US drops the anti business, tax business to death attitude and reduces corporate tax rates you will see growth in our economy. Even socialists, and the French understand it doesn't pay to shoot yourself in the foot.
 
Presently, corporate taxes make up around 11% of all federal revenue. The tax falls upon different businesses unequally, at least in practice. Some large corporations like GE pay a very tiny rate. Mom-and-pop stores typically pay around 15%.

At this point, does the corporate tax rate provide enough revenue to make it worth the burden it places on small businesses? Or could we replace the revenue as easily by other means, like legalizing and taxing cannabis?

What burden, precisely, do you mean?
  • The financial burden of yielding some of one's gross income to the government?
  • The administrative burden to prepare the documentation that justifies and explains the sum one pays?
  • The time and money burden of understanding the tax code so as to minimize one's tax bill to the greatest extent possible given the provisions in the tax code?
  • Some other burden(s)? If so, what is that burden(s)?
 
Presently, corporate taxes make up around 11% of all federal revenue. The tax falls upon different businesses unequally, at least in practice. Some large corporations like GE pay a very tiny rate. Mom-and-pop stores typically pay around 15%.

At this point, does the corporate tax rate provide enough revenue to make it worth the burden it places on small businesses? Or could we replace the revenue as easily by other means, like legalizing and taxing cannabis?

What burden, precisely, do you mean?
  • The financial burden of yielding some of one's gross income to the government?
  • The administrative burden to prepare the documentation that justifies and explains the sum one pays?
  • The time and money burden of understanding the tax code so as to minimize one's tax bill to the greatest extent possible given the provisions in the tax code?
  • Some other burden(s)? If so, what is that burden(s)?

I'm just saying, perhaps that 11% of revenue could be found elsewhere. Maybe tax wealthy individuals more. Clearly lowering their taxes did nothing to improve economic growth.
 
Presently, corporate taxes make up around 11% of all federal revenue. The tax falls upon different businesses unequally, at least in practice. Some large corporations like GE pay a very tiny rate. Mom-and-pop stores typically pay around 15%.

At this point, does the corporate tax rate provide enough revenue to make it worth the burden it places on small businesses? Or could we replace the revenue as easily by other means, like legalizing and taxing cannabis?

What burden, precisely, do you mean?
  • The financial burden of yielding some of one's gross income to the government?
  • The administrative burden to prepare the documentation that justifies and explains the sum one pays?
  • The time and money burden of understanding the tax code so as to minimize one's tax bill to the greatest extent possible given the provisions in the tax code?
  • Some other burden(s)? If so, what is that burden(s)?

I'm just saying, perhaps that 11% of revenue could be found elsewhere. Maybe tax wealthy individuals more. Clearly lowering their taxes did nothing to improve economic growth.

As for whether it works or not: What Is the Evidence on Taxes and Growth? . As best as I can tell, the economy has continually grown. I suppose one can argue over the role tax breaks have in stimulating that growth.

Personally, my gut said and says the paltry size of the tax cuts that have been offered in the past decade weren't and aren't useful for much other than political positioning. I say that based really on my own spending patterns over the years, which haven't changed one way or the other due to the taxes I pay. Then again I haven't gotten a tax refund in some 20+ years, mainly because I don't want a refund; I want full use of my money all year, and I want the government to give me the interest free use of its money, even though it's not that much money in the scheme of things, rather than the other way round.

As for where the 11% could come from, how 'bout getting some of it by reducing the implied discount realized as a rate of return on taxes paid and later spent? To put that another way, by extending the period of time the government actually holds on to the tax revenue collected from corporations before returning it to them in the form of subsidies and future period tax breaks.

Don't misconstrue my meaning. I don't think companies like GE should get away without paying their fair share of taxes, regardless of how growth stimulating or not it may have been that they didn't pay taxes in some years. My stance in that regard has almost nothing to do with economics and finance and everything to do what I think is ethically as it should be.
 
Last edited:
Presently, corporate taxes make up around 11% of all federal revenue. The tax falls upon different businesses unequally, at least in practice. Some large corporations like GE pay a very tiny rate. Mom-and-pop stores typically pay around 15%.

At this point, does the corporate tax rate provide enough revenue to make it worth the burden it places on small businesses? Or could we replace the revenue as easily by other means, like legalizing and taxing cannabis?

I don't think you understand corporate taxes

A Mom and Pop business as you call it are most likely not a C corp but an S corp and S corps do not pay corporate taxes as all the profit and loss is reported on the shareholders personal tax returns

Or they could be an LLC, no?

Limited liability company - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Instead of cutting corporate tax rates, I would prefer to keep them as they are, but allow for a single tax deduction; 20% of the cost of their American citizen wages.

Unemployment and off shore cash holdings disappear over night, as well as an end to corporate inversions where a large corp buys a small foreign corp and moves the HQ there to list as a business of that country instead of the USA.
 

Forum List

Back
Top