GAO: U.S. corporations pay average effective tax rate of 12.6 ...
money.cnn.com/2013/07/01/news/economy/corporate-tax-rate/...
The federal corporate tax rate stands at 35%, and jumps to 39.2% when state rates are taken into account. But thanks to things like tax credits, exemptions ...
U.S. Corporations Pay Average Effective Tax Rate of 12.6 ...
www.dailyfinance.com/2013/07/...companies-effective-tax-rate
AP By JAMES O' TOOLE U.S. companies face the highest official corporate tax rate in the world. But there's a big difference between the rates set out by ...
The Effective Corporate Tax Rate is at 12.1%, the ... - TIME
business.time.com/2012/02/06/the-corporate-tax-rate-is-at...
Despite the favored notion that the current US tax code sprung fully formed off Ronald Reagan's head in 1986, it’s not the case that companies tend to be ...
Reality Check: Effective U.S. Corporate Tax Rate Much Lower ...
thinkprogress.org/.../reminder-corporate-taxes-very-low
... the U.S. will have the highest statutory corporate tax rate in ... (the effective rate) fell to a 40 year low of 12.1 ... “Corporate taxes are ...
Effective Corporate Income Tax Rates and the Corporate Ta
Those happened under the Bush administration. Their real name is "subsidies". It's expensive moving millions of jobs to China and closing down over 40,000 factories. All that has to be paid for. Which is why those companies were subsidized by government under Republicans during the Bush administrations.
Too bad you have no idea what you're talking about. From FactCheck.org:
FULL QUESTION:
When Democratic presidential candidates talk about tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies, what are they referring to and are they accurate?
FULL ANSWER:
It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:
Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.
But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are
taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the
highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005
report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.
We first
addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.
Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks