It's Time to Lower Corporate Taxes

[Toddsterpatriot]

Incorporating your income should not give you a tax break. You are already sheltering your other wealth & income from risk, that is reward enough. No loopholes 19% minimum tax on carried interest, dividend, corps & any income over $250k with with a max combined total tax of anywhere between 19% to 29%. Make 17% the max combined payroll & income tax rate for everything below $250k.

No loopholes 19% minimum tax on corps & income over $250k

First $50,000 15.00%
$50,000-$75,000 25.00%
$75,000-$100,000 34.00%
$100,000-$335,000 39.00%
$335,000-$10,000,000 34.00%
$10,000,000-$15,000,000 35.00%
$15,000,000-$18,333,333 38.00%
Over $18,333,333 35.00%

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/02corate.pdf

That would be a huge tax break for almost every corporation.

That would be a huge tax break for almost every corporation.

EXCEPT almost NO Corp pays margin rates EXCEPT Corps that can't off shore their profits, Walmarts, Mc'D's, etc


EFFECTIVE tax rates are at 40+ year lows of around 12%

https://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=WMT+Income+Statement&annual

Last year, WalMart had:

Income Before Tax of $24,656,000,000

And had Income Tax Expense of $8,105,000,000

Please explain what their EFFECTIVE tax rate was.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

.

If we lowered corporate tax rates to 10% (or lower), you'd see a flood of re-patrioted dollars, the likes of which you've never seen. You'd also see a flood of NEW foreign capital, the likes of which you've never seen.

But no, that would make too much sense.

Instead, we double down. We put taxes on our corporations that force them -- they have fiduciary (L-E-G-A-L) responsibilities to maximize shareholder value or be SUED, I wonder how many people know that -- to move all or parts of their operations overseas to save money. Then, when we force them to do that, we then want to punish them for doing their jobs, and take away their ability to compete in an increasingly competitive global business environment.

And the American Left whines when it is pointed out that they are anti-business. And they wonder why business is not willing to take undue risks in this environment.

You can't make this shit up.

.

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?

GOV'T POLICY CAN STOP THIS CORP TAX AVOIDANCE PRETTY EASILY, IF THE GOP STEPPED UP. THEY REFUSE TOO. Weird you can't be honest about that!

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Thanks for the link.
I didn't see where it claimed to have cost jobs.
Perhaps you can cut and paste the section you feel claimed that?

Thanks!

 

[Toro]

No loopholes 19% minimum tax on corps & income over $250k

First $50,000 15.00%
$50,000-$75,000 25.00%
$75,000-$100,000 34.00%
$100,000-$335,000 39.00%
$335,000-$10,000,000 34.00%
$10,000,000-$15,000,000 35.00%
$15,000,000-$18,333,333 38.00%
Over $18,333,333 35.00%

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/02corate.pdf

That would be a huge tax break for almost every corporation.

That would be a huge tax break for almost every corporation.

EXCEPT almost NO Corp pays margin rates EXCEPT Corps that can't off shore their profits, Walmarts, Mc'D's, etc


EFFECTIVE tax rates are at 40+ year lows of around 12%

https://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=WMT+Income+Statement&annual

Last year, WalMart had:

Income Before Tax of $24,656,000,000

And had Income Tax Expense of $8,105,000,000

Please explain what their EFFECTIVE tax rate was.

Corporations have to report the amount of cash taxes paid in their SEC filings. In 2013, WalMart paid $8.641 billion in taxes. Consolidated net income was $16.695 billion. Therefore, WalMart's effective tax rate was 34.1%.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=112761&p=irol-secframe#9351219

 

[Dad2three]

.

If we lowered corporate tax rates to 10% (or lower), you'd see a flood of re-patrioted dollars, the likes of which you've never seen. You'd also see a flood of NEW foreign capital, the likes of which you've never seen.

But no, that would make too much sense.

Instead, we double down. We put taxes on our corporations that force them -- they have fiduciary (L-E-G-A-L) responsibilities to maximize shareholder value or be SUED, I wonder how many people know that -- to move all or parts of their operations overseas to save money. Then, when we force them to do that, we then want to punish them for doing their jobs, and take away their ability to compete in an increasingly competitive global business environment.

And the American Left whines when it is pointed out that they are anti-business. And they wonder why business is not willing to take undue risks in this environment.

You can't make this shit up.

.

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?

GOV'T POLICY CAN STOP THIS CORP TAX AVOIDANCE PRETTY EASILY, IF THE GOP STEPPED UP. THEY REFUSE TOO. Weird you can't be honest about that!

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Thanks for the link.
I didn't see where it claimed to have cost jobs.
Perhaps you can cut and paste the section you feel claimed that?

Thanks!

The 15 companies that repatriated the most after the 2004 tax break on the return of overseas profits later cut a net 20,931 jobs between 2004 and 2007 and slightly decreased the pace of their spending on research and development, found the report surveying 19 companies' activity.

Report: Repatriation Tax Holiday a 'Failed' Policy - WSJ


The evidence clearly shows that these repatriated earnings did not increase domestic investment, job creation, or research and development (R&D).[9] As the authors of the leading paper on the subject concluded in 2010, “repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D.


Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?




A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. A valuable new report[3]from the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations shows that, during the first repatriation holiday in 2004, seven of the nineteen surveyed corporations received over 90 percent of their repatriations from tax haven countries. A second holiday for repatriated profits would enable firms that have avoided U.S. taxes in this way to bring sheltered earnings back at a greatly reduced tax rate — encouraging them and other firms to shift more income earned from investments in the United States and other non-low-tax countries to offshore tax havens.

The mistaken belief that a tax holiday would generate a net increase in federal revenues has sparked proposals to pair it with investments in other priorities, most notably an infrastructure bank


JCT found that a second repatriation holiday would have three separate effects on revenues, compared to what would happen in absence of a holiday:

It would encourage corporations to repatriate foreign earnings that they would otherwise have kept overseas over at least the medium term. This would increase revenues in the short term.

It would give companies a large tax break for other foreign earnings that they would have repatriated even without a holiday. This would decrease revenues.

It would increase incentives for companies to shift jobs, profits, and investments overseas in anticipation of future holidays. This, too, would decrease revenues.



Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Increase Deficits and Push Investment Overseas ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[Dad2three]

No loopholes 19% minimum tax on corps & income over $250k

First $50,000 15.00%
$50,000-$75,000 25.00%
$75,000-$100,000 34.00%
$100,000-$335,000 39.00%
$335,000-$10,000,000 34.00%
$10,000,000-$15,000,000 35.00%
$15,000,000-$18,333,333 38.00%
Over $18,333,333 35.00%

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/02corate.pdf

That would be a huge tax break for almost every corporation.

That would be a huge tax break for almost every corporation.

EXCEPT almost NO Corp pays margin rates EXCEPT Corps that can't off shore their profits, Walmarts, Mc'D's, etc


EFFECTIVE tax rates are at 40+ year lows of around 12%

https://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=WMT+Income+Statement&annual

Last year, WalMart had:

Income Before Tax of $24,656,000,000

And had Income Tax Expense of $8,105,000,000

Please explain what their EFFECTIVE tax rate was.

The EFFECTIVE rate is about 30%

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?

GOV'T POLICY CAN STOP THIS CORP TAX AVOIDANCE PRETTY EASILY, IF THE GOP STEPPED UP. THEY REFUSE TOO. Weird you can't be honest about that!

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Thanks for the link.
I didn't see where it claimed to have cost jobs.
Perhaps you can cut and paste the section you feel claimed that?

Thanks!

The 15 companies that repatriated the most after the 2004 tax break on the return of overseas profits later cut a net 20,931 jobs between 2004 and 2007 and slightly decreased the pace of their spending on research and development, found the report surveying 19 companies' activity.

Report: Repatriation Tax Holiday a 'Failed' Policy - WSJ


The evidence clearly shows that these repatriated earnings did not increase domestic investment, job creation, or research and development (R&D).[9] As the authors of the leading paper on the subject concluded in 2010, “repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D.


Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?




A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. A valuable new report[3]from the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations shows that, during the first repatriation holiday in 2004, seven of the nineteen surveyed corporations received over 90 percent of their repatriations from tax haven countries. A second holiday for repatriated profits would enable firms that have avoided U.S. taxes in this way to bring sheltered earnings back at a greatly reduced tax rate — encouraging them and other firms to shift more income earned from investments in the United States and other non-low-tax countries to offshore tax havens.

The mistaken belief that a tax holiday would generate a net increase in federal revenues has sparked proposals to pair it with investments in other priorities, most notably an infrastructure bank


JCT found that a second repatriation holiday would have three separate effects on revenues, compared to what would happen in absence of a holiday:

It would encourage corporations to repatriate foreign earnings that they would otherwise have kept overseas over at least the medium term. This would increase revenues in the short term.

It would give companies a large tax break for other foreign earnings that they would have repatriated even without a holiday. This would decrease revenues.

It would increase incentives for companies to shift jobs, profits, and investments overseas in anticipation of future holidays. This, too, would decrease revenues.



Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Increase Deficits and Push Investment Overseas ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That would be a huge tax break for almost every corporation.

EXCEPT almost NO Corp pays margin rates EXCEPT Corps that can't off shore their profits, Walmarts, Mc'D's, etc


EFFECTIVE tax rates are at 40+ year lows of around 12%

https://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=WMT+Income+Statement&annual

Last year, WalMart had:

Income Before Tax of $24,656,000,000

And had Income Tax Expense of $8,105,000,000

Please explain what their EFFECTIVE tax rate was.

The EFFECTIVE rate is about 30%

Hmmmmmm......that's a lot more than 12%.

Do you have any examples of companies that paid 12%?

 

[Dad2three]

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Thanks for the link.
I didn't see where it claimed to have cost jobs.
Perhaps you can cut and paste the section you feel claimed that?

Thanks!

The 15 companies that repatriated the most after the 2004 tax break on the return of overseas profits later cut a net 20,931 jobs between 2004 and 2007 and slightly decreased the pace of their spending on research and development, found the report surveying 19 companies' activity.

Report: Repatriation Tax Holiday a 'Failed' Policy - WSJ


The evidence clearly shows that these repatriated earnings did not increase domestic investment, job creation, or research and development (R&D).[9] As the authors of the leading paper on the subject concluded in 2010, “repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D.


Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?




A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. A valuable new report[3]from the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations shows that, during the first repatriation holiday in 2004, seven of the nineteen surveyed corporations received over 90 percent of their repatriations from tax haven countries. A second holiday for repatriated profits would enable firms that have avoided U.S. taxes in this way to bring sheltered earnings back at a greatly reduced tax rate — encouraging them and other firms to shift more income earned from investments in the United States and other non-low-tax countries to offshore tax havens.

The mistaken belief that a tax holiday would generate a net increase in federal revenues has sparked proposals to pair it with investments in other priorities, most notably an infrastructure bank


JCT found that a second repatriation holiday would have three separate effects on revenues, compared to what would happen in absence of a holiday:

It would encourage corporations to repatriate foreign earnings that they would otherwise have kept overseas over at least the medium term. This would increase revenues in the short term.

It would give companies a large tax break for other foreign earnings that they would have repatriated even without a holiday. This would decrease revenues.

It would increase incentives for companies to shift jobs, profits, and investments overseas in anticipation of future holidays. This, too, would decrease revenues.



Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Increase Deficits and Push Investment Overseas ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US? Nope, but the JCT and other studies say it did, and would again!

 

[Dad2three]

https://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=WMT+Income+Statement&annual

Last year, WalMart had:

Income Before Tax of $24,656,000,000

And had Income Tax Expense of $8,105,000,000

Please explain what their EFFECTIVE tax rate was.

The EFFECTIVE rate is about 30%

Hmmmmmm......that's a lot more than 12%.

Do you have any examples of companies that paid 12%?

Not doing this bullshit with you moron

YOU HAVE READING COMPREHENSION ISSUES?

EXCEPT Corps that can't off shore their profits, Walmarts, Mc'D's, etc



Congressional Budget Office numbers, corporations are paying an effective rate of 12.1%, the lowest in at least 40 years.

The Corporate Tax Rate Is Lowest in Decades; Is Business Paying Its Fair Share? | TIME.com

 

[Dad2three]

Sure, like we saw with Dubya's 'repatriation' holiday in 2004 at 5% where it not only cost revenues BUT jobs?

Thanks for the link.
I didn't see where it claimed to have cost jobs.
Perhaps you can cut and paste the section you feel claimed that?

Thanks!

The 15 companies that repatriated the most after the 2004 tax break on the return of overseas profits later cut a net 20,931 jobs between 2004 and 2007 and slightly decreased the pace of their spending on research and development, found the report surveying 19 companies' activity.

Report: Repatriation Tax Holiday a 'Failed' Policy - WSJ


The evidence clearly shows that these repatriated earnings did not increase domestic investment, job creation, or research and development (R&D).[9] As the authors of the leading paper on the subject concluded in 2010, “repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D.


Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?




A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. A valuable new report[3]from the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations shows that, during the first repatriation holiday in 2004, seven of the nineteen surveyed corporations received over 90 percent of their repatriations from tax haven countries. A second holiday for repatriated profits would enable firms that have avoided U.S. taxes in this way to bring sheltered earnings back at a greatly reduced tax rate — encouraging them and other firms to shift more income earned from investments in the United States and other non-low-tax countries to offshore tax havens.

The mistaken belief that a tax holiday would generate a net increase in federal revenues has sparked proposals to pair it with investments in other priorities, most notably an infrastructure bank


JCT found that a second repatriation holiday would have three separate effects on revenues, compared to what would happen in absence of a holiday:

It would encourage corporations to repatriate foreign earnings that they would otherwise have kept overseas over at least the medium term. This would increase revenues in the short term.

It would give companies a large tax break for other foreign earnings that they would have repatriated even without a holiday. This would decrease revenues.

It would increase incentives for companies to shift jobs, profits, and investments overseas in anticipation of future holidays. This, too, would decrease revenues.



Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Increase Deficits and Push Investment Overseas ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report


The subcommittee's report found that the last repatriation tax holiday cost the Treasury at least $3.3 billion in net revenue lost over ten years and that it "produced no appreciable increase in U.S. jobs or domestic investment, and led to U.S. corporations directing more funds offshore."

A second such tax break, it said, would cut government revenues, fail to create jobs and increase incentives for U.S. corporations to move more jobs and investment abroad.


Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report | Reuters

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The 15 companies that repatriated the most after the 2004 tax break on the return of overseas profits later cut a net 20,931 jobs between 2004 and 2007 and slightly decreased the pace of their spending on research and development, found the report surveying 19 companies' activity.

Report: Repatriation Tax Holiday a 'Failed' Policy - WSJ


The evidence clearly shows that these repatriated earnings did not increase domestic investment, job creation, or research and development (R&D).[9] As the authors of the leading paper on the subject concluded in 2010, “repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D.


Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?




A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. A valuable new report[3]from the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations shows that, during the first repatriation holiday in 2004, seven of the nineteen surveyed corporations received over 90 percent of their repatriations from tax haven countries. A second holiday for repatriated profits would enable firms that have avoided U.S. taxes in this way to bring sheltered earnings back at a greatly reduced tax rate — encouraging them and other firms to shift more income earned from investments in the United States and other non-low-tax countries to offshore tax havens.

The mistaken belief that a tax holiday would generate a net increase in federal revenues has sparked proposals to pair it with investments in other priorities, most notably an infrastructure bank


JCT found that a second repatriation holiday would have three separate effects on revenues, compared to what would happen in absence of a holiday:

It would encourage corporations to repatriate foreign earnings that they would otherwise have kept overseas over at least the medium term. This would increase revenues in the short term.

It would give companies a large tax break for other foreign earnings that they would have repatriated even without a holiday. This would decrease revenues.

It would increase incentives for companies to shift jobs, profits, and investments overseas in anticipation of future holidays. This, too, would decrease revenues.



Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Increase Deficits and Push Investment Overseas ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US? Nope, but the JCT and other studies say it did, and would again!

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US?

No mention of the tax holiday costing us jobs.

I'm curious why you think bringing money back into the US, paying some taxes on it, and using it to pay dividends or for any other corporate need does nothing for us?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The EFFECTIVE rate is about 30%

Hmmmmmm......that's a lot more than 12%.

Do you have any examples of companies that paid 12%?

Not doing this bullshit with you moron

YOU HAVE READING COMPREHENSION ISSUES?

EXCEPT Corps that can't off shore their profits, Walmarts, Mc'D's, etc



Congressional Budget Office numbers, corporations are paying an effective rate of 12.1%, the lowest in at least 40 years.

The Corporate Tax Rate Is Lowest in Decades; Is Business Paying Its Fair Share? | TIME.com

WalMart does business in 26 countries. McDonalds in more than 100. What the hell are you talking about?

 

[Dad2three]

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US? Nope, but the JCT and other studies say it did, and would again!

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US?

No mention of the tax holiday costing us jobs.

I'm curious why you think bringing money back into the US, paying some taxes on it, and using it to pay dividends or for any other corporate need does nothing for us?

"A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes."

 

[Dad2three]

Hmmmmmm......that's a lot more than 12%.

Do you have any examples of companies that paid 12%?

Not doing this bullshit with you moron

YOU HAVE READING COMPREHENSION ISSUES?

EXCEPT Corps that can't off shore their profits, Walmarts, Mc'D's, etc



Congressional Budget Office numbers, corporations are paying an effective rate of 12.1%, the lowest in at least 40 years.

The Corporate Tax Rate Is Lowest in Decades; Is Business Paying Its Fair Share? | TIME.com

WalMart does business in 26 countries. McDonalds in more than 100. What the hell are you talking about?

YET the VAST majority of their profits are in the US, But YES,. that's why their EFFECTIVE rate was around 30% instead of 35%

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The 15 companies that repatriated the most after the 2004 tax break on the return of overseas profits later cut a net 20,931 jobs between 2004 and 2007 and slightly decreased the pace of their spending on research and development, found the report surveying 19 companies' activity.

Report: Repatriation Tax Holiday a 'Failed' Policy - WSJ


The evidence clearly shows that these repatriated earnings did not increase domestic investment, job creation, or research and development (R&D).[9] As the authors of the leading paper on the subject concluded in 2010, “repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D.


Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?




A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. A valuable new report[3]from the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations shows that, during the first repatriation holiday in 2004, seven of the nineteen surveyed corporations received over 90 percent of their repatriations from tax haven countries. A second holiday for repatriated profits would enable firms that have avoided U.S. taxes in this way to bring sheltered earnings back at a greatly reduced tax rate — encouraging them and other firms to shift more income earned from investments in the United States and other non-low-tax countries to offshore tax havens.

The mistaken belief that a tax holiday would generate a net increase in federal revenues has sparked proposals to pair it with investments in other priorities, most notably an infrastructure bank


JCT found that a second repatriation holiday would have three separate effects on revenues, compared to what would happen in absence of a holiday:

It would encourage corporations to repatriate foreign earnings that they would otherwise have kept overseas over at least the medium term. This would increase revenues in the short term.

It would give companies a large tax break for other foreign earnings that they would have repatriated even without a holiday. This would decrease revenues.

It would increase incentives for companies to shift jobs, profits, and investments overseas in anticipation of future holidays. This, too, would decrease revenues.



Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Increase Deficits and Push Investment Overseas ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report


The subcommittee's report found that the last repatriation tax holiday cost the Treasury at least $3.3 billion in net revenue lost over ten years and that it "produced no appreciable increase in U.S. jobs or domestic investment, and led to U.S. corporations directing more funds offshore."

A second such tax break, it said, would cut government revenues, fail to create jobs and increase incentives for U.S. corporations to move more jobs and investment abroad.


Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report | Reuters

A second such tax break, it said, would cut government revenues, fail to create jobs and increase incentives for U.S. corporations to move more jobs and investment abroad

Our highest in the world corporate tax rates and our idiotic insistence on taxing world-wide profit is incentive enough for US corporations to move jobs and investment abroad.

Cut the corporate rate to something reasonable, like 15%, and foreign corporations would move jobs and investment here.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US? Nope, but the JCT and other studies say it did, and would again!

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US?

No mention of the tax holiday costing us jobs.

I'm curious why you think bringing money back into the US, paying some taxes on it, and using it to pay dividends or for any other corporate need does nothing for us?

"A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes."

Imagine the revenue we'd get if foreign corporations had an incentive to shift revenue here.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The 15 companies that repatriated the most after the 2004 tax break on the return of overseas profits later cut a net 20,931 jobs between 2004 and 2007 and slightly decreased the pace of their spending on research and development, found the report surveying 19 companies' activity.

Report: Repatriation Tax Holiday a 'Failed' Policy - WSJ


The evidence clearly shows that these repatriated earnings did not increase domestic investment, job creation, or research and development (R&D).[9] As the authors of the leading paper on the subject concluded in 2010, “repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D.


Would Another Repatriation Tax Holiday Create Jobs?




A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes. A valuable new report[3]from the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations shows that, during the first repatriation holiday in 2004, seven of the nineteen surveyed corporations received over 90 percent of their repatriations from tax haven countries. A second holiday for repatriated profits would enable firms that have avoided U.S. taxes in this way to bring sheltered earnings back at a greatly reduced tax rate — encouraging them and other firms to shift more income earned from investments in the United States and other non-low-tax countries to offshore tax havens.

The mistaken belief that a tax holiday would generate a net increase in federal revenues has sparked proposals to pair it with investments in other priorities, most notably an infrastructure bank


JCT found that a second repatriation holiday would have three separate effects on revenues, compared to what would happen in absence of a holiday:

It would encourage corporations to repatriate foreign earnings that they would otherwise have kept overseas over at least the medium term. This would increase revenues in the short term.

It would give companies a large tax break for other foreign earnings that they would have repatriated even without a holiday. This would decrease revenues.

It would increase incentives for companies to shift jobs, profits, and investments overseas in anticipation of future holidays. This, too, would decrease revenues.



Repatriation Tax Holiday Would Increase Deficits and Push Investment Overseas ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report


The subcommittee's report found that the last repatriation tax holiday cost the Treasury at least $3.3 billion in net revenue lost over ten years and that it "produced no appreciable increase in U.S. jobs or domestic investment, and led to U.S. corporations directing more funds offshore."

A second such tax break, it said, would cut government revenues, fail to create jobs and increase incentives for U.S. corporations to move more jobs and investment abroad.


Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report | Reuters

The subcommittee's report found that the last repatriation tax holiday cost the Treasury at least $3.3 billion in net revenue lost over ten years

Hilarious! The Treasury would get 35% of zero, because corporations would leave the money overseas, or some much lower rate on a much bigger sum.

And that repatriated cash would pay dividends (taxed again) or buy equipment (generates more economic activity) or pay down debt (increased net profit = higher corporate tax payments).

 

[Dad2three]

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report


The subcommittee's report found that the last repatriation tax holiday cost the Treasury at least $3.3 billion in net revenue lost over ten years and that it "produced no appreciable increase in U.S. jobs or domestic investment, and led to U.S. corporations directing more funds offshore."

A second such tax break, it said, would cut government revenues, fail to create jobs and increase incentives for U.S. corporations to move more jobs and investment abroad.


Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report | Reuters

A second such tax break, it said, would cut government revenues, fail to create jobs and increase incentives for U.S. corporations to move more jobs and investment abroad

Our highest in the world corporate tax rates and our idiotic insistence on taxing world-wide profit is incentive enough for US corporations to move jobs and investment abroad.

Cut the corporate rate to something reasonable, like 15%, and foreign corporations would move jobs and investment here.

Sure UNTIL the next nation cuts it to 10%. MOST Corp profits on US Corps are made WITHIN the US even counting 'accounting tricks' like Google and Apple use.

Good Gov't Policy, IF the GOP would allow it again, would do just fine to keeping jobs AND tax revenues in the US. Of course I don't expect that until 2018-2020 when the extremists TP/GOP is finally destroyed and the Birchers who run it are put back in the corner, as they wewre up until Reagan!

 

[Dad2three]

From Biz friendly Heritage who said it did NOTHING for US?

No mention of the tax holiday costing us jobs.

I'm curious why you think bringing money back into the US, paying some taxes on it, and using it to pay dividends or for any other corporate need does nothing for us?

"A second tax holiday would also reward and encourage corporate tax avoidance. The evidence indicates that a significant share of the profits that multinational corporations book in low-tax foreign jurisdictions is, in economic terms, attributable to domestic economic activity — that these "overseas profits" were, through complicated accounting maneuvers, shifted overseas on paper specifically to avoid U.S. corporate taxes."

Imagine the revenue we'd get if foreign corporations had an incentive to shift revenue here.

Almost zilch. MOST profits are already made in the US

 

[Dad2three]

Thanks, I didn't think there was a claim that it cost jobs, and your post confirms there was no claim.

Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report


The subcommittee's report found that the last repatriation tax holiday cost the Treasury at least $3.3 billion in net revenue lost over ten years and that it "produced no appreciable increase in U.S. jobs or domestic investment, and led to U.S. corporations directing more funds offshore."

A second such tax break, it said, would cut government revenues, fail to create jobs and increase incentives for U.S. corporations to move more jobs and investment abroad.


Foreign profit tax break was costly bomb: report | Reuters

The subcommittee's report found that the last repatriation tax holiday cost the Treasury at least $3.3 billion in net revenue lost over ten years

Hilarious! The Treasury would get 35% of zero, because corporations would leave the money overseas, or some much lower rate on a much bigger sum.

And that repatriated cash would pay dividends (taxed again) or buy equipment (generates more economic activity) or pay down debt (increased net profit = higher corporate tax payments).

Don't want to pay your taxes? KEEP IT OFFSHORE. FUCK THEM, Eventually the TP/GOP will be voted out and we can start having GOOD GOV'T POLICY with those that actually believe in governance!