If I taxed a person making $1 million at 1% and a person making $10,000 at 30%, who would pay more in taxes? The answer is the man making $1 million. Paying more in taxes overall does not mean the fair share is being paid, nor does it negate tax breaks and incentives.
They paid nearly $300 billion in taxes and yet you persist in parroting the liberal oil company hate talking points. Liberals told you to hate them and you obeyed, its sad really.
What matters is the percentage of income paid relative to other companies, not the total. This is an incredibly easy point to grasp. Would you support taxing a person making $10,000 at 30%, and a person making $1 million at 1%? Do you understand how that compares to companies that receive special tax privileges?
Exxon Mobile is won of the most profitable companies, meaning it should pay one of the highest corporate tax rates. Yet it pays an average of 17.6% in corporate taxes, higher than the average individual effective income tax rate.
Exxon Mobil Dodges the Tax Man Center for American Progress
What I am criticizing is the government picking and choosing corporations and industries to subsidize. That fosters an enormous amount of corruption and rent-seeking and runs contrary to basic free market principles. A corporate socialist is not a capitalist.
And yet Corporate taxation never does what most people think it does. Based on studies of tax incidence much taxes levied on Corporations are actually paid by consumers. If the Capital is mobile, they can be passed on to labor. If supply is elastic consumers pay the tax. But the most important problem with Corporate taxation is, it gives the congress critters a means to pass on savings for campaign contributions. The taxes Corporations do pay should be eliminated and passed on to the owners of the shares for their profits off of the company making it a tax neutral situation.
ya, more bullshit jumbo talk. you made yourself wealthy on your hard work? education? you've learned nothing and earned what's coming to you. karma has a way of waking up the "poor" to eat the rich as they've fed on the poor. get a history book stupid
Actually no BS at all. I am not wealthy and what I have I did earn through work and my education helped me to do so. If there is ignorance being expended on this thread, it is you doing the crap throwing. The point is, we have lost numerous corporations who have migrated their headquarters to a lower tax country. All of those would have stayed in the US but for the excessive corporate taxation. We would keep many of them here if we taxed the money paid to the share holders such that it would be tax neutral.
Interesting is the way you earlier used the term "rent-seeking." Sounds like the failed attempts of Georgism; a system which has never succeeded without resorting to other taxes to keep the government going. Example: Hong Kong, which has several types of tax besides land valuation tax. In addition, as in Hong Kong, when LVT is used and the user pays the rent to the government, it all works exactly the same as fee-simple property tax on owned land. It is inheritable, it is exclusive to the current occupant, it can be sold just like private land, thus there is no practical difference between one system and the other since if property taxes not paid the land is forfeit.
