Plan to Cut Corporate Tax Rate to 15%

[mudwhistle]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

IMHO Depends on what those corporations spend the extra money on and what sectors we're talking about.

Just some random observations based on this 15% outline of a plan to create a plan...

Average effective tax rate for large corporations right now is around 19% so we're looking at a roughly 4% boost to the bottom line, many of our largest corporations are already sitting on mountains of cash which means that it's not likely they're going to go on an expansion spending spree with a 4% bump, what's more likely to happen with those corporations is an increased pace of stock buybacks and higher dividends, which is good for investors but isn't likely to translate into a massive labor market expansion.

For foreign companies it does provide an attractive incentive to locate within the U.S. which is a good potential job creator as well as pulling in new investment to the U.S..

For SMB's it'll be a mixed bag depending on where they are now with taxes, it'll be great for the retail sector since it gets hit hardest by income taxes so I'd imagine we'd see some positive job creation there but less so for sectors with a lighter income tax burden.

All in all (if this ever becomes law, which is a BIG if) I'd expect this will be a positive for job creation and have a significant upside for investors as well as allowing certain sectors some cushion in terms of pricing, however IMHO it still doesn't go far enough (Corporate rates should be ZERO in my estimation).

How deceptive of you.

The top rate is over 38%

LOL, Do You need help with understanding the word EFFECTIVE or sumptin' ?

Nope. I always maxed out English comprehension.


I also know what "average rate" means, dickhead.

 

[NightFox]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

IMHO Depends on what those corporations spend the extra money on and what sectors we're talking about.

Just some random observations based on this 15% outline of a plan to create a plan...

Average effective tax rate for large corporations right now is around 19% so we're looking at a roughly 4% boost to the bottom line, many of our largest corporations are already sitting on mountains of cash which means that it's not likely they're going to go on an expansion spending spree with a 4% bump, what's more likely to happen with those corporations is an increased pace of stock buybacks and higher dividends, which is good for investors but isn't likely to translate into a massive labor market expansion.

For foreign companies it does provide an attractive incentive to locate within the U.S. which is a good potential job creator as well as pulling in new investment to the U.S..

For SMB's it'll be a mixed bag depending on where they are now with taxes, it'll be great for the retail sector since it gets hit hardest by income taxes so I'd imagine we'd see some positive job creation there but less so for sectors with a lighter income tax burden.

All in all (if this ever becomes law, which is a BIG if) I'd expect this will be a positive for job creation and have a significant upside for investors as well as allowing certain sectors some cushion in terms of pricing, however IMHO it still doesn't go far enough (Corporate rates should be ZERO in my estimation).

How deceptive of you.

The top rate is over 38%

LOL, Do You need help with understanding the word EFFECTIVE or sumptin' ?

Nope. I always maxed out English comprehension.

Odd that you were able to manage that without understanding the difference between statutory corporate tax rates and effective corporate tax rates, perhaps you should have spent a little bit of time studying accounting, finance and math along with English, huh?

I also know what "average rate" means, dickhead.

Cool, now all that remains is for you to go look up the meaning of effective and then maybe we can move you up from the complete novice class to a seat in the slightly informed rookie section.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Well, with corporate tax rates going down, they will have less incentive to invest in tax deductible R&D and expansion, so it will make sense if business expansion and job growth slows.

 

[Moonglow]

It's usually under 20% now.

 

[da Vinci]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

Corporate tax windfalls are not what drive job creation. Demand is what drives job creation. Cutting the corporate tax rate in an environment where we need to reduce our deficit and address the national debt is about the worst idea imaginable. Corporate profits have consistently hit record highs each quarter for the last five to six years, so it's not as if corporations are in need of tax relief. Also, tax rates are not what drive price. A combination of supply and demand is what drives price. Corporate tax rates are fine where the are. Over 12 million private sector jobs were created during the Obama era under those tax rates.

If you want a tax policy that will stimulate the economy and create more jobs, cut taxes for the bottom personal income brackets and offset that by raising taxes on the higher income brackets. This is a no brainer, though it seems to escape the republican electorate. Tax cuts for the lower income brackets would provide a boost to aggregate demand, which would lead businesses to hire more employees to meet that demand.

What was the demand for small computers before venture capitalists using new money from Reagan's deregulation and tax cuts provided capital for companies like Apple, Microsoft, etc.? There was none, but the "windfall's from Reagan policies allowed investors to take risks on new investments that eventually drove the prosperity of the 1990's. No amount of middle class tax cuts intended to increase demand could have done this.

There was certainly demand for data processing, and more efficient means of consuming, storing, and sharing data back in the 80's. Personal computers were a vehicle to meet that demand. This is true independent of any regressive tax cuts.

Put another way, personal computers - much less regressive tax cuts - didn't invent the demand for data processing any more than the automobile invented the demand for transportation. You're mistaking technological innovation of an already existing, demanded process with the creation of an entirely new, not-previously-demanded process.

If you want to give the Reagan tax cuts credit for something that they actually created, look no further than our national debt. The trend of ballooning deficit spending and national debt begins in the 80s with Reagan's tax cuts. One could also make the argument that those tax cuts play a role in the skewed distribution of wealth and income that has taken hold over the last several decades as well.

 

[NightFox]

Well, with corporate tax rates going down, they will have less incentive to invest in tax deductible R&D and expansion, so it will make sense if business expansion and job growth slows.

Umm.. decisions regarding investment are based on risk/reward not solely whether or not it's deductible, a lower effective rate generally speaking means higher returns (reward) and thus (in many cases) makes investment more likely.

In other words... if I invest X amount today for Y amount of returns tomorrow, with lower effective rates Y has a lower tax exposure and thus a higher reward over the lifetime of the investment.

If I only get to deduct X once (or depreciate it over a schedule) but have to pay a higher effective rate on Y over the lifetime of the investment then the reward (possibly) isn't going to be as attractive versus the risk.

It really depends on the details of the nature of the investment and the current financial position of the company in question but IMHO more than likely it would stimulate CapEx in the aggregate.

 

[Toro]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

Exactly

 

[Toro]

Cut the tax rates, close the loopholes, broaden the tax base and ignore the special interests.

 

[Moonglow]

Cut the tax rates, close the loopholes, broaden the tax base and ignore the special interests.

I don't think Congress can swallow it..

 

[Dschrute3]

Should have been done a long time ago. Canada did it, and its Economy has done very well since. Good on Trump.

 

[Cellblock2429]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

/---- no savings since fed taxes are passed on to the consumer. Part of the overhead.

 

[xotoxi]

I'm thinking that most of the extra money will be spent on bonuses for executives, and some of what is left over will be saved for Golden Parachutes.

Without some sort of mandate to spend the saved money in a way that would benefit the little people, why would a corporation do anything else?

That's a very narrow view IMHO, generally speaking corporations aren't the evil empires that some people try to depict them as, ultimately they're answerable to their shareholders which means that shareholder return is paramount, "bonuses" for executives don't meet that standard unless they're required to attract and retain talent that is necessary to maximize returns.

Fair enough...however will shareholders be pleased if tax savings are passed down to consumers through lower retail prices? I can't imagine that they would be...and I don't see any corporation using their tax savings to benefit the American People through increased jobs or lower prices.

Mandating how corporations spend the money that they EARN is completely antithetical to American Values and completely unnecessary if you create a climate of economic growth where businesses can invest in capital with some certainty they'll see superior return to just sitting on their hands and accumulating cash/equivalents and buying their own shares back.

How about keeping the tax rate the way it is...but that companies who make efforts in some of the following benchmarks: increasing employment, decreasing consumer costs, using American made materials, manufacturing in America, etc...would be entitled to have decreases in their tax rate. That way, nothing would be MANDATED, but rather ENCOURAGED, with a tax incentive if achieved.

 

[mudwhistle]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

IMHO Depends on what those corporations spend the extra money on and what sectors we're talking about.

Just some random observations based on this 15% outline of a plan to create a plan...

Average effective tax rate for large corporations right now is around 19% so we're looking at a roughly 4% boost to the bottom line, many of our largest corporations are already sitting on mountains of cash which means that it's not likely they're going to go on an expansion spending spree with a 4% bump, what's more likely to happen with those corporations is an increased pace of stock buybacks and higher dividends, which is good for investors but isn't likely to translate into a massive labor market expansion.

For foreign companies it does provide an attractive incentive to locate within the U.S. which is a good potential job creator as well as pulling in new investment to the U.S..

For SMB's it'll be a mixed bag depending on where they are now with taxes, it'll be great for the retail sector since it gets hit hardest by income taxes so I'd imagine we'd see some positive job creation there but less so for sectors with a lighter income tax burden.

All in all (if this ever becomes law, which is a BIG if) I'd expect this will be a positive for job creation and have a significant upside for investors as well as allowing certain sectors some cushion in terms of pricing, however IMHO it still doesn't go far enough (Corporate rates should be ZERO in my estimation).

How deceptive of you.

The top rate is over 38%

LOL, Do You need help with understanding the word EFFECTIVE or sumptin' ?

Nope. I always maxed out English comprehension.

Odd that you were able to manage that without understanding the difference between statutory corporate tax rates and effective corporate tax rates, perhaps you should have spent a little bit of time studying accounting, finance and math along with English, huh?

I also know what "average rate" means, dickhead.

Cool, now all that remains is for you to go look up the meaning of effective and then maybe we can move you up from the complete novice class to a seat in the slightly informed rookie section.

As I said before, there's no need.

Sell your shit to some idiot that wants to buy it, numbnuts

 

[Moonglow]

I am sure that the next mini push will also be the replacement of Oblamacare, to reduce taxes that it generates..

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Rubes ...What Up ?
Mnuchin Can’t Promise Middle Class Won’t Pay More
Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin “declined to guarantee that middle-class families wouldn’t pay more under President Trump’s sweeping tax overhaul plan,” ABC News reports.

 

[xotoxi]

If you want a tax policy that will stimulate the economy and create more jobs, cut taxes for the bottom personal income brackets and offset that by raising taxes on the higher income brackets. This is a no brainer, though it seems to escape the republican electorate. Tax cuts for the lower income brackets would provide a boost to aggregate demand, which would lead businesses to hire more employees to meet that demand.

Agree.

The majority of consumers in the economy are the lower income. Any additional money that ends up in their pockets will be spent into the economy (since the lower income people generally don't save money)

 

[xotoxi]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

If you live in a white trash country, which voted overwhelmingly for Trump and you find your life better because the rich are getting richer and Trump's promises are connecting to you, than yes, its a win. But you know and I know, talk is not only cheap, it doesn't pay bills or put food on the table....but as long as red necks are happy, hey, more power!!!

In a few more months, reality will sink in and idiots will wake up.....no infastructure bill is coming, no mega jobs from China, no wage increases, Trump is gonna make you idiots life a living hell in a few more months, you'll see

Trickle down has never ever ever ever ever ever worked.

As I have always said, only one thing trickles down: URINE.

Piss and bullshit.....LOLOLOL

Actually, bullshit usually drops in large plops.

Unless it is diarrhea, in which case it might trickle...if it doesn't explosively spew.

 

[kwc57]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

Corporate tax windfalls are not what drive job creation. Demand is what drives job creation. Cutting the corporate tax rate in an environment where we need to reduce our deficit and address the national debt is about the worst idea imaginable. Corporate profits have consistently hit record highs each quarter for the last five to six years, so it's not as if corporations are in need of tax relief. Also, tax rates are not what drive price. A combination of supply and demand is what drives price. Corporate tax rates are fine where the are. Over 12 million private sector jobs were created during the Obama era under those tax rates.

If you want a tax policy that will stimulate the economy and create more jobs, cut taxes for the bottom personal income brackets and offset that by raising taxes on the higher income brackets. This is a no brainer, though it seems to escape the republican electorate. Tax cuts for the lower income brackets would provide a boost to aggregate demand, which would lead businesses to hire more employees to meet that demand.

Define "lower income bracket". It seems to escape the Democrat electorate that the vast majority of the lower income bracket pays zero income tax and even get checks back....which is funded by the higher income brackets who do pay tax.

 

[xotoxi]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

Corporate tax windfalls are not what drive job creation. Demand is what drives job creation. Cutting the corporate tax rate in an environment where we need to reduce our deficit and address the national debt is about the worst idea imaginable. Corporate profits have consistently hit record highs each quarter for the last five to six years, so it's not as if corporations are in need of tax relief. Also, tax rates are not what drive price. A combination of supply and demand is what drives price. Corporate tax rates are fine where the are. Over 12 million private sector jobs were created during the Obama era under those tax rates.

If you want a tax policy that will stimulate the economy and create more jobs, cut taxes for the bottom personal income brackets and offset that by raising taxes on the higher income brackets. This is a no brainer, though it seems to escape the republican electorate. Tax cuts for the lower income brackets would provide a boost to aggregate demand, which would lead businesses to hire more employees to meet that demand.

Define "lower income bracket". It seems to escape the Democrat electorate that the vast majority of the lower income bracket pays zero income tax and even get checks back....which is funded by the higher income brackets who do pay tax.

I would define the "lower income bracket" as those tax brackets where greater than 50% of it's members shop regularly at Walmart or Target, and where 90% of it's members do not own a sports car or a large boat.

I'm sure your next question will be: define "large boat".

 

[NightFox]

IMHO Depends on what those corporations spend the extra money on and what sectors we're talking about.

Just some random observations based on this 15% outline of a plan to create a plan...

Average effective tax rate for large corporations right now is around 19% so we're looking at a roughly 4% boost to the bottom line, many of our largest corporations are already sitting on mountains of cash which means that it's not likely they're going to go on an expansion spending spree with a 4% bump, what's more likely to happen with those corporations is an increased pace of stock buybacks and higher dividends, which is good for investors but isn't likely to translate into a massive labor market expansion.

For foreign companies it does provide an attractive incentive to locate within the U.S. which is a good potential job creator as well as pulling in new investment to the U.S..

For SMB's it'll be a mixed bag depending on where they are now with taxes, it'll be great for the retail sector since it gets hit hardest by income taxes so I'd imagine we'd see some positive job creation there but less so for sectors with a lighter income tax burden.

All in all (if this ever becomes law, which is a BIG if) I'd expect this will be a positive for job creation and have a significant upside for investors as well as allowing certain sectors some cushion in terms of pricing, however IMHO it still doesn't go far enough (Corporate rates should be ZERO in my estimation).

How deceptive of you.

The top rate is over 38%

LOL, Do You need help with understanding the word EFFECTIVE or sumptin' ?

Nope. I always maxed out English comprehension.

Odd that you were able to manage that without understanding the difference between statutory corporate tax rates and effective corporate tax rates, perhaps you should have spent a little bit of time studying accounting, finance and math along with English, huh?

I also know what "average rate" means, dickhead.

Cool, now all that remains is for you to go look up the meaning of effective and then maybe we can move you up from the complete novice class to a seat in the slightly informed rookie section.

As I said before, there's no need.

Sell your shit to some idiot that wants to buy it, numbnuts

LOL, do you always get so angry and resort to ad hominem after sticking your own foot in your mouth?

BTW you can pick up your white flag and take it with ya, you're obviously going to need to make use of it A LOT in the future if you keep going out of your way to make yourself look stupid.

Ciao