forgot password register

reset password

register

patrick.net

 

#misc


#housing #investing #politics #random more»
771,458 comments by 11,157 registered users, 6 online now: APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE, HEY YOU, justme, KimJongUn, NuttBoxer, Tenpoundbass
new post
« prev   misc   next »

0

GOP 1.3 Trillion dollar tax cut for businesses

By jazz_music following x   2017 Sep 15, 2:03pm 406 views   29 comments   watch   quote     share  

This tax package is the main event: what it is all about. The billion dollar cost of propaganda is nothing compared to the pay off for businesses.

Get ready to CONSTANTLY hear FROM ALL DIRECTIONS that these MONSTER tax reductions are going to cure all ills real and imagined.


It is clear that a major goal of the House plan is to dramatically reduce the contribution that corporations and other businesses make to federal tax receipts. The plan represents an extraordinarily large tax cut for both corporations and other types of businesses, costing an estimated $1.3 trillion in the first 10 years after enactment. Much of the reduction would benefit the largest and most-profitable businesses, including those that have engaged in shifting profits and jobs out of the United States. This report considers whether a tax cut for corporations and other businesses is justified at this time.

According to the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX), this part of the House blueprint is designed “to grow jobs, the economy, and wages” [put hair on your head too, the same old lies] with “the lowest rates for businesses in modern history.”

However, the House business tax plan’s ability to generate American jobs, stimulate economic growth, and increase wages is highly uncertain. Although proponents claim that there would be significant incentives for increased real investment in the United States, there is good reason to believe that this claim is not well-founded. Moreover, the DBCFT is unlikely to deliver an improved trade balance or eliminate corporate tax avoidance schemes, as its proponents claim. And it could have adverse effects on the real incomes of many American households.

While enacting the destination-based cash flow tax is a high priority for House Republicans, this change to the corporate tax is unlikely to benefit anyone other than corporations and the wealthy.

...
U.S. firms would still have incentive to shift income outside the United States [MAGA LOL]

By design, the House GOP blueprint would impose no tax on active income from U.S. firms’ business activities abroad. In addition, profits earned abroad by subsidiaries of U.S. parent companies could be returned to the U.S. parent tax-free, with the apparent exception of income earned from passive investments abroad.

However, there would still be many ways for firms to game this system in cases where the final customer is not in the United States. For example, as noted in a paper by Avi-Yonah and Clausing:

A U.S. pharmaceutical with foreign subsidiaries could develop its intellectual property in the United States (claiming deductions for wages, overhead and R&D), and then sell (i.e., export) the foreign rights to its Irish subsidiary (at the highest price possible). The proceeds would not be taxable. Ireland would allow that subsidiary to amortize its purchase price. This creates tax benefits in each jurisdiction by reason of the different regimes. If the Irish subsidiary manufactures drugs, the profits could be distributed up to the U.S. parent tax-free under a territorial system.

In addition, although the House blueprint would allow dividends from active operations of foreign-controlled subsidiaries to be repatriated tax-free, passive income earned overseas would be taxed under the retained Subpart F of the Internal Revenue Code. Together, these provisions might encourage firms with passive income to establish small real operations abroad in order to facilitate recharacterization of passive income as active. It would be difficult for U.S. tax authorities to distinguish passive income and income from active operations, especially where products or services contain elements of both. This is a problem under the current U.S. tax system and could be exacerbated by the House tax plan.



Look at the trends, it's never going to be enough, not when its possible to extract even more.




https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2017/03/14/427967/house-republicans-corporate-tax-cut/
1 anonymous   2017 Sep 15, 3:00pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
The solution to our problems is tax cuts. it is better for businesses to keep more money, than to give it to government. Government is the most inefficient enterprise to ever exist, and they take too much from us people.

Private sector is the engine, and government keeps on cutting it down by taxing it more and more every year.
2 drBu   2017 Sep 15, 3:20pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
anonymous says
Private sector is the engine, and government keeps on cutting it down by taxing it more and more every year.

Does this apply to GE also?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html?pagewanted=all
3 anotheraccount   2017 Sep 15, 3:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
anonymous says
Private sector is the engine


The only reason why where we are today is that central banks intervened and saved the "private" sector.
4 KimJongUn   2017 Sep 15, 3:56pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
Don't whine - buy stocks.
5 jazz_music   2017 Sep 15, 3:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
anonymous says
Private sector is the engine, and government keeps on cutting it down by taxing it more and more every year.


What data says that?

The data above shows corporate taxes steadily declining over 70 years.
6 KimJongUn   2017 Sep 15, 4:25pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
jazz_music says
What data says that?


What data says the water is wet?
7 FortWayne   2017 Sep 15, 6:12pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
We need tax cuts, less government
8 Bellingham Bill   2017 Sep 15, 6:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
anonymous says
Private sector is the engine, and government keeps on cutting it down by taxing it more and more every year.


here I'm going to blow your mind and tell you every dollar the government takes out of the private sector via taxes it puts right back via spending.

without government redistribution this economy would lock up, and quickly -- all those red states on Uncle Sugar's teat, dead.

What makes the private sector really rip is increasing the discretionary income of people who would spend more if only they had more money; this happened in the mid-50s, late 70s, mid-80s and mid-00s in credit booms (aided by the rise in two-worker households):



(% YOY growth in real consumer debt)

and also the real wage rises of the 1990s, that was nice.
9 FortWayne   2017 Sep 15, 6:46pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
We are trillions in debt, poverty is high, welfare is growing, lack of real jobs... and you believe government growing is a solution?

Government is the problem.
Bellingham Bill says
anonymous says
Private sector is the engine, and government keeps on cutting it down by taxing it more and more every year.


here I'm going to blow your mind and tell you every dollar the government takes out of the private sector via taxes it puts right back via spending.

without government redistribution this economy would lock up, and quickly -- all those red states on Uncle Sugar's teat, dead.

What makes the private sector really rip is increasing the discretionary income of people who would spend more if only they had more money; this happened in the mid-50s, late 70s, mid-80s and mid-00s in credit booms (aided by the rise in two-worker households):



(% YOY growth in real consumer debt)

and also the real wage rises of the 1990s, that was nice.
10 iwog   2017 Sep 15, 6:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
FortWayne says
We are trillions in debt, poverty is high, welfare is growing, lack of real jobs... and you believe government growing is a solution?

Government is the problem.


So why can't a game of Monopoly continue indefinitely?
11 Strategist   2017 Sep 15, 6:49pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
Bellingham Bill says

here I'm going to blow your mind and tell you every dollar the government takes out of the private sector via taxes it puts right back via spending.


With most of it being wasted. When has the government ever spent wisely. If you want to cut down on waste, you have to first cut down on government.
12 jazz_music   2017 Sep 15, 6:54pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
Bellingham Bill says
increasing the discretionary income of people who would spend more if only they had more money


13 Strategist   2017 Sep 15, 7:01pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
jazz_music says


So lets have a 100% tax rate for the rich, give it all to the poor, and watch it trickle back up to the rich.
ROFL. Ha ha ha ha. Jazz, you really post some funny stuff.
14 anotheraccount   2017 Sep 15, 7:04pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
Strategist says
So lets have a 100% tax rate for the rich


Nobody said tax the corporations at 100&. We are talking about the rate that would put the income distribution to a more normal rate. Corporations benefits hugely from 1T in spending on US military, they need to fund some of it.
15 Strategist   2017 Sep 15, 7:25pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
tr6 says
Strategist says
So lets have a 100% tax rate for the rich


Nobody said tax the corporations at 100&. We are talking about the rate that would put the income distribution to a more normal rate. Corporations benefits hugely from 1T in spending on US military, they need to fund some of it.


Humans work on incentives. If you take away the incentives nothing much will be produced, and we become a failed nation, just like every single communist country. Even dogs and animals need treats and incentives to get them to do something. When corporations have the incentives to make more profit, they invest more, hire more people, produce more, our tax collection increases, our 401K's are worth more. In the end there is more for the 80 year old widow who cannot fend for herself.
Everyone is better off. Lets cut taxes.
16 BayAreaObserver   2017 Sep 16, 6:13am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
Tax cuts quiet once-deafening GOP call for fiscal discipline - why is that ?

Republicans spooked world markets in their ardor to cut spending when Democrat Barack Obama was in the White House. Now, with Republican President Donald Trump pressing for politically popular tax cuts and billions more for the military, few in the GOP are complaining about the nation's soaring debt.

The tea partyers and other conservatives who seized control of the House in 2010 have morphed into Ronald Reagan-style supply-siders while the GOP's numerous Pentagon pals run roughshod over the few holdouts. Tax cuts in the works could add hundreds of billions of dollars to the debt while bipartisan pressure for more money for defense, infrastructure and domestic agencies could mean almost $100 billion in additional spending next year alone.

The bottom line: The $20 trillion national debt promises to spiral ever higher with Republicans controlling both Congress and the White House.

It's a far cry from the Newt Gingrich-led GOP revolution that stormed Washington two decades ago with a mandate to balance the budget and cut taxes at the same time. Or even from Republicans of 2001, who enthusiastically cut taxes under President George W. Bush, but only at a moment when the government was flush with money.

Now, deficits are back with a vengeance. Medicare and Social Security are drawing closer to insolvency. Fiscal hawks and watchdogs like the Congressional Budget Office warn that the debt is eventually going to drag the economy down.

But like Obama and Bush before him, Trump isn't talking about deficits. Neither much are voters.

"Voters, frankly, after these huge deficits, are saying, 'Well, how much do deficits really matter?'" said former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., a two-time presidential candidate. "We're not Greece yet, right?"

Topping the immediate agenda, however, is a debt-financed drive to overhaul the tax system.

Much More: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_REPUBLICANS_SPENDING?SITE=KYB66&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-09-16-02-16-12
17 bob2356   2017 Sep 16, 6:44am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
FortWayne says
. and you believe government growing is a solution?


You've never heard of reducing the debt? Very odd.
18 bob2356   2017 Sep 16, 6:47am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
Strategist says

Humans work on incentives. If you take away the incentives nothing much will be produced, and we become a failed nation, just like every single communist country. Even dogs and animals need treats and incentives to get them to do something. When corporations have the incentives to make more profit, they invest more, hire more people, produce more, our tax collection increases, our 401K's are worth more. In the end there is more for the 80 year old widow who cannot fend for herself.
Everyone is better off. Lets cut taxes.


Yes after all tax rates are so much higher now than say the 1950's. America would have been a failed nation if we didn't have such low tax rates back then. Do you ever even attempt to square reality with what you say?
19 APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE   2017 Sep 16, 6:50am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
Tax cuts = cuckware.

AMERICA! needs TAX! ANNIHILATION! and a contemporaneous genocidal program to ANNIHILATE! the poor, exactly as the Founding Fathers intended.
20 drBu   2017 Sep 16, 7:39am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
contemporaneous genocidal program to ANNIHILATE! the poor

We need FREE!MARKET!BASED! program to annihilate the poor. Government contracts HALLIBURTON! and NORTHROP GRUMMAN! to KILL! the poor and pays $TRILLION! bounty for each poor person incinerated, exactly as written in CON!stitution.
21 Bellingham Bill   2017 Sep 16, 9:30am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=f52l
blue is real corporate profits, red is real corporate profits after tax, green is tax rate (right axis)

St Raygun raised taxes on corporations . . . who knew???
22 Bellingham Bill   2017 Sep 16, 9:39am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
after-tax corporate profits (2009 dollars) were $400B in 1976 when Carter was elected and $400B when Clinton was elected in 1992.

they went up 50% under Clinton and the Gingrich Congress to $600B by 2000, and under the full GOP regime briefly hit $1.5T (up 150%) during the housing bubble.

real profits have remained flat at $1.6T in the recovery / QE-regime of 2012-

hmmm, there's some predictive knowledge in this chart . . . present economy's running to stand still
23 Strategist   2017 Sep 16, 9:50am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
bob2356 says
Strategist says

Humans work on incentives. If you take away the incentives nothing much will be produced, and we become a failed nation, just like every single communist country. Even dogs and animals need treats and incentives to get them to do something. When corporations have the incentives to make more profit, they invest more, hire more people, produce more, our tax collection increases, our 401K's are worth more. In the end there is more for the 80 year old widow who cannot fend for herself.
Everyone is better off. Lets cut taxes.


Yes after all tax rates are so much higher now than say the 1950's. America would have been a failed nation if we didn't have such low tax rates back then. Do you ever even attempt to square reality with what you say?


We were competitive back then, but today we are losing that edge. We need to cut taxes just so our corporations can compete with other countries that have better tax rates.
24 jazz_music   2017 Sep 16, 12:48pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
Now in control of everything, the Republicans show themselves to be a cult of kleptocrats that almost all say and will do whatever it takes, feigning piety to fairy tale ideology and a vengeful god, to make luxurious careers for themselves by betraying their office, handing over the nation to the top few regardless of how much wealth they already have, they still want more, and they are willing to pay a little to get it all if possible.

Republicans need a new Ayn Rand to further muddy the waters who hasn't been quite so widely discredited yet with her vile fairy tale ideology.

Top Republican kleptocrats, like McConnell, have made their bug-out plans known, they plan to leave the nation a warlord state with police and landlords to control everybody else. Every little black swan event that comes along, flood, famine, war, will be another trigger to tighten the "emergency" ratchet around the people who are either hopelessly unemployed or working all possible hours up to the next layoff. In any case no resistance has been mounted regardless of the severity of losses. After all, the most powerful propaganda system in history is in play to assure accommodating workers and feelings of powerlessness as widespread as possible. Disgruntled workers are relegated to dog piling on those who are least able to be heard. --so many parallels to Hitler's rise there.

The 53% who turn out to vote are so propagandized that they cannot discern between an imperfect friend and an mortal enemy.
25 bob2356   2017 Sep 16, 1:29pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
Strategist says

We were competitive back then, but today we are losing that edge. We need to cut taxes just so our corporations can compete with other countries that have better tax rates



What were the tax rates we were competing against back then? I know, do you? Having record profits means companies are not being able to compete? Really? Why aren't companies leaving if tax rates are so great other places? For all the crying and moaning the number of companies leaving is inconsequential. The effective tax rate in the US isn't that high considering the advantages of being here. .
26 jazz_music   2017 Sep 16, 1:50pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
jazz_music says
considering the advantages of being here.


USA has the best slaves left over from when education was available to those who wanted to have a career based on something other than betraying others trust and raise a family.

It doesn't hurt for you to be reputed to commiserate with the boss' woes but imagine if secrecy was to be used to form some association, the kind bosses watch out for vigilantly. The kind of association that bosses made sure that engineering societies of the 1970's and 1980's did not evolve into. The professional societies could still evolve into something else if secrecy was used. Everything our oligarchy wants might depend on having a strangle hold over computer scientists. Think of the power in reversing that dynamic.

Computer science, especially the highly articulate multidisciplined, seems to be the key resource advantage that brings the expectation of continued market dominance.

Loose lips. Some of you have professional relationships that also involve personal bonds of trust. That could be a start of a new deal for you all. The first problem is to reverse the outsourcing to H1B, H2B and all the other work visas in the world of computer scientists.

The work is so vital that change could begin there if you look at the history of how changes succeeded.

Imagine someday having enough leverage to negotiate for intellectual property rights rather than to simply enjoy a temp gig that leaves you with nothing. Even imagine entering into employment without immediately seeing that your negotiating position is cut off at the knees and you just have to agree to whatever to get the fucking paycheck.

Imagine how different life would be if you had even just a little meaningful representation in our government.

In order for anybody to get anything out of an economy, somebody somewhere, who is not an instrument of centralized wealth, has got to start getting something. In other words somebody has to be first. Societal benefit could spread out from those beginnings. You computer scientists seem to be the most critical resource of all employment nowadays.

Just saying.
28 APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE   2017 Sep 17, 5:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
All this will be fixed up quick when Jamie and Lloyd have their faces eaten by people with no teeth.
29 jazz_music   2017 Sep 17, 6:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
jazz_music says
You computer scientists seem to be the most critical resource of all employment nowadays.


And when I say "You computer scientists" I mean particularly you who have cross discipline knowledge, language skills, project lead experience, maybe even a project manager cert.

Y'all can do more than make bank, you can put together a political block that has paradigm changing potentials. Management knows this and is hyper vigilant against any possibility of this ever happening so that is what you are up against. The rewards are possible back end money, perqs, percentage ownership, treatment like you are first class.

Wouldn't it be great if there was some reason not to burn you out and kick you out ASAP into feast and famine?

Imagine if y'all could have gotten special terms in NAFTA the way doctors and lawyers did. It would be a different world right now.

The incentives are different today in the 1930's it was all about "stop killing us on the job, dammit" but plenty of people are still getting killed on the job and they have ways to make it their own fault too now so the companies get away clean.

users   about   suggestions   source code   contact  
topics   best comments   comment jail  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home