The US already has the second highest corporate tax rates in the western world and is one of the few countries that taxes income raised in other countries.
If Kerry increases these taxes by eliminating deferrment, you’re liable to see a large number of companies reincorpoating outside the US or being bought out by foreign corporations, ala Chrysler.
I don’t know why liberals are so gung ho about punitively taxing corporations, and yet want to be shocked when the companies respond by shifting operations overseas.
We should switch to a regional corporate tax system like most other countries (i.e. only income earned in the US is taxed in the US).
1) Back up that first statment please, beacsue it does not square with what I have been hearing from economists
2)If you read the article, you would note that many of these comonaies use acocutning tricks to make things appear as if they are not making money in the US. That means that they recieve the benefits of being in the US without paying for it. Thats wrong, and harmful to the entire economy.
3)Companies could already relocate, but being in the US has advantages. Chryslar wasn’t bought becasue of tax issues, it was baought becasue it was run into the ground.
And I was slightly wrong. We have the second highest tax rate if you only account for national corporate taxes. If you include subnational (i.e. state and local) corporate income taxes, then we are _the_ highest corporate income tax rate in the world.
As for the territorial vs. worldwide taxing, I can’t find a nice table anywhere, but if you Google “Territorial vs. Worldwide Taxation” you’ll get a whole bunch of hits.
Okay, I think I see what the difference is coming from. Te rates yu are talking about are the stated rates on corporate income. They aren’t the effective rates, and they don’t include things like the VAT Common in europe, whihc have an effect on what businesses pay out in taxes:
So, the question isn’t what the income tax rate is, but what the overall actuall tax rate paid is. Unfortunately, I found nothing that could compare that.
Yes, but a company that produces something in another country and then ships it back to the US to sell doesn’t pay VAT, so that’s not going to effect the decision to locate overseas.
leanleft
Kevin
tgirsch
Kevin T. Keith
Judd
The US already has the second highest corporate tax rates in the western world and is one of the few countries that taxes income raised in other countries.
If Kerry increases these taxes by eliminating deferrment, you’re liable to see a large number of companies reincorpoating outside the US or being bought out by foreign corporations, ala Chrysler.
I don’t know why liberals are so gung ho about punitively taxing corporations, and yet want to be shocked when the companies respond by shifting operations overseas.
We should switch to a regional corporate tax system like most other countries (i.e. only income earned in the US is taxed in the US).
SD
1) Back up that first statment please, beacsue it does not square with what I have been hearing from economists
2)If you read the article, you would note that many of these comonaies use acocutning tricks to make things appear as if they are not making money in the US. That means that they recieve the benefits of being in the US without paying for it. Thats wrong, and harmful to the entire economy.
3)Companies could already relocate, but being in the US has advantages. Chryslar wasn’t bought becasue of tax issues, it was baought becasue it was run into the ground.
Corporate Tax Rate:
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/44/3/1942514.xls
And I was slightly wrong. We have the second highest tax rate if you only account for national corporate taxes. If you include subnational (i.e. state and local) corporate income taxes, then we are _the_ highest corporate income tax rate in the world.
As for the territorial vs. worldwide taxing, I can’t find a nice table anywhere, but if you Google “Territorial vs. Worldwide Taxation” you’ll get a whole bunch of hits.
>then we are _the_ highest corporate income tax
>rate in the world.
Industrialized world, even.
SD
Okay, I think I see what the difference is coming from. Te rates yu are talking about are the stated rates on corporate income. They aren’t the effective rates, and they don’t include things like the VAT Common in europe, whihc have an effect on what businesses pay out in taxes:
http://www.leanleft.com/cgi-bin/mt.cgi?__mode=view&_type=entry&blog_id=2&id=2712&saved_changes=1
So, the question isn’t what the income tax rate is, but what the overall actuall tax rate paid is. Unfortunately, I found nothing that could compare that.
Yes, but a company that produces something in another country and then ships it back to the US to sell doesn’t pay VAT, so that’s not going to effect the decision to locate overseas.
BTW, that URL goes to a log in screen, so I can’t read it.
just a test, sorry about spoiling…