Warren Buffett to Pay 3B in Burger King buy of Tim Hortons to Avoid US Taxes

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:  Of all the other nations who have 'lower' tax rates how many have the burden of defending the world? Aircraft carrier fleets get mighty expensive yet the US maintains them at ready and everyone benefits but US corporations want to jump ship and leave? It's a Republican mind set . . . . . if it's legal why not?

What exactly is your reasoning that US corporations are opposed to the US defense program, and what does lowering the US corporate tax rate have to do with it?

".....if it's legal why not"  So, is it "unpatriotic of you or me to claim a deduction for charitable contributions or mortgage interest?  How about the deduction for IRA contributions?  No? Well these are part of the same tax code that the US Congress put into place.  The same tax code that allows US businesses to operate overseas to avoid paying US taxes.

I have yet to hear a cogent argument against lowering the US corp tax rate.

I agree with lowering the corporate tax rates colaguy what I did not understand reading your comment was the narrative of everyone claims deductions and pays the very least amount possible versus legally abandoning your country because it would improve the bottom line.  Two vastly different narratives . . .    

NP Knot.  I understand.  What I don't understand is the mindset of some who say that following the US Tax Code and the provisions put into it by the US Congress is somehow unpatriotic.  I merely tried to point out that most of us don't consider it unpatriotic to use the mortgage interest expense deduction that is part of the same US Tax Code.  If the US Congress didn't intend for people to use it then it should change it.  Similarly, if they didn't intend for US companies to use the Tax Code and move its  company to another company, then the Congress should change it.

Floridatexan wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:  Of all the other nations who have 'lower' tax rates how many have the burden of defending the world? Aircraft carrier fleets get mighty expensive yet the US maintains them at ready and everyone benefits but US corporations want to jump ship and leave? It's a Republican mind set . . . . . if it's legal why not?

What exactly is your reasoning that US corporations are opposed to the US defense program, and what does lowering the US corporate tax rate have to do with it?

".....if it's legal why not"  So, is it "unpatriotic of you or me to claim a deduction for charitable contributions or mortgage interest?  How about the deduction for IRA contributions?  No? Well these are part of the same tax code that the US Congress put into place.  The same tax code that allows US businesses to operate overseas to avoid paying US taxes.

I have yet to hear a cogent argument against lowering the US corp tax rate.

I agree with lowering the corporate tax rates colaguy what I did not understand reading your comment was the narrative of everyone claims deductions and pays the very least amount possible versus legally abandoning your country because it would improve the bottom line.  Two vastly different narratives . . .    

NP Knot.  I understand.  What I don't understand is the mindset of some who say that following the US Tax Code and the provisions put into it by the US Congress is somehow unpatriotic.  I merely tried to point out that most of us don't consider it unpatriotic to use the mortgage interest expense deduction that is part of the same US Tax Code.  If the US Congress didn't intend for people to use it then it should change it.  Similarly, if they didn't intend for US companies to use the Tax Code and move its  company to another company, then the Congress should change it.

Most of us aren't hiding our assets overseas or moving our operations out of the country to avoid paying taxes.  

boards of FL wrote:

colaguy wrote:Again, is it just your nature to try to belittle those whose opinion differs from yours?

Forgive me.  Perhaps it is too much to assume that those who participate in online discussions of corporate tax burden also possess some elementary knowledge of math.

Now if you'll excuse me for a second...

(lowers standards)

2seaoat wrote:How do we fix the problem ....put up a huge barbed wire fence to keep corporations here and call them un-American if they leave?

We do not need to put up a barb wire fence.   We just need to utilize the tax code to punish economic traitors.  Many in Congress want to pursue legislation to address tax-inverting companies, but no consensus measures have emerged. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden of Oregon said earlier this month he's working with Sen. Chuck Schumer, the No. 3 Senate Democrat, and ranking member Orrin Hatch of Utah, on a bipartisan bill, but details are sketchy.

The highest corporate tax rate is an absurd concept.  That is like telling an individual they have to pay a certain rate before they took their deductions.  The truth is just the opposite.  The only true measure of corporate tax is as a percentage of GDP.  The truth is we are at a historical low.   It is amazing how the Oligarchy has brainwashed otherwise intelligent people to work against their economic interests while the 1% skates on their contributions.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/02/corporate-tax-revenues-ne_n_830361.html

colaguy wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:  Of all the other nations who have 'lower' tax rates how many have the burden of defending the world? Aircraft carrier fleets get mighty expensive yet the US maintains them at ready and everyone benefits but US corporations want to jump ship and leave? It's a Republican mind set . . . . . if it's legal why not?

What exactly is your reasoning that US corporations are opposed to the US defense program, and what does lowering the US corporate tax rate have to do with it?

".....if it's legal why not"  So, is it "unpatriotic of you or me to claim a deduction for charitable contributions or mortgage interest?  How about the deduction for IRA contributions?  No? Well these are part of the same tax code that the US Congress put into place.  The same tax code that allows US businesses to operate overseas to avoid paying US taxes.

I have yet to hear a cogent argument against lowering the US corp tax rate.

I agree with lowering the corporate tax rates colaguy what I did not understand reading your comment was the narrative of everyone claims deductions and pays the very least amount possible versus legally abandoning your country because it would improve the bottom line.  Two vastly different narratives . . .    

NP Knot.  I understand.  What I don't understand is the mindset of some who say that following the US Tax Code and the provisions put into it by the US Congress is somehow unpatriotic.  I merely tried to point out that most of us don't consider it unpatriotic to use the mortgage interest expense deduction that is part of the same US Tax Code.  If the US Congress didn't intend for people to use it then it should change it.  Similarly, if they didn't intend for US companies to use the Tax Code and move its  company to another company, then the Congress should change it.

Most of us aren't hiding our assets overseas or moving our operations out of the country to avoid paying taxes.  

While it IS illegal for individuals to do that - it is legal for companies to do so, per the US Tax Code.  In 1997, the Treasury changed regulations to permit corporations to decide for themselves.  So wrote your Congressmen, so it has become.

knothead wrote:  Of all the other nations who have 'lower' tax rates how many have the burden of defending the world? Aircraft carrier fleets get mighty expensive yet the US maintains them at ready and everyone benefits but US corporations want to jump ship and leave? It's a Republican mind set . . . . . if it's legal why not?

knothead wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:  Of all the other nations who have 'lower' tax rates how many have the burden of defending the world? Aircraft carrier fleets get mighty expensive yet the US maintains them at ready and everyone benefits but US corporations want to jump ship and leave? It's a Republican mind set . . . . . if it's legal why not?

What exactly is your reasoning that US corporations are opposed to the US defense program, and what does lowering the US corporate tax rate have to do with it?

".....if it's legal why not"  So, is it "unpatriotic of you or me to claim a deduction for charitable contributions or mortgage interest?  How about the deduction for IRA contributions?  No? Well these are part of the same tax code that the US Congress put into place.  The same tax code that allows US businesses to operate overseas to avoid paying US taxes.

I have yet to hear a cogent argument against lowering the US corp tax rate.

I agree with lowering the corporate tax rates colaguy what I did not understand reading your comment was the narrative of everyone claims deductions and pays the very least amount possible versus legally abandoning your country because it would improve the bottom line.  Two vastly different narratives . . .    

Floridatexan wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:

colaguy wrote:

knothead wrote:  Of all the other nations who have 'lower' tax rates how many have the burden of defending the world? Aircraft carrier fleets get mighty expensive yet the US maintains them at ready and everyone benefits but US corporations want to jump ship and leave? It's a Republican mind set . . . . . if it's legal why not?

What exactly is your reasoning that US corporations are opposed to the US defense program, and what does lowering the US corporate tax rate have to do with it?

".....if it's legal why not"  So, is it "unpatriotic of you or me to claim a deduction for charitable contributions or mortgage interest?  How about the deduction for IRA contributions?  No? Well these are part of the same tax code that the US Congress put into place.  The same tax code that allows US businesses to operate overseas to avoid paying US taxes.

I have yet to hear a cogent argument against lowering the US corp tax rate.

I agree with lowering the corporate tax rates colaguy what I did not understand reading your comment was the narrative of everyone claims deductions and pays the very least amount possible versus legally abandoning your country because it would improve the bottom line.  Two vastly different narratives . . .    

NP Knot.  I understand.  What I don't understand is the mindset of some who say that following the US Tax Code and the provisions put into it by the US Congress is somehow unpatriotic.  I merely tried to point out that most of us don't consider it unpatriotic to use the mortgage interest expense deduction that is part of the same US Tax Code.  If the US Congress didn't intend for people to use it then it should change it.  Similarly, if they didn't intend for US companies to use the Tax Code and move its  company to another company, then the Congress should change it.

Most of us aren't hiding our assets overseas or moving our operations out of the country to avoid paying taxes.  

Th Dude wrote:http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2014/09/08/what-will-the-sale-of-ge-appliances-mean-for-jobs/15272205/

boards of FL wrote:

colaguy wrote:

boards of FL wrote:For some added context...

Corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP (US is ranked 16th):

Country %Tax
Norway 10.4
Luxembourg 5.1
New Zealand 4.4
Korea 4.0
Czech Republic 3.6
Japan 3.4
Belgium 3.1
Denmark 3.0
Sweden 3.0
Canada 2.9
Switzerland 2.9
United Kingdom 2.9
Italy 2.9
Israel  (1) 2.8
Portugal 2.8
United States 2.6


Total taxes as a percentage of GDP (US is ranked 61st):

Country %Tax
Zimbabwe 49.3
Denmark 49
Belgium 46.8
Sweden 45.8
Cuba 44.8
France 44.6
Finland 43.6
Norway 43.6
Austria 43.4
Lesotho 42.9
Italy 42.6
Bosnia and Herzegovina 41.2
Germany 40.6
Iceland 40.4
Netherlands 39.8
Swaziland 39.8
Slovenia 39.3
Cyprus 39.2
Hungary 39.1
United Kingdom 39
Spain 37.3
Argentina 37.2
Portugal 37
Israel 36.8
Luxembourg 36.5
Czech Republic 36.3
Botswana 35.2
Malta 35.2
New Zealand 34.5
Brazil 34.4
Bulgaria 34.4
Serbia 34.1
Moldova 33.8
Mongolia 33.8
Poland 33.8
Barbados 32.6
Turkey 32.5
Estonia 32.3
Canada 32.2
Seychelles 32
Guyana 31.9
Ireland 30.8
Latvia 30.4
Dominica 30.3
Greece 30
Mexico 29.7
Russia 29.5
Slovakia 29.5
 Switzerland 29.4
Macedonia 29.3
Namibia 28.8
Japan 28.3
Romania 28.1
Ukraine 28.1
Montenegro 28
Trinidad and Tobago 28
Jamaica 27.2
Bolivia 27
Tonga 27
South Africa 26.9
United States (all levels) 26.9

This is fairly irrelevant to the issue.  

Since the US has a humongous economy, 35% of $15T is quite a bit more than 35% of $500B, such as Norway.

Right after saying that using %'s as a means of comparison is irrelevant, you go on to explain why using %'s as a means of comparison is relevant.

We obviously would not compare nominal tax receipts because - as you point out - GDP varies between country.  That is why we use %'s instead.  %'s are the relevant means of comparison whereas nominal values are not.

I bet you struggle with concepts like "per capita", don't you?

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results.

Markle wrote:

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results.

That raises prices for that particular corporation making them less competitive with corporations not paying those higher taxes.

Progressives demand that successful people and companies be punished as much as possible for their success.  How that strikes (pun intended) them as a brilliant idea, escapes me.  At the same time, these same Progressives steadfastly believe rewarding unsuccessful people and companies who refuse to play by the rules is somehow going to lead to them working harder and producing taxes.  Whew, brilliant!

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results.

That raises prices for that particular corporation making them less competitive with corporations not paying those higher taxes.

Progressives demand that successful people and companies be punished as much as possible for their success.  How that strikes (pun intended) them as a brilliant idea, escapes me.  At the same time, these same Progressives steadfastly believe rewarding unsuccessful people and companies who refuse to play by the rules is somehow going to lead to them working harder and producing taxes.  Whew, brilliant!

How many aircraft carriers do the Canadiens have? Get my point . . . . treasonous . . . . .

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results.

That raises prices for that particular corporation making them less competitive with corporations not paying those higher taxes.

Progressives demand that successful people and companies be punished as much as possible for their success.  How that strikes (pun intended) them as a brilliant idea, escapes me.  At the same time, these same Progressives steadfastly believe rewarding unsuccessful people and companies who refuse to play by the rules is somehow going to lead to them working harder and producing taxes.  Whew, brilliant!

How many aircraft carriers do the Canadiens have? Get my point . . . . treasonous . . . . .

Was this supposed to make a point?

Does that explain why you believe that success should be punished and bad behavior rewarded?

Wow!

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results.

That raises prices for that particular corporation making them less competitive with corporations not paying those higher taxes.

Progressives demand that successful people and companies be punished as much as possible for their success.  How that strikes (pun intended) them as a brilliant idea, escapes me.  At the same time, these same Progressives steadfastly believe rewarding unsuccessful people and companies who refuse to play by the rules is somehow going to lead to them working harder and producing taxes.  Whew, brilliant!

How many aircraft carriers do the Canadiens have? Get my point . . . . treasonous . . . . .

Was this supposed to make a point?

Does that explain why you believe that success should be punished and bad behavior rewarded?

Wow!

You sometimes act brain dead but we all differently . . . . this is about American companies deserting their country and by doing so depriving it of the revenue to meet this nations' needs . . . . Canada, in my example, like most others do not have the burden of protecting the sea lanes or liberty across the globe . . . . it is shameful and desertion, period.

Th Dude wrote:

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results.

That raises prices for that particular corporation making them less competitive with corporations not paying those higher taxes.

Progressives demand that successful people and companies be punished as much as possible for their success.  How that strikes (pun intended) them as a brilliant idea, escapes me.  At the same time, these same Progressives steadfastly believe rewarding unsuccessful people and companies who refuse to play by the rules is somehow going to lead to them working harder and producing taxes.  Whew, brilliant!

How many aircraft carriers do the Canadiens have? Get my point . . . . treasonous . . . . .

Was this supposed to make a point?

Does that explain why you believe that success should be punished and bad behavior rewarded?

Wow!

You sometimes act brain dead but we all differently . . . . this is about American companies deserting their country and by doing so depriving it of the revenue to meet this nations' needs . . . . Canada, in my example, like most others do not have the burden of protecting the sea lanes or liberty across the globe . . . . it is shameful and desertion, period.  

Sorry... you aren't making much sense. You're talking about companies leaving our tax burden... but one thing you would have to acknowledge in your awkward parallel is that the US corps that build aircraft carriers do so here... taxes are collected although it's govt money to begin with. It's like govt employees paying taxes... moving your change from your left pocket to the right and calling it new money. Govt math is a joke.

knothead wrote:

Th Dude wrote:

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

knothead wrote:

Markle wrote:

Th Dude wrote:Precent of gdp is irrelevant to a business... he's just looking at it from a political pov.  

Where do corp tax dollars derive? It's really just circuitous consumption tax if you just look at the effective results.

That raises prices for that particular corporation making them less competitive with corporations not paying those higher taxes.

Progressives demand that successful people and companies be punished as much as possible for their success.  How that strikes (pun intended) them as a brilliant idea, escapes me.  At the same time, these same Progressives steadfastly believe rewarding unsuccessful people and companies who refuse to play by the rules is somehow going to lead to them working harder and producing taxes.  Whew, brilliant!

How many aircraft carriers do the Canadiens have? Get my point . . . . treasonous . . . . .

Was this supposed to make a point?

Does that explain why you believe that success should be punished and bad behavior rewarded?

Wow!

You sometimes act brain dead but we all differently . . . . this is about American companies deserting their country and by doing so depriving it of the revenue to meet this nations' needs . . . . Canada, in my example, like most others do not have the burden of protecting the sea lanes or liberty across the globe . . . . it is shameful and desertion, period.  

Sorry... you aren't making much sense. You're talking about companies leaving our tax burden... but one thing you would have to acknowledge in your awkward parallel is that the US corps that build aircraft carriers do so here... taxes are collected although it's govt money to begin with. It's like govt employees paying taxes... moving your change from your left pocket to the right and calling it new money. Govt math is a joke.

Sorry but your rebuttal is lacking in substance . . . . . my point is: 1) other countries certainly have lower corporate taxes, 2) other countries sit on the sidelines while the American taxpayer foots the bill of "liberty", 3) other nations with lower corporate taxation can do so only because they do not bear the burden of global protection which requires MONEY . . . . . 4) American companies taking advantage of tax inversion are treasonous.
You want to live here? You want to enjoy the safety here? You want to utilize the infrastructure to enrich yourself or your corporation here? Well keep your corporate  address here . . . . it's really not complicated . . . .

America should not be played like a monopoly game . . . .

2seaoat wrote:It seems very complicated for Progressives. They can't get their head around the fact that rewarding people, as well as corporations has far better results than punishing them.

Not true when the revenue not collected results in proportionately greater debt.   You do not reward people and create 10 trillion in debt from lost revenues over the last thirty years as a direct result in lowered tax rates.  Trickle down did not work.  Cut spending and return rates to the levels which pay are bills and remove debt.  This is not complicated.