Something something corporate tax is too high...

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,214
2,336
1,743
46
DFW
#41
But to be clear, a 15% minimum corporate tax that does not have loopholes or exclusions, will likely have a negative effect on investment and innovation.
Any additional expense would have that effect. Are you implying that corporate profits should be untouchable?

This conversation keeps morphing.
  • Big companies aren’t paying corporate taxes
  • Wait, raising the rate won’t help
  • Wait, we have to close loopholes
  • Wait, closing loopholes will negatively affect investment and innovation (and shareholders, which is the real concern from corporate America)
  • Wait, we can’t do anything
  • Shrug
Edit: I do see your point that the loopholes typically are in the form of incentives for reinvestment or other desired outcomes. Still, we seem to be going in circles here.
 
Oct 30, 2007
4,758
3,877
1,743
#42
Meanwhile, 3.1 million children die in the US every year due to lack of food and healthcare.. you won't hear Republicans saying we must help those children. Nope. They sure don't. And most of them consider themselves as Christian.. yet their ideologies are the opposite of everything Jesus preached. Those Republicans who do consider themselves as a Christian yet do not support helping the poor and impoverished are 100% hypocrites.
https://datacenter.kidscount.org/da...37,871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133/any/286,287

I believe the statistic you're citing is worldwide. There are approximately 9-10K children age 1-14 that die every year in the US, and most of them are from unintentional injury. The number of people that starve to death in our country is so low that we don't even track it. These deaths typically occur due to mental illness or abuse.

As far as corporate taxes, I agree with much of what has already been posted. The problem isn't the current tax rate, the problem is the loopholes that allow some corporations to pay a much lower effective tax rate or no taxes at all. We ought to be focusing on the problem instead of raising taxes across the board.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,438
17,968
1,743
#43
https://datacenter.kidscount.org/da...37,871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133/any/286,287

I believe the statistic you're citing is worldwide. There are approximately 9-10K children age 1-14 that die every year in the US, and most of them are from unintentional injury. The number of people that starve to death in our country is so low that we don't even track it. These deaths typically occur due to mental illness or abuse.

As far as corporate taxes, I agree with much of what has already been posted. The problem isn't the current tax rate, the problem is the loopholes that allow some corporations to pay a much lower effective tax rate or no taxes at all. We ought to be focusing on the problem instead of raising taxes across the board.
The "loopholes" are not unintentional.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
53,438
17,968
1,743
#45
This is exactly it. It is not the rate, it is the tax code. They do not want to fix those, the politicians use the same loopholes for their own taxes.
What's being referred to here as "loopholes" aren't actually "loopholes".

These are intended laws written into the tax code to the benefit of those who write or have great influence on the tax code.
 
Sep 22, 2011
4,159
2,923
743
33
#46
So just to gauge the temperature, is there anyone not in favor of simplifying the tax code so that there arent as many loopholes?
 
Jul 5, 2020
727
118
43
57
Broken Arrow
#48
So just to gauge the temperature, is there anyone not in favor of simplifying the tax code so that there arent as many loopholes?
Just so I’m clear, are you referring to loophole as we currently understand the definition, or perhaps a soon-to-be revised definition of the word? Regardless, I’m all for making things very clear and concise.
 
Sep 3, 2010
272
77
1,578
#49
Just reading through this thread. I think part of the issue is a misunderstanding of corporate taxation. I’m certainly no expert but for example a sub s corporation pays no tax but the tax is passed on to the shareholders and paid at their individual rate. People hear this and say that the corporation pays zero tax and, while technically true, is very misleading. The taxes are still being paid. Without this ”loophole “ the corp pays the tax at the corporate rate and any income passed to the shareholder is taxed at his individual rate. It’s double taxation and it’s a business killer. We made the sub s election several years ago when we wanted to start making distributions to shareholders. Not much difference in the total amount of tax being paid it’s just coming from a different pocket.
I always get a little ouchy when people are raising heck about how all of these big nasty corporations aren’t paying enough tax. We need to be mindful that corporations all have shareholders and boards of directors and employees and they all expect the same thing...PROFITS. Without profits there aren’t any jobs or benefits or return on investment. You have to ask yourself if you want all corporations taxed at a higher rate or just the ones you aren’t invested in? Think 401k. Speaking of the 401k, is that one of the “loopholes” we’re worried about? It’s a slippery slope fellas.
We should be way more concerned about how much of our tax money is being pissed down a rat hole than how much the “rich” are being taxed when, at the end of the day, they are actually the ones paying most of the tax that actually gets paid. They are also creating all of the jobs and benefits and research and development. I suggest that everyone should go to work for a poor man and see how many OSU season tickets you can afford. We pay enough taxes...we all do.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
30,922
32,272
1,743
oklahoma city
#50
Screen Shot 2021-04-12 at 10.35.32 PM.png


For the first time since at least the 1940s, a peak in corporate profits was not met with a peak in corporate tax revenue.

Screen Shot 2021-04-12 at 11.04.30 PM.png

This shows the continued growth of personal income tax and diminished corporate income tax as the driver of federal tax receipts. What is the other driver? Payroll taxes.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,358
17,111
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#51
So just to gauge the temperature, is there anyone not in favor of simplifying the tax code so that there arent as many loopholes?
I think this is one of the things that voters on both sides can agree on. Unfortunately, politicians on both sides will never do it. The tax code is too good a tool for rewarding cronies and punishing opponents.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,214
2,336
1,743
46
DFW
#52
I think this is one of the things that voters on both sides can agree on. Unfortunately, politicians on both sides will never do it. The tax code is too good a tool for rewarding cronies and punishing opponents.
The impression I get from this thread is that there is far less consensus than you suggest. We have them right where they want us. Divided. Confused. Hopeless that anything can/will change.
 
Sep 6, 2012
2,407
980
743
Edmond
#53
You made a good point about small businesses, so I wanted to look up how the tax hike affects them (including me as a small business owner).

https://www.lendio.com/blog/bidens-tax-plan-could-mean-small-businesses/
Most small businesses are not subject to the corporate tax—it only applies to incorporated businesses and not sole proprietors or partnerships. The National Federation of Independent Businesses estimates that “75% of small businesses are unincorporated pass-through entities, so owners report business income on their personal taxes.”
For most small business it is a pass through. Which means that if your successful, you get a taxed more than you were. Capital gains / death tax will be increased as well. So in a couple of years , when I pass my businesses to my kids. They will get taxed.
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,358
17,111
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#54
The impression I get from this thread is that there is far less consensus than you suggest. We have them right where they want us. Divided. Confused. Hopeless that anything can/will change.
There might be disagreements as to how much things should be simplified but I haven't seen anybody arguing that it shouldn't be done at all.

If I seem hopeless there's a reason for it.... election after election we the people give a huge thumbs up to the GOP and the DNC while year after year they continue screwing us over. Maybe one day an election will give me hope, but it is not this day.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,214
2,336
1,743
46
DFW
#55
There might be disagreements as to how much things should be simplified but I haven't seen anybody arguing that it shouldn't be done at all.

If I seem hopeless there's a reason for it.... election after election we the people give a huge thumbs up to the GOP and the DNC while year after year they continue screwing us over. Maybe one day an election will give me hope, but it is not this day.
I won’t disagree with that. And this is where we end up, what do we do now? Neither party is the solution. The politicians who talk about reform (tax, campaign finance, etc.) seemed to get sidelined by the system. Until this changes — corporations, special interest groups, and lobbyists seem to be at the helm. But something’s gotta give.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,214
2,336
1,743
46
DFW
#57
Ugh.

But It's funny that the editorial board of the WSJ pretends to care about middle class tax burden. They complain about the estate tax, but that only affects estates over $11.7 million. I think this can affect families that have large assets like a large family business or farm, but isn't a typical middle class issue.

https://www.investopedia.com/estate-tax-exemption-2021-definition-5114715

They also bring up double-taxation (corporate + personal), but my understanding is this mostly affects larger corporations that pay stockholder dividends. Corporations have ways to avoid double-taxation (not paying dividends, paying justified salaries instead which reduces profit, utilizing business structures, borrowing from their business). Again, this is not likely a large middle class issue.

Then they brought up Elizabeth Warren's wealth tax, which is aimed at "Ultra Millionaires." How is that a middle class burden?

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/06/facts-on-warrens-wealth-tax-plan/
Under Warren’s wealth tax plan, households would pay an annual 2% tax on all assets — net worth — above $50 million, and a 3% tax on every dollar of net worth above $1 billion.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,694
2,163
1,743
#58
Ugh.

But It's funny that the editorial board of the WSJ pretends to care about middle class tax burden. They complain about the estate tax, but that only affects estates over $11.7 million. I think this can affect families that have large assets like a large family business or farm, but isn't a typical middle class issue.

ht.
Doesn’t the Biden plan reduce the estate exemption to $3.5M? I hope that doesn’t get enacted, but that would effect many who saved well, but are not necessarily upper class.
 

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
5,214
2,336
1,743
46
DFW
#59
Doesn’t the Biden plan reduce the estate exemption to $3.5M? I hope that doesn’t get enacted, but that would effect many who saved well, but are not necessarily upper class.
Good question. I see mentions of $3.5 and $5 million, but it does look like a reduced exemption.Where do you think it should be set to not impact middle class families unreasonably? I also don't know if his plan is tiered to affect the ultra wealthy more so than those middle class folks who simply planned well and hope to pass that on to their families.
 
Mar 11, 2006
3,694
2,163
1,743
#60
Good question. I see mentions of $3.5 and $5 million, but it does look like a reduced exemption.Where do you think it should be set to not impact middle class families unreasonably? I also don't know if his plan is tiered to affect the ultra wealthy more so than those middle class folks who simply planned well and hope to pass that on to their families.
I don’t know that I have an answer on what an exemption level should be. However, I do think that tax laws on estate taxes should be simplified. They currently have allowances that provide better tax avoidance for people that better understand the laws. For example, there are several ways an individual or a couple could set up a trust to avoid taxes for portions of their estate. However, that is not understood by most in the general population. Normally not a big-deal, but if the estate tax exemption gets lowered, it will effect many without a legal trust and expose them to tax that they could have avoided with better planning.