Moe_Nox posted:

---

Tali is being deliberately obtuse.

---

Taliesihne posted:

---

Not sure what's so funny about this.

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

There are healthy post histories the last couple months filled with angst and name calling over breaks for big business.

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

The entire humor of this issue and this thread, is laughing at the predictable belly roll the left will do, and is now doing here, on this topic.
Laughing at Obama? No.
Laughing at the libs that will line up to claim how great this is and disregard all their previous ranting about the need for higher corporate taxes?
Oh yes!

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

You guys are sandy vag'd noobs if you have missed this stuff. Welcome to the Outpost
Returns from a single poster.

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Hola carp, we called Moe's bluff and got owned. /activateFlailingArmsandArglebargle

---

Lyken-P posted:

---

Trickle down economics does not work!

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

Obama Will Propose Removing Corporate Tax Breaks While Cutting Rate to 28%

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

There are healthy post histories the last couple months filled with angst and name calling over breaks for big business.

---

SoBaKi posted:

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

Obama Will Propose Removing Corporate Tax Breaks While Cutting Rate to 28%

---

Wait, so now you're against cutting corporate taxes?

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Obama's plan would result in a higher rate on big business and a lower rate on small business.

Basically, your /whaarggbhl is as misplaced as ever.

---

Rosaria posted:

---

So a higher rate on big businesses is what LWNs want? Just asking, its hard to follow from day to day.

---

Rosaria posted:

---

So a higher rate on big businesses is what LWNs want?

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

Rosaria posted:

---

So a higher rate on big businesses is what LWNs want? Just asking, its hard to follow from day to day.

---

LWNs want higher capital gains tax rates. In order to do that both politically and economically it makes sense to also address corporate taxation.

Obviously not all liberals will agree with that but it makes sense. When positions are not just driven by blind ideology one can make such proposals. This may make it hard for some to understand.

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Rosaria posted:

---

So a higher rate on big businesses is what LWNs want?

---

Check with Moe, he seems to have his ear to the ground imo

---

Rosaria posted:

---

Obama said he is addressing corporate tax rates to make us more competative internationally. I think we already have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, will have to check that. Is raising the effective tax rate on businesses the way to go. I'm asking these questions because it appears that people are pleased that the overall tax rate would be higher, and it seemed to me that Obama wanted to make us more competative by reducing corporate taxes, yet some are claiming they will be higher. At the end of the day, is this going to be a further hinderance or an asset to the expansion of businesses in the US, both foreign and home-grown?

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

Rosaria posted:

---

Obama said he is addressing corporate tax rates to make us more competitive internationally. I think we already have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, will have to check that. Is raising the effective tax rate on businesses the way to go. I'm asking these questions because it appears that people are pleased that the overall tax rate would be higher, and it seemed to me that Obama wanted to make us more competitive by reducing corporate taxes, yet some are claiming they will be higher. At the end of the day, is this going to be a further hindrance or an asset to the expansion of businesses in the US, both foreign and home-grown?

---

Well it is supposed to be revenue neutral so to the existing business it would be a wash (before taking into account how exposed the various winners and losers are to global compeition). By relying less on credits this helps any new business that isn't receiving or would not receive a credit.

There is a lot more that can be done to help business with corp tax reform and like I said earlier I think Obama is probably willing to move on this issue. This is really a Republican issue and should be pushed by Republicans.

---

Rosaria posted:

---

It would be helpful if Obama clarified his goals again because so far I don't see how this is going to make us more competitive in the international business arena, particularly if some of the claims in this thread are true. Are we at least headed in the right direction? I dunno.

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

Rosaria posted:

---

It would be helpful if Obama clarified his goals again because so far I don't see how this is going to make us more competitive in the international business arena, particularly if some of the claims in this thread are true. Are we at least headed in the right direction? I dunno.

---

We would be more competitive for any business that wouldn't benefit from the credits that are cut.

It is pretty straight forward. It is also pretty straight forward that Obama is proposing things that Republicans like and things they don't. He will want both but he has to play politics.

What do Republicans want? That is really what is missing.

---

Rosaria posted:

---

I have no idea what Republicans want, we'll have to wait and see how they respond to this or what they counter-propose. How will they work re US land-locked businesses and those with interests overseas? The corps with interests overseas are always going to have an edge over those who don't IMO.

---

Rosaria posted:

---

Ashmaele posted:

---

Rosaria posted:

---

So a higher rate on big businesses is what LWNs want?

---

Check with Moe, he seems to have his ear to the ground imo

---

You're an LWN, I'm asking you the same questions I asked Sin.

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

What do Republicans want? That is really what is missing.

---

Eager_Igraine posted:

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

What do Republicans want? That is really what is missing.

---

Corp taxes lowered to 18-25% iirc.

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

The Republicans have to decide what they want to make a priority. Obama has already given a lot of ground but the proposal is revenue neutral. In the end I don't think it will be.

---

Rosaria posted:

---

I don't think it will be either. Nor do I think this has anything to do with international competition.

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

Rosaria posted:

---

I don't think it will be either. Nor do I think this has anything to do with international competition.

---

So you don't know what the Republican plan is but it doesn't have anything to do with competition?

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

Then how can you say that lowering rates doesn't help competitiveness?

---

Rosaria posted:

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

Then how can you say that lowering rates doesn't help competitiveness?

---

I don't say that. What I'm questioning is the belief expressed in this thread that Obama's tax proposal really represents an increase in effective tax rates? Is that true or not? What's the end result going to be? If I'm a businesswoman with investments all over the globe is this proposal going to lean me towards expansion in the US?

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

Eager_Igraine posted:

---

Sin_of_Onin posted:

---

What do Republicans want? That is really what is missing.

---

Corp taxes lowered to 18-25% iirc.

---

Is that really it? I would imagine most of the debate will not be around the rate but the basis.

---

posted:

---

Representative Dave Camp, a Michigan Republican who heads the House Ways and Means Committee, has released part of a proposed corporate tax overhaul. Camp proposed a 25 percent top rate and changes to the international tax system that would let companies avoid paying U.S. taxes on most of the income they earn outside the country.

Last week, Camp urged Geithner to propose a comprehensive tax-code overhaul that would include changes to corporate and individual taxation.

The proposals from the administration and Camp are designed to not increase the federal budget deficit, in contrast with policies promoted by the Republican presidential candidates.

Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, wants to reduce the corporate tax rate to 25 percent before eliminating any tax breaks. Rick Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, wants to cut the rate to 17.5 percent and eliminate corporate taxes for manufacturers.

Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, wants to cut the rate to 12.5 percent and let companies write off all capital investments immediately.

---

Sinlock posted:

---

Moe has never been interested in real discussion and would rather obfuscate facts and act like an all around ass.
He's essentially stuck in the 2004 "I R Playing the Outpost Game!" version of things and never really broke out of it.

---

Yukishiro1 posted:

---

Obama's plan would result in a higher rate on big business and a lower rate on small business.
Basically, your /whaarggbhl is as misplaced as ever.

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

I agree Yuki, I don't expect to see much at all of it going forward. They will fall into line and commend Obama on it.
You have to go backwards to see how they felt before this proposal came out, and how they felt is well documented, and comedy gold.

---

Eager_Igraine posted:

---

Moe_Nox posted:

---

I agree Yuki, I don't expect to see much at all of it going forward. They will fall into line and commend Obama on it.
You have to go backwards to see how they felt before this proposal came out, and how they felt is well documented, and comedy gold.

---

So Corporations are paying about a 12% tax rate, and Obama's plan is to compromise them into paying 25% and you think his base with arglebargle about this?

---

Lyken-P posted:

---

The one this that will always be true when government makes tax laws is that there will be more loopholes added. I bet companies will get their taxes down to 11% the next time around.

---

This study takes a hard look at the federal income taxes paid or not paid by 280 of
America’s largest and most profitable corporations in 2008, 2009 and 2010. The companies in
our report are all from Fortune’s annual list of America’s 500 largest corporations, and all of
them were profitable in each of the three years analyzed. Over the three years, the 280
companies in our survey reported total pretax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion.
.
.
.
The table on this page summarizes what the 280 companies paid (or didn’t pay) in effective U.S.
income tax rates on their pretax U.S. profits.
# The good news is that 71 of our companies, 25 percent of the total, paid effective three-year
tax rates of more than 30 percent. Their average effective tax rate was 32.3 percent.
# The bad news is that an almost equal number of companies, 67, paid effective three-year tax
rates of less than 10 percent. Their average effective tax rate was zero.
# Even worse news is that 30 companies paid less than zero percent over the three years. Their
effective tax rate averaged –6.7 percent.
It’s interesting to note that the average pretax profits for the companies in each effective-tax-rate
group were quite similar. But their average after-tax profits diverged widely.
.
.
.
Over the 2008-10 period, our 280
companies earned almost $1.4
trillion in pretax profits in the
United States. Had all of those profits
been reported to the IRS and taxed at
the statutory 35 percent corporate tax
rate, then the 280 companies would
have paid $473 billion in income taxes
over the three years. But instead, the
companies as a group paid only about
half that amount. The enormous
amount they did not pay was due to
the hundreds of billions of dollars in
tax subsidies that they enjoyed.

By 1986, President Ronald Reagan fully repudiated his earlier policy of showering tax breaks
on corporations. Reagan’s Tax Reform Act of 1986 closed tens of billions of dollars in corporate
loopholes, so that by 1988, our survey of large corporations (published in 1989) found that the
overall effective corporate tax rate was up to 26.5 percent, compared to only 14.1 percent in
1981-83.4 That improvement occurred even though the statutory corporate tax rate was cut from
46 percent to 34 percent as part of the 1986 reforms.5

But over the past three fiscal years (2009-11), total corporate income tax payments fell to
only 1.16 percent of the GDP, an even lower
share than in fiscal 2002-03 and a new
sustained record low since World War II.
Corporate taxes paid for more than a
quarter of federal outlays in the 1950s and
a fifth in the 1960s. They began to decline
during the Nixon administration, yet even
by the second half of the 1990s, corporate
taxes still covered 11 percent of the cost of
federal programs. But in fiscal 2010,
corporate taxes paid for a mere 6 percent of
the federal government’s expenses.