I'm tired of the "Corporations need to pay their fair share" BS mantra

You are the one who brought it up.

If the consumer does not pay a higher price for the product because of the tax, then that tax comes out of company profits. That makes it an expense.

 

"I'm tired of the "Corporations need to pay their fair share" BS mantra"

don't worry, republicans are taking over the SC, mega corps and the rich will not have to pay their fair share

worker safety and other regulation that cut into profits.... gone

gonna be good years to be rich, bad years for the working class

 

Businesses are not taxed on operating income. They are taxes on net profit.

Tax law affects all businesses. Increased taxes increase the cost of products and services everywhere all at once. It is a perversion of the market.

Inflation results from increases in the money supply. We commonly call this government printing money. This dilutes the value of dollars. Business taxes contribute to this by causing all prices to rise together causing the value of the dollar to be diluted as well. Businesses then have to pay employees more so they can afford the increased prices. Increased payments to employees causes price increases in the market in the same way that tax increases do. And so goes the cycle. Increases in the money supply kick starts the cycle. Hope that helps.

 

Supply and demand is how price is set in a free economy. Has nothing to do with corporate tax. "Demand" in the economic sense is not some kid saying he really wants that toy. Demand is the amount of money seeking a product. If you have an aggregate demand for Chevy trucks that averages $30,000 per truck, that's what a company can charge. It's really that simple. Consumers don't care what a company's tax liability is. If a company gets hit with a huge tax bill, it won't recoup that money by raising its price to $35,000. It will go broke.

I make the same wage as my coworkers in the same position. Some, like me, are single and pay more tax than others married with children. Tax is irrelevant to the going rate of labor. If I demanded a raise to make up the difference, my boss would laugh at me, and when a corporation tries to raise price to do the same thing, consumers go elsewhere.

 

Operating income minus depreciation and amortization. That's net profit. Has nothing to do with income tax.

We're talking about income tax, not taxes related to production.

Inflation is a rise in the consumer price index, which you haven't shown. So no, you haven't helped at all.

Go back to Bill Clinton's tax increase. The data should reflect this inflation if your argument is correct.

 

We're talking about income tax, not taxes related to production.




Inflation is a rise in the consumer price index, which you haven't shown. So no, you haven't helped at all.

Go back to Bill Clinton's tax increase. The data should reflect this inflation if your argument is correct.[/QUOTE]

I tried.

 

I tried.[/QUOTE]
Tried what? Checking the inflation data from the '90s? What did you find?

 

Tried what? Checking the inflation data from the '90s? What did you find?[/QUOTE]
I tried to increase your knowledge of business. I didn't check any inflation data from the 90's. Your blinders are working just fine.

 

What happens when a competitor drops his price a couple of thousand dollars? i.e. because he has fewer expenses.

 

My god. Learn a bit about the economy, please. No offense, but regurgitating this nonsense over and over doesn't make it true. Powerful people have convinced so many that corporations can just pass down any expense they encounter. It doesn't work that way. That would be indicative of a command economy, not a free economy.

If you see a demand for widgets, and people are willing to pay x dollars per widget, you assemble a business plan and try to turn a profit. Whether you turn a profit, owe tax, or blow the weekly payroll gambling, does not have any effect on consumers who will pay X dollars for your widgets. This is how the economy works, not by some conspiracy theory that claims producers are colluding to overprice their products.

 

What do you mean, "What happens?" And what does this have to do with income tax?

Companies that outperform others in keeping costs down can lower prices and maintain the same level of income as the others, but companies don't lower prices just because their costs are less. They charge the market price and increase profits.

 

Lol. By calling me ignorant? That's your idea of education? You got nothing. Less than nothing. Read a book or something.

 

I agree somewhat. Big corporations do not pay taxes mostly because they have politicians of both parties in their back pocket. Global corporations do not have to pay taxes period.

On the other hand, prices are not determined by anything but what people.are willing to pay for something. The idea that labor costs, taxes, etc...determine what prices are is not true. Companies charge the most people are willing to pay.

 

I responded to your comments. You paid no attention to it. I can't help you.

 

Since I've been a business owner for 53 years, having founded eight, now running one with customers all over the world... I just might have an edge on this that you do not.
YOU are wrong. Profit is a necessity of survival for a business. No profit- no product or company for you to buy what you need from. Taxes MUST be built into the pricing because they are part of the cost of selling the product. Supply and demand enters into volume of sales and profitability of volume- but no profit always mean no products will be made period.
My company builds taxation into price, and every businessman I know understands it.

You pay sales taxes. The seller is collecting those taxes for the state, but telling you about it. He could also tell you there was no sales tax, build the tax into the price asked, pay the state, and make you feel you didn't pay taxes. Exactly the same process, except you know the sales tax is a tax, because it's identified separately. Being a tax collector also creates expenses for a business, and they have to build that cost into price too- because all businesses work free for the government in that respect, so you pay that as well..
Increase corporate tax- increase product price.

There is no free ride- just the illusion of one, which the more gullible will accept and tell themselves it's true.

 

And the prices which include taxes get even higher through markups and added services as products and services travel through the economy from source to consumer. If we could simply get government behind spending cuts, we would make life better for everyone.

 

Taxes MUST be built into the pricing because they are part of the cost of selling the product.

Income tax is not a cost of production, so while ignorance of this does not mean you don't own a business, it does mean your accountants have you covered.

This is just getting silly. Any tax that a company incurs as a cost of production is a result of that production; licenses and fees would fit this category. Payroll taxes are a cost of production, not income tax. The income tax liability for a firm can be anywhere from 0 to the top rate. This has no effect on the cost of production. Your widgets cost x dollars to produce, regardless of the tax on profits.

And it doesn't matter how much you spend producing a product, you can only sell it for the market price. Really simple.

 

All expenses affect the cost of selling the product. Taxes are definitely an expense.

 

Either the tax is passed onto the consumer or absorbed by the company. Those are the only possibilities. Just like any other expense.

By the way. I have a masters degree in management. Much of that was economics.

 

And I have only two semesters of economics, yet I recall my lessons.

Do you pass your tax bill off to your employer, or do you absorb it? Of course companies absorb it. They absorb all costs. Price isn't something so elastic that it can be manipulated at will. Surely you know this with the education you claim to have.

Everyone, every individual and company, has a unique tax liability, yet wages and prices do not reflect this. They are not linked at all. Totally irrelevant to each other. Companies approach tax liability like any other; they try to reduce it, they don't try to recoup it by raising prices. Unless a company has a unique product - a niche market, for example - the price of its products is mostly out of its control. If you doubt me, open a gas station and see how well you do trying to sell gas for $5 a gallon.

 

No they don't. Income tax no more affects the cost of producing a product than it affects the cost of your transportation to work, or the tools you use, or the cost of meals. Repeating this over and over isn't gonna work.

Income tax reduces after tax income. It does not add a single penny to the cost of production.

 

That's what capitalism is. Wealth transfer. But the right only "loves it" when it's transferred to the rich. However, the rich only consume a small portion of what they make. So if that wealth is not returned into the economy, it stagnates.

Workers produce the products that consumers consume. Workers consume the largest part of their income. This is how wealth is produced.

It's not an "illusion". It's a system. One of the ways in which the money keeps flowing.

Of course. The poor and the middle class are the ones who produce the wealth. So they're the ones who ultimately pay "everything". Just like I said before. They should be aware that they are paying the taxes and producing the majority of the wealth. They're not "dumb". Poor people know that they are paying taxes. But they are 100% entitled to getting the opportunity to come out of their poverty. Giving them that opportunity costs money. Which comes (or should come) from corporate taxes. Which, of course, they produced in the first place. They're just getting it back. But they're getting it as an opportunity to get out of their condition. As a social net, yes, but also as education, as protection, as roads to get to their jobs, as healthcare to stay healthy and be able to work, ... and so on.

Yeah! So what? That's what Marx said. He was right in how he described it. But dead wrong in how to deal with it. He tried to instigate a revolution based on that fact. You have two options: you either participate in it, and make it work for you... or you grab a gun and instigate a revolution to change the system. I prefer the former. It's not "perfect" but it works fine so long as those who produce the wealth (workers/consumers) get opportunities to climb in the social ladder. The alternative would be to lose all freedom.

Capitalism doesn't work with too much intellectual honesty. That's the nature of the beast. But it all works out in the end, so long as the money flow. So long as the wealth transfers. You might not like the terminology. But it's the only way capitalism works. And it works. People are happier with capitalism. So if you are trying to instigate a Marxist revolution, just be aware that, in the end, people are unhappy with it. And "unhappiness" tends to make a system topple quicker than intellectual dishonesty.

 

You made unsupported assertions. There's nothing to pay attention to. Come back when you have some substance.

 

I paid my tax bill with what my employer pays me.

I don't just claim my education. I actually have an education.

But lets put it simply. I will use small phony numbers, but they illustrate the point.

I have a product. I sell it for $100 each. My cost of production is $99. There is a tax of $1 on each of those items. Now I do not tell the customer there is a $1 tax. Just like you don't know how much tax is already paid on any product you choose to buy. Now, if I do not increase the price of that product to something over $100, I will make no profit at all and I will eventually go out of business. That very simply makes it an expense which must be covered.

See the above. It is a tax which must be included in the price of the product.

 

Government is necessary. Business is necessary.
Big Government and Big Business eventually become very big problems for humanity.

“I will now add what I do not like. First, the omission of a bill of rights, providing clearly, and without the aid of sophism, for freedom of religion, freedom of the press, protection against standing armies, restriction of monopolies, the eternal and unremitting force of the habeas corpus laws, and trials by jury, in all matters of fact triable by the law of the land, and not by the laws of nations.”
THOMAS JEFFERSON, Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, 1787
http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/connections/thomas-jefferson/file.html