Republicans fight to keep tax breaks for companies moving jobs overseas

Any confusion as to who the Republicans work for? The Dems are corrupt too, but (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*), Republicans have it down to a science.

 

Why would they want to punish production and help inspire companies to move entirely out of the US?

 

Are you for awarding federal contracts to corporations who renounce their US citizenship to dodge taxes?

It seems like a fair bill to me, but that's what corporate apologists always argue: any attempt to govern will punish the citizens. Guess what? We've lowered corporate taxes, over and over and over again, and they still move jobs overseas, and still dodge paying their fair share. The United States reaps a pittance in corporate tax revenue when compared to other OECD countries, and we have one of the lowest effective tax rates. It's time we stopped letting corporations bribe our politicians and insert costly loopholes into our tax code.

 

We have lowered them so far that we have the highest corporate tax in the world.

 

Riddled with so many loopholes that the average corporation pays 12% in taxes, while some pay zero.

 

Excessive taxation of companies in California has the unemployment in my county at 8.4%.

 

Depending on the amendments the Republicans want on the bill, I disagree with them on this. Before I totally slam them for turning it down, I want to know what the amendments are. Why haven't they been listed so we know all of the story?

 

That's true, but those corporations are not leaving the US. It's the corporations that are paying more than the OECD average that are leaving. I'm not sure why you would be opposed to lowering rates and reducing loopholes so those companies that are paying such low taxes would have to pay their fair share.

 

I agree with Lil Mike. Why don't the Dems offer a bill that lowers the corporate tax rates to 25%, AND gets rid of the loopholes? Something that would actually work for the good of the country, and get passed. I'll tell you why, because the demagogues only care about demagoguing the issue, not resolving it.

 

Actually, they are.

 

Republican David Camp introduced a tax reform plan earlier this year with bi-partisan support, and he was literally laughed out of the House (he's not seeking re-election). Both parties are in the pocket of Wall Street, but at least this bill would do something while we wait for a mythical complete tax code overhaul. We can't dawdle in the name of idealism.

 

Because we have the highest tax rate in the country. Some countries allow repatriation of overseas funds at 0% tax rate. We don't and that is why much of the money will stay overseas. Dems want to make the shift to overseas so attractive that we will have no companies here except those that can't afford to move their headquarters to another country.

 

Not effectively, no. What, we should just throw up our hands and give into corporate ransom? The fact of the matter is, we need a strong tax base. But the wealthy have lobbied so efficiently to lower their taxes that they've bottomed it out. You aren't pissed that you pay more in taxes than most millionaires, billionaires and corporations?

 

I never pay more taxes than millionaires, billionaires and corporations. The falsehood that corporations pay no tax is popular in liberal circles but they pay all kinds of taxes, like payroll taxes, state taxes and local taxes. They would bring more money back to the US if the US were not so confiscatory.

 

because it cant pass with the right wing obstruction levels

 

Companies move out of the country because the business environment is better over there. Want them to come back? Make the business environment better over here. Simple.

QUIZ: Raising taxes on businesses....

a) Makes them want to leave
b) Makes them want to stay
​

 

right, because billionaires aren't rich enough yet

[video=youtube;QGjSO5U7rBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGjSO5U7rBE[/video]

Income inequality in the United States has grown significantly since the early 1970s, after several decades of stability and has been the subject of study of many scholars and institutions. The U.S. consistently exhibits higher rates of income inequality than most developed nations due to the nation's enhanced support of free market capitalism. Income inequality (as measured by the Gini coefficient) is not uniform among the states: after-tax income inequality in 2009 was greatest in Texas and lowest in Maine.

Most of the growth has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity widening the further one goes up in the income distribution. A 2011 study by the CBO found that the top earning 1 percent of households increased their income by about 275% after federal taxes and income transfers over a period between 1979 and 2007, compared to a gain of just under 40% for the 60 percent in the middle of America's income distribution. Other sources find that the trend has continued since then. In spite of this data, only 42% of Americans think inequality has increased in the past ten years. In 2012, the gap between the richest 1 percent and the remaining 99 percent was the widest it's been since the 1920s. Incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_Unite d_States

 

Easily explained.[video=youtube;xQ7kn2-GEmM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ7kn2-GEmM[/video]

 

make you case with FACTS


Prove it caused this

 

No, we have the highest corporate income tax in the industrial world and the dems like that. Now they want to build a wall to keep corporations in the US where they will die from over taxation and over regulation.

What we need is a much lower corporate income tax so that corporations can grow.

GE pays "0" because the GE CEO is friends with Obama and you complain?? That isn't very progressive of you.

 

As a percentage, you certainly do. What falsehood? You can look at if from myriad different angles, as some conservatives argue that most corporate taxes get passed on to consumer and shareholders, or the liberal side which simply observes that most corps pay far less than what they owe. Google what Verizon paid last year.

 

You think Obama is a progressive? I've got a bridge to sell you. Why is it we've slashed corporate taxes repeatedly, but they still try to dodge them? Hell, Mylan is undergoing "inversion" to Ireland when they already pay a very low effective corporate tax rate. The new ethos is to maximize shareholder value whatever the cost. It's effectively a race to the bottom where the wealthy are using their resources to push tax obligations on the poor and middle class. No wonder our infrastructure is literally crumbling.

 

From the OP: "The difference - $214 million - would have been added to the budget deficit." That's over a ten year period, or $21,400, 000 a year. Obama spreads that much on his toast every morning.

For Liberals to jump out of their seat on this issue as if money actually mattered, why not scream above the rooftops at how we are spending too much and our deficit is tumbling toward 20T?

 

That would be a figment of your imagination, likely one of many. What is true, is that it would never pass in the Senate, let alone, even be put up for a vote in the Senate.