5 ms·
This is the type of thing where I feel absolutely ashamed of how impotent the US is, despite its superpower status. I find it hard to believe that if we had And
by kolbe 11y ago
This is the type of thing where I feel absolutely ashamed of how impotent the US is, despite its superpower status. I find it hard to believe that if we had Andrew Jackson as president today, and Ireland and Bermuda were allowing US companies to shield themselves from paying US taxes, that these tax inversions and avoidance schemes wouldn't be quickly and swiftly resolved with extreme prejudice. Ireland alone is costing the US maybe a hundred billion a year. Our relationship with them is not worth that much. Throw sanctions on them. Make Ireland pay taxes to the US. Don't recognize any IP of any Irish company. Threaten them with bombings. Do something. While it is a "problem" that the US has higher corporate tax rates, that's only an actual problem if the US lacks the will or power to enforce those higher tax rates. And the US has the power. And we look like a joke for letting little shit countries give companies back doors to our tax code.
It's also a reason why I think a defiant blowhard like Donald Trump could make waves as president. I don't think he'd have any problem dropping his sac to break treaties and crack skulls.
- alainv 11y agoPoe's law? Poe's law.
- kolbe 11y agoNope. I'm just a man with beliefs that most people today would call antiquated.
- alainv 11y agoOk - can you elaborate why you so clearly favour aggression and blaming Ireland rather than simple domestic legislation and general political will to prevent these companies using other countries as tax havens?
- Jach 11y agoYeah, threatening them to take the action of banning US incorporation is a bit weird. Even Trump is about fining the company that wants to move to Mexico above the tax savings rather than getting Mexico to halt the deal.
- kolbe 11y agoSure. I like the logic of trying to close it with domestic legislation, but the US sucks at that. For one, congress and the president cannot ever seem to work together to get anything meaningful done. But secondly, every single time we think we make an exception or a rule in the tax code, we learn that crafty investment bankers figure out how to exploit the rule. As Plato said, "know thyself." And we suck at playing nicely. Completely hypothetically, say we could kill tax inversions. The whole thing has felt like a game of cat and mouse game for a century now. Inversions are the tax-avoidance scheme du jouer. For example, for years, Pfizer has already been paying virtually no taxes in the US by storing all of its IP in an offshore subsidiary. The "double Irish" trick is being done by companies who have never done an inversion. There are all sorts of holes in the tax code that other nations use to fuck the US. And there's no way we can compete on the rate, since we'd be competing with countries that have a 0% rate. Many companies pay a zero percent corporate tax rate on all of their offshore profits (which, IIRC, is attributed to a subsidiary in Bermuda), and mostly claim to have nothing but losses to write off in the US. We need to finally say, "fuck this nonsense." Companies don't need laws to inform them when they're acting morally. It is immoral to act the way they are, and instead of playing cat and mouse like we have been doing, we need to put our foot down and MAKE every company obey the spirit of the tax laws, and not the letter. And the only way I know of to make that happen is to use extreme threats like invalidating their IP if they pull these tricks, or threatening the countries that aid them.
- vezzy-fnord 11y agoNot antiquated at all. Protectionism has always been an integral part of U.S. economic policy since the beginning, though I don't think even ardent tariff and land law act proponents would have went as far as to threaten war on countries with more favorable business conditions (actually, the trend has been war on not being favorable enough, but otherwise retain strong domestic policies).
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- derriz 11y agoBomb a western country because corporations - in full compliance with its laws and those of the US - are doing something you dont like? Really? How about the US simply change its tax laws to prevent this happening?
- notacoward 11y agoWhile I think the "bombing" hyperbole was a bit much, I do think you have a point there. Even if we accept the argument that corporate taxes in the US are too high, a tax which is unevenly enforced is effectively a tax on the honest and a subsidy for the dishonest. Facilitating such subterfuge - which several countries do quite openly and deliberately as a matter of policy - is just money laundering writ large. As with other money launderers, letting them get away with it is effectively giving them money from our own taxpayers' pockets. Instead, we should encourage them to help us collect our lawfully levied taxes, as we help them collect theirs. If they continue cooperating with criminals instead of with our government, sanctions from denial of IP to outright embargo (but not bombing) are entirely appropriate.