4 ms·

Tangentially - if there's no tax rate competition which seems to be the desired goal of many, there's nothing to stop politicians continuing to bribe their elec

by vixen99 11y ago

Tangentially - if there's no tax rate competition which seems to be the desired goal of many, there's nothing to stop politicians continuing to bribe their electorate with bread and circuses paid for by that electorate's money. The gigantic debt mountains in the US and the EU demonstrate the degree to which they do that. And when it's all over, out of office, out of responsibility! Companies have of course to keep prudent accounts or go out of business.

icebraining 11y ago
Considering that currently "tax rate competition" exists, and as you point out the US and EU have "gigantic debt mountains" anyway, the argument that such competition is important to keep states from accumulating too much debt seems to be defeated by your own claims.
- sievebrain 11y ago
  It's the other way around - if all tax rates were uniform around the world, borrowing (or variously disguised forms of tax rebate) would be the only way for governments to control their own budgets.
ssmoot 11y ago
You can have a different political opinion without being hyperbolic and going all "wake up sheeple!".
toyg 11y ago
> Companies have of course to keep prudent accounts or go out of business. Wrong comparison. A politician is to government what a CEO is to a company. Loads of CEOs make terrible decisions to appease the stock market short-term, then leave the company before shit hits the fan. Replace "CEOs" with "prime ministers" and "stock market" with "electorate". Human nature is what it is.
Ontheflyflyfly 11y ago
" if there's no tax rate competition" The point is, these executives are not living in Ireland or Panama but in the valley or some highly developed country in Europe. So while the enjoy the benefits of those countries, the want to avoid paying taxes. No one has anything against people who want to enjoy Irish tax laws who move to Ireland. Or people who want to have a company in Panama to move to Panama.
- icebraining 11y ago
  That's a novel position. So US companies, whose executives presumably live in the US, shouldn't open an EU subsidiary, and vice-versa? Is it wrong for Toyota to open a subsidiary in the US? Not to mention that executives don't "have" companies, shareholders do.
  - Ontheflyflyfly 11y ago
    Yes, if the executives at Apple decide that they want to pay corporate taxes in Ireland instead of the US to reduce their taxes and increase their income, they should move Apple to Ireland from the valley. You can twist my words to "Is it wrong for Toyota to open a subsidiary in the US?" as you like, it doesn't change the point. Some people bring arguments, some play word games "Not to mention that executives don't "have" companies"

by vixen99 11y ago

icebraining 11y ago

Considering that currently "tax rate competition" exists, and as you point out the US and EU have "gigantic debt mountains" anyway, the argument that such competition is important to keep states from accumulating too much debt seems to be defeated by your own claims.

sievebrain 11y ago
It's the other way around - if all tax rates were uniform around the world, borrowing (or variously disguised forms of tax rebate) would be the only way for governments to control their own budgets.

ssmoot 11y ago

You can have a different political opinion without being hyperbolic and going all "wake up sheeple!".

toyg 11y ago

> Companies have of course to keep prudent accounts or go out of business. Wrong comparison. A politician is to government what a CEO is to a company. Loads of CEOs make terrible decisions to appease the stock market short-term, then leave the company before shit hits the fan. Replace "CEOs" with "prime ministers" and "stock market" with "electorate". Human nature is what it is.

Ontheflyflyfly 11y ago

" if there's no tax rate competition" The point is, these executives are not living in Ireland or Panama but in the valley or some highly developed country in Europe. So while the enjoy the benefits of those countries, the want to avoid paying taxes. No one has anything against people who want to enjoy Irish tax laws who move to Ireland. Or people who want to have a company in Panama to move to Panama.

icebraining 11y ago
That's a novel position. So US companies, whose executives presumably live in the US, shouldn't open an EU subsidiary, and vice-versa? Is it wrong for Toyota to open a subsidiary in the US? Not to mention that executives don't "have" companies, shareholders do.
- Ontheflyflyfly 11y ago
  Yes, if the executives at Apple decide that they want to pay corporate taxes in Ireland instead of the US to reduce their taxes and increase their income, they should move Apple to Ireland from the valley. You can twist my words to "Is it wrong for Toyota to open a subsidiary in the US?" as you like, it doesn't change the point. Some people bring arguments, some play word games "Not to mention that executives don't "have" companies"