4 ms·

To play devil's advocate, Finland was giving sort of a vague argument for their tax cuts: "dynamic effects", while in America there are very concrete potential

by mjfl 10y ago

To play devil's advocate, Finland was giving sort of a vague argument for their tax cuts: "dynamic effects", while in America there are very concrete potential effects of the policy. You can point directly to Apple and say, "If we cut tax rates to 15%, Apple will bring back $X to the USA", "Exxon Mobile will bring back $X to USA", and so on. You can even... talk to them and ask them what it would take to repatriate the offshore funds, and I would hope Trump would do that. So yeah, I think it's one thing to cut taxes and hope "economic growth" happens automatically, but a completely different thing if you have a quantifiable number of offshore dollars, deals can be made, etc.

muninn_ 10y ago
Eventually that money will be either returned to share holders, or will be invested in the business. You also have to consider that the government in Finland is probably way less shitty than the US government.
- mjfl 10y ago
  The money is already returned to shareholders offshore as equity in the global company. I don't know what you are talking about.
  - muninn_ 10y ago
    Sure but not through dividends or stock buybacks
vannevar 10y ago
This is a race to the bottom. There is no public policy reason that corporations, particularly public corporations, should be allowed to amass such enormous piles of cash.
tmaly 10y ago
I think the small businesses, the mom and pop shops that cannot afford a fleet of accountants, will benefit the most from a lower tax.
- dplgk 10y ago
  How does lower or higher tax changes the amount of accountants you need?
  - dmix 10y ago
    Complex tax code = lots of loops that can be found via a team of accountants Therefore the big firms that everyone villianizes for paying little taxes are already paying low taxes. This would lower the taxes for those who can't afford the team of accountants. Ideally they should also dramatically simplify the tax code to eliminate all of the loopholes so everyone pays the expected rates and there are no reinforcing cyclical benefits for market incumbents crippling innovation and continually enriching a small subset of the population.

by mjfl 10y ago

muninn_ 10y ago

Eventually that money will be either returned to share holders, or will be invested in the business. You also have to consider that the government in Finland is probably way less shitty than the US government.

mjfl 10y ago
The money is already returned to shareholders offshore as equity in the global company. I don't know what you are talking about.
- muninn_ 10y ago
  Sure but not through dividends or stock buybacks

vannevar 10y ago

This is a race to the bottom. There is no public policy reason that corporations, particularly public corporations, should be allowed to amass such enormous piles of cash.

tmaly 10y ago

I think the small businesses, the mom and pop shops that cannot afford a fleet of accountants, will benefit the most from a lower tax.

dplgk 10y ago
How does lower or higher tax changes the amount of accountants you need?
- dmix 10y ago
  Complex tax code = lots of loops that can be found via a team of accountants Therefore the big firms that everyone villianizes for paying little taxes are already paying low taxes. This would lower the taxes for those who can't afford the team of accountants. Ideally they should also dramatically simplify the tax code to eliminate all of the loopholes so everyone pays the expected rates and there are no reinforcing cyclical benefits for market incumbents crippling innovation and continually enriching a small subset of the population.