3 ms·
I would have loved Sam to make that argument explicitly: it’s not his style to talk about government money as if it grows on trees. I suspect he wouldn’t have l
by bertil 7y ago
I would have loved Sam to make that argument explicitly: it’s not his style to talk about government money as if it grows on trees. I suspect he wouldn’t have looked at the overall distribution but where to assign marginal tax revenues.
- philwelch 7y agoCorporate taxes are only 4.4% of US tax revenue[1], there's no possible way that corporate tax avoidance would make a significant difference. Especially compared to what most successful startups end up doing, which is to employ people and pay them salaries that are within the upper tax brackets. Respectfully, you seem to be trying to draw a strong connection here where it's not obvious that one exists. [1] https://taxfoundation.org/us-tax-revenue-by-tax-type-2020/ https://taxfoundation.org/us-tax-revenue-by-tax-type-2020/
- bertil 7y ago> there's no possible way that corporate tax avoidance would make a significant difference Citation needed.
- philwelch 7y agoI already provided one, what are you talking about?
- bertil 7y agoYou are saying that what’s left after tax optimisation is small. Not that the potential revenue if corporate benefits were taxed effectively is small. Do you have an estimate of the revenue that is declared in low-tax jurisdiction?