6 ms·

It would be perfectly fine for corporations to pay comically low taxes--- IF they also had NO ability to fund large-scale lobbying operations and were not allow

It would be perfectly fine for corporations to pay comically low taxes--- IF they also had NO ability to fund large-scale lobbying operations and were not allowed to put unlimited amounts of money into political campaigns. That's NOT ever going to happen. But now is the best time for the tax part to change. The economy has been floated by unprecedented government pay-outs, narrowly avoiding a deep depression that would have crushed even the most cash-flush corporations. If certain people have their way, the working class will foot the bill for this for decades to come. Maybe it's time for those who thrived through this to pay their share just like in the post-WWII era where max tax rates reached 80+% up until the early 60's?

tlholaday 6y ago
> ... unprecedented government pay-outs ... The G.I. Bill after World War 2 is a precedent. Do you think CARES is larger, or smaller?
- _huayra_ 6y ago
  It's larger, but less effective. The G.I. bill gave resources to veterans to advance their lives while the 'rona-based payouts disproportionately affected the already-wealthy individuals and businesses due to the military-industrial-congressional complex. It's not so much whether it's larger or smaller, but how well it was spent. Free college and the myriad other benefits in the G.I. bill helped build the US into a superpower (well combined with other fortuitous things, like being the only major industrial power that hadn't been bombed to smithereens). The bailout of large industries that a lot of the CARES act went to were not well spent: it was cronyism to prop up underprepared corporate structures (i.e. those that have hollowed out any "emergency fund" due to it being an overhead to their bottom line) and prevent bankruptcy from enabling other folks to come in and perhaps run things better.
  - matwood 6y ago
    > prevent bankruptcy from enabling other folks to come in and perhaps run things better. Yeah, while I think the CARES act helped individuals, there's no need to try and save every business. Take restaurants for example. In good times, most restaurants fail, and new ones start. The narrative that if restaurants failed they would never come back was simply untrue.
listenallyall 6y ago
>> It would be perfectly fine for corporations to pay comically low taxes No it wouldn't
- crispyambulance 6y ago
  I am just trying to highlight the fact that corporations have a double advantage: Low-to-no taxes + oversized political influence. It would be an almost level playing field if they had only ONE of those advantages.
  - harperlee 6y ago
    To me, it seems that discussing about corporations vs. individuals is the wrong kind of discussion to have. At the end corporations are groups of individuals, and whenever someone argues about unfairness of different treatment, there's an implicit "and that's bad because some individuals end up on a better position than others" that, I think, should be talked more explicitly. At the end of the day, a corporation is an instrument, and its wealth is the wealth of some individuals. Corporations are instruments to coordinate wealth creation, so perhaps the issue is how/whether rich people are profiting too much from "The System" we have in place, be it through an excessive command of corporations (which are allowed certain things) or through other means. I mean, if wealth inequality among individuals were close to nil, then it would not be too polemic to raise taxes if we need more public budget, or lower them if we need to push the economy forward - the issue when taxes need to increase or decrease is where do you cut / take. So perhaps we're focusing our analysis on optimizing the wrong thing.
- thehappypm 6y ago
  Why should corporations pay taxes on their profits? What's the argument for it?
  - webinvest 6y ago
    For the privilege of continued access to a workforce that was educated by public schooling For access to roads that are maintained by tax dollars For environmental damages and other negative externalities that the tax payer has to pay to clean up For an army and police system that allows the flow of commerce to continue without attacks and interruption For a sovereign wealth fund if there is a surplus of tax revenue one year For a court system so that corporations can continue to sue each other To secure the population access to vaccines to reduce the spread of Covid and other diseases To fund libraries that help the local population To build sea ports and airports that provide the economy with better trade and transportation These are some common things taxes are spent on but they are not reasons why corporations shouldn’t pay taxes on their free cash flow, revenue, or some other financial statement line item (FSLI) instead of their profit.
spacemanmatt 6y ago
> It would be perfectly fine for corporations to pay comically low taxes Strong disagree.
mjthompson 6y ago
Corporations enjoy signficant benefits of being in the state, including, for example, a police force that protects them from attack, and a legal system that will resolve disputes they have both internally and with others. They should pay reasonable (not low) taxes in any event, not subject to the caveat you identify.
- Guthur 6y ago
  Everyone they employ already pays tax. Everyone that gets a dividend pays tax. Everyone that enjoys capital growth pays tax. Just looking at the direct corporate tax rate is grossly myopic.
  - adamcstephens 6y ago
    You’re right, capital gains should be taxed at the normal tax rate too.
  - varispeed 6y ago
    > Everyone they employ already pays tax. But this is their tax they pay on the money _they_ earned. Not sure why this is okay for corporations to appropriate this tax as theirs. > Everyone that gets a dividend pays tax. In my country dividend tax has a lower rate. You have this insanity where a person making money out of their hard work pays more tax than a person living off dividends and doing nothing.
    - scatters 6y ago
      The money used to purchase shares has already been taxed as income. A person receiving dividends is enjoying the benefit of their own hard work in the past.
    - postingawayonhn 6y ago
      But does your tax system allow for company tax payments to be offset against the tax liabilities of those receiving dividends? Here in Australia/NZ companies can provide shareholders with franking/imputation credits.
AzzieElbab 6y ago
I agree, what is going on is legalized corruption. Tax rates are too high, so no one is paying while lawmakers are getting compensated (in one form or another) for introducing and maintaining tax loopholes
Guthur 6y ago
Then advocate to remove every form of regressive taxation that takes away poorest already limited wealth. Abolish sales tax, and punitive fines at the very least, theses are highly regressive in nature. Though i suspect quite a few don't believe the poor should have more wealth but rather that the government should just get bigger.

tlholaday 6y ago

> ... unprecedented government pay-outs ... The G.I. Bill after World War 2 is a precedent. Do you think CARES is larger, or smaller?

_huayra_ 6y ago
It's larger, but less effective. The G.I. bill gave resources to veterans to advance their lives while the 'rona-based payouts disproportionately affected the already-wealthy individuals and businesses due to the military-industrial-congressional complex. It's not so much whether it's larger or smaller, but how well it was spent. Free college and the myriad other benefits in the G.I. bill helped build the US into a superpower (well combined with other fortuitous things, like being the only major industrial power that hadn't been bombed to smithereens). The bailout of large industries that a lot of the CARES act went to were not well spent: it was cronyism to prop up underprepared corporate structures (i.e. those that have hollowed out any "emergency fund" due to it being an overhead to their bottom line) and prevent bankruptcy from enabling other folks to come in and perhaps run things better.
- matwood 6y ago
  > prevent bankruptcy from enabling other folks to come in and perhaps run things better. Yeah, while I think the CARES act helped individuals, there's no need to try and save every business. Take restaurants for example. In good times, most restaurants fail, and new ones start. The narrative that if restaurants failed they would never come back was simply untrue.

listenallyall 6y ago

>> It would be perfectly fine for corporations to pay comically low taxes No it wouldn't

crispyambulance 6y ago
I am just trying to highlight the fact that corporations have a double advantage: Low-to-no taxes + oversized political influence. It would be an almost level playing field if they had only ONE of those advantages.
- harperlee 6y ago
  To me, it seems that discussing about corporations vs. individuals is the wrong kind of discussion to have. At the end corporations are groups of individuals, and whenever someone argues about unfairness of different treatment, there's an implicit "and that's bad because some individuals end up on a better position than others" that, I think, should be talked more explicitly. At the end of the day, a corporation is an instrument, and its wealth is the wealth of some individuals. Corporations are instruments to coordinate wealth creation, so perhaps the issue is how/whether rich people are profiting too much from "The System" we have in place, be it through an excessive command of corporations (which are allowed certain things) or through other means. I mean, if wealth inequality among individuals were close to nil, then it would not be too polemic to raise taxes if we need more public budget, or lower them if we need to push the economy forward - the issue when taxes need to increase or decrease is where do you cut / take. So perhaps we're focusing our analysis on optimizing the wrong thing.
thehappypm 6y ago
Why should corporations pay taxes on their profits? What's the argument for it?
- webinvest 6y ago
  For the privilege of continued access to a workforce that was educated by public schooling For access to roads that are maintained by tax dollars For environmental damages and other negative externalities that the tax payer has to pay to clean up For an army and police system that allows the flow of commerce to continue without attacks and interruption For a sovereign wealth fund if there is a surplus of tax revenue one year For a court system so that corporations can continue to sue each other To secure the population access to vaccines to reduce the spread of Covid and other diseases To fund libraries that help the local population To build sea ports and airports that provide the economy with better trade and transportation These are some common things taxes are spent on but they are not reasons why corporations shouldn’t pay taxes on their free cash flow, revenue, or some other financial statement line item (FSLI) instead of their profit.

spacemanmatt 6y ago

> It would be perfectly fine for corporations to pay comically low taxes Strong disagree.

mjthompson 6y ago

Corporations enjoy signficant benefits of being in the state, including, for example, a police force that protects them from attack, and a legal system that will resolve disputes they have both internally and with others. They should pay reasonable (not low) taxes in any event, not subject to the caveat you identify.

Guthur 6y ago
Everyone they employ already pays tax. Everyone that gets a dividend pays tax. Everyone that enjoys capital growth pays tax. Just looking at the direct corporate tax rate is grossly myopic.
- adamcstephens 6y ago
  You’re right, capital gains should be taxed at the normal tax rate too.
- varispeed 6y ago
  > Everyone they employ already pays tax. But this is their tax they pay on the money _they_ earned. Not sure why this is okay for corporations to appropriate this tax as theirs. > Everyone that gets a dividend pays tax. In my country dividend tax has a lower rate. You have this insanity where a person making money out of their hard work pays more tax than a person living off dividends and doing nothing.
  - scatters 6y ago
    The money used to purchase shares has already been taxed as income. A person receiving dividends is enjoying the benefit of their own hard work in the past.
  - postingawayonhn 6y ago
    But does your tax system allow for company tax payments to be offset against the tax liabilities of those receiving dividends? Here in Australia/NZ companies can provide shareholders with franking/imputation credits.

AzzieElbab 6y ago

I agree, what is going on is legalized corruption. Tax rates are too high, so no one is paying while lawmakers are getting compensated (in one form or another) for introducing and maintaining tax loopholes

Guthur 6y ago

Then advocate to remove every form of regressive taxation that takes away poorest already limited wealth. Abolish sales tax, and punitive fines at the very least, theses are highly regressive in nature. Though i suspect quite a few don't believe the poor should have more wealth but rather that the government should just get bigger.