4 ms·
Honest question: what is the reason for there to be a corporate tax at all? When corporations distribute profit to their owners/shareholders, those people must
by jcrites 5y ago
Honest question: what is the reason for there to be a corporate tax at all? When corporations distribute profit to their owners/shareholders, those people must pay income tax on it. Why not have the government get its share from income tax?
Corporate tax seems like double taxation, and its existence seemingly means that all companies have a lower margin than they would otherwise, meaning that they need to charge higher prices to be equally profitable. For companies that sell products to consumers, one would presume this would result in higher prices for everyday items.
In other words, isn't a corporate tax ultimately regressive because it causes companies that sell products to consumers to have higher prices? Companies that sell everyday items like food and essentials will pass on that corporate tax through higher prices to consumers. Meanwhile, any business owners/shareholders who receive substantial income pay income tax in the highest tax bracket for any income received from the company.
Corporate taxes just seem to hurt margins, resulting in a regressive effect on the economy through higher prices, and discourage companies from conducting research and development, by again hurting their margins. Why not eliminate corporate tax and rely on income tax, or better yet a model like sales tax/VAT?
There will be exceptions like business owners who start a business from nothing, see the net value of their shares rise into a billion dollar valuation, yet pay little in taxes -- however they haven't necessarily sold those shares to receive income yet, and when they do they'll be taxed at the capital gains rate.
You could argue that the capital gains tax (or qualified dividend tax) should be higher, which is an entirely separate matter from the corporate tax, but if you raise that rate then you discourage prospective business owners from starting businesses, and you discourage investors from investing and holding shares in companies for the long term.
The top 1% of people by income already pay 40% of all taxes. Meanwhile, the top 2-5% pay the next 20% of all taxes; so the top 5% of earners collectively pay 60% of income tax. Given this fact it surprises me that people say that the rich need to pay their "fair share". https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/1-chart-how-much-the-rich-pay-taxes https://www.heritage.org/taxes/commentary/1-chart-how-much-t... (Note that this is considering income, not wealth. We don't tax wealth, and I don't personally think we should while people live, beyond generally taxing real estate to pay for the services provided near that real estate, such as roads, police, schools, etc. I have mixed feelings about the estate tax i.e. taxes paid on inheritances at death).
- dane-pgp 5y ago> The top 1% of people by income already pay 40% of all taxes. I believe that this famous misleading statistic is only true if you specifically limit it to federal income tax, not "all taxes".[0] Less misleading is to compare total taxes against total income, which is shown in a chart[1] included in the linked article. It shows that the top 1% earn 21% of the income, and pay 24% of all taxes. The real question is, why are the top 1% only paying 24% of the taxes when they own 39% of the wealth?[2] [0] https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics/ https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics... [1] https://theintercept.imgix.net/wp-uploads/sites/1/2019/04/chart-1-1555038429.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&q=90&w=1024&h=496 https://theintercept.imgix.net/wp-uploads/sites/1/2019/04/ch... [2] https://jacobinmag.com/2017/10/wealth-inequality-united-states-federal-reserve https://jacobinmag.com/2017/10/wealth-inequality-united-stat...
- systoll 5y ago> Corporate tax seems like double taxation, and its existence seemingly means that all companies have a lower margin than they would otherwise, meaning that they need to charge higher prices to be equally profitable. For companies that sell products to consumers, one would presume this would result in higher prices for everyday items. Isn’t this a good thing? The core reason for incorporation is to have limited liability, leading owners to have a limited potential downside, and unlimited potential upsides. But the downside is still there, it’s just externalised. Corporate tax seems to be a fairly reasonable approach to paying for this liability insurance.