8 ms·

I distinctly remember the claim that most economists (left and right) believe the optimal corporate tax rate is 0%, but I can't find the source for this. The ar

I distinctly remember the claim that most economists (left and right) believe the optimal corporate tax rate is 0%, but I can't find the source for this. The argument is that the corporate tax is simply an indirect income tax, and so as an alternative to raising income taxes, all it does is to penalize entrepreneurs for incorporating their businesses.

jostmey 5y ago
Except some bosses use their business as personal assets. A personal jet is a good example
- Aerroon 5y ago
  That is very much illegal though. If the jet is for personal use and the company isn't compensated for it then it's tax fraud.
  - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
    That's straightforward to work-around: arrange for an important industry meeting that's coincidentally in the same city as your weekend getaway.
    - Aerroon 5y ago
      If you need to set up a business meeting every time you want to use "your" private jet then why wouldn't you just charter instead?
walshemj 5y ago
Ask yourself who pays these "economists"
- russh 5y ago
  Ask yourself, where does the money the corporations use to pay the tax come from?
wolverine876 5y ago
> most economists (left and right) believe the optimal corporate tax rate is 0% Please provide some evidence, because I think only a narrow group of right-wing economists say that. Taxes are generally applied where money is transacted, such as income and sales. For economic and legal purposes, corporations are entities just like people. They earn money, save it, pay it, invest it, etc. IME, they try to come up with every argument, sane or bizarre, to avoid contributing their share of taxes.
- gruez 5y ago
  >Please provide some evidence, because I think only a narrow group of right-wing economists say that. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/18/156928675/episode-387-the-no-brainer-economic-platform https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/18/156928675/epis... no transcript unfortunately, but the summary seems to be that economists across the political spectrum agrees with it. edit: listened to the podcast. the relevant section is at around 12:30. the reasoning seems to be that corporate taxes discourages corporations from reinvesting their profits, and if want corporate taxes because corporations are mostly owned by rich people, you should tax them directly.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> I distinctly remember the claim that most economists (left and right) believe the optimal corporate tax rate is 0% Optimal for what objective?
- gruez 5y ago
  general efficiency? if you want to tax corporations because they're owned by rich people, tax the rich people directly. see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28804390 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28804390
  - realityking 5y ago
    The problem I have with that is that it favors foreign asset ownership. I own some Apple stock and live in Germany. Now when Apple designs and develops an iPhone in California, manufactures it in China and sells it in Chicago should the tax on the profit (dividends or realized gains) only go to Germany or should the US and China also get a slice of the pie? Apple definitely benefits from many resources the US and China provide, from roads to police.
    - gruez 5y ago
      >Apple definitely benefits from many resources the US and China provide, from roads to police. Roads are already financed by vehicle registration/fuel taxes. Police are funded partially from property taxes. Besides, most businesses don't crime by themselves. They're mostly caused by humans, which are already taxed.
      - realityking 5y ago
        You’re wrong about the fuel tax: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-13/debunking-the-myth-that-because-of-the-gas-tax-only-drivers-pay-for-roads https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-13/debunking... But that’s besides the point, these were just two examples of the way businesses benefit from the societal infrastructure around them. They should pay a part of that infrastructure.

jostmey 5y ago

Except some bosses use their business as personal assets. A personal jet is a good example

Aerroon 5y ago
That is very much illegal though. If the jet is for personal use and the company isn't compensated for it then it's tax fraud.
- DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
  That's straightforward to work-around: arrange for an important industry meeting that's coincidentally in the same city as your weekend getaway.
  - Aerroon 5y ago
    If you need to set up a business meeting every time you want to use "your" private jet then why wouldn't you just charter instead?

walshemj 5y ago

Ask yourself who pays these "economists"

russh 5y ago
Ask yourself, where does the money the corporations use to pay the tax come from?

wolverine876 5y ago

> most economists (left and right) believe the optimal corporate tax rate is 0% Please provide some evidence, because I think only a narrow group of right-wing economists say that. Taxes are generally applied where money is transacted, such as income and sales. For economic and legal purposes, corporations are entities just like people. They earn money, save it, pay it, invest it, etc. IME, they try to come up with every argument, sane or bizarre, to avoid contributing their share of taxes.

gruez 5y ago
>Please provide some evidence, because I think only a narrow group of right-wing economists say that. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/18/156928675/episode-387-the-no-brainer-economic-platform https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/07/18/156928675/epis... no transcript unfortunately, but the summary seems to be that economists across the political spectrum agrees with it. edit: listened to the podcast. the relevant section is at around 12:30. the reasoning seems to be that corporate taxes discourages corporations from reinvesting their profits, and if want corporate taxes because corporations are mostly owned by rich people, you should tax them directly.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> I distinctly remember the claim that most economists (left and right) believe the optimal corporate tax rate is 0% Optimal for what objective?

gruez 5y ago
general efficiency? if you want to tax corporations because they're owned by rich people, tax the rich people directly. see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28804390 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28804390
- realityking 5y ago
  The problem I have with that is that it favors foreign asset ownership. I own some Apple stock and live in Germany. Now when Apple designs and develops an iPhone in California, manufactures it in China and sells it in Chicago should the tax on the profit (dividends or realized gains) only go to Germany or should the US and China also get a slice of the pie? Apple definitely benefits from many resources the US and China provide, from roads to police.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >Apple definitely benefits from many resources the US and China provide, from roads to police. Roads are already financed by vehicle registration/fuel taxes. Police are funded partially from property taxes. Besides, most businesses don't crime by themselves. They're mostly caused by humans, which are already taxed.
    - realityking 5y ago
      You’re wrong about the fuel tax: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-13/debunking-the-myth-that-because-of-the-gas-tax-only-drivers-pay-for-roads https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-13/debunking... But that’s besides the point, these were just two examples of the way businesses benefit from the societal infrastructure around them. They should pay a part of that infrastructure.