3 ms·

Corporations get to pay their costs before paying taxes on what's left. Only the population pays taxes before their costs.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Only the population pays taxes before their costs Not that simple. Plenty of individuals pay a negative income tax. Plenty of individuals deduct various expenses. And if you're a sole proprietor, you get to deduct expenses like a corporation. Labour v capital != corporations v people.
- zo1 2y ago
  It may not be that simple, and there are definitely exemptions to what the OP posted. But the principle of it is what most of corporate taxation is built upon, and it's fundamentally different to how taxation works for individuals. Is it logically consistent and/or fair? Doubtful, but it is the way it is, and until we get a law change to happen (in any country - doubtful the world over), it'll stay that way.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > the principle of it is what most of corporate taxation is built upon, and it's fundamentally different to how taxation works for individuals They're built on a similar principle: you tax earnings. That's why we have a standard deduction. The point was to cover living expenses. It's clearly not doing that, but the logic is similar. (I'd raise it to $50k+. Cover the cost, about $500 to 600bn, with new tax brackets at $10mm, $100mm and $1bn; a modest increase in the capital-gains rate; and by closing the carried-interest loophole.)
- mihaic 2y ago
  You've said something true that misses the point. Taxation disproportionately comes from wages, and most in the middle class can't avoid them, even though they are a pillar of the economy.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Taxation disproportionately comes from wages, and most in the middle class can't avoid them Totally correct. Ironically, a classic labour vs. capital argument holds water better than people vs. corporations. We absolutely tax returns on labour too much in America and capital not enough. That doesn't really result in concluding that we should let people deduct more expenses or corporations pay on their top line. You're still working at the level of abstractions.
    - mihaic 2y ago
      Well, in this case I think the subject also is corporations v. people, as people can't lobby to Congress to get tax breaks. In this particular issue, the problem is both that corporations aren't taxed enough AND that they can evade the law by getting special dispensations. I'd be upset the most at: > Congress might give Tesla even more tax breaks. A bill passed by the House of Representatives in the previous Congress would have retroactively reinstated a provision allowing full expensing of research and development expenses which could save the company up to $2.4 billion in taxes.
      - mrkandy 2y ago
        > people can't lobby to Congress Always assumed that the elections is exactly about it
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > people can't lobby to Congress to get tax breaks You've never called your elected? I've literally worked on the language of bills because I was the only one to call in about a bill that had to be voted on, nobody in my jurisdiction cared about and the staffer who was chargdd with it couldn't give fewer shits about the issue.
  - stogot 2y ago
    Half of taxpayers pay 97.7% of federal income tax https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-of-the-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2020-update/ https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-of-the-la...
purplethinking 2y ago
An interesting thought experiment what would happen if we treated people as corporations. I guess we'd have to raise income taxes quite a bit to make ends meet, as most people spend everything they make.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > what would happen if we treated people as corporations You'd rename line items and move on. Companies can't deduct any expense. The chief ones are things they've already paid tax on, e.g. wages subject to payroll and purchases subject to sales taxes.
  - ffsm8 2y ago
    Uh, isn't that exactly like it is for people? They pay taxes on income and VAT
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> Only the population pays taxes before their costs Not that simple. Plenty of individuals pay a negative income tax. Plenty of individuals deduct various expenses. And if you're a sole proprietor, you get to deduct expenses like a corporation. Labour v capital != corporations v people.

zo1 2y ago
It may not be that simple, and there are definitely exemptions to what the OP posted. But the principle of it is what most of corporate taxation is built upon, and it's fundamentally different to how taxation works for individuals. Is it logically consistent and/or fair? Doubtful, but it is the way it is, and until we get a law change to happen (in any country - doubtful the world over), it'll stay that way.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > the principle of it is what most of corporate taxation is built upon, and it's fundamentally different to how taxation works for individuals They're built on a similar principle: you tax earnings. That's why we have a standard deduction. The point was to cover living expenses. It's clearly not doing that, but the logic is similar. (I'd raise it to $50k+. Cover the cost, about $500 to 600bn, with new tax brackets at $10mm, $100mm and $1bn; a modest increase in the capital-gains rate; and by closing the carried-interest loophole.)
mihaic 2y ago
You've said something true that misses the point. Taxation disproportionately comes from wages, and most in the middle class can't avoid them, even though they are a pillar of the economy.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Taxation disproportionately comes from wages, and most in the middle class can't avoid them Totally correct. Ironically, a classic labour vs. capital argument holds water better than people vs. corporations. We absolutely tax returns on labour too much in America and capital not enough. That doesn't really result in concluding that we should let people deduct more expenses or corporations pay on their top line. You're still working at the level of abstractions.
  - mihaic 2y ago
    Well, in this case I think the subject also is corporations v. people, as people can't lobby to Congress to get tax breaks. In this particular issue, the problem is both that corporations aren't taxed enough AND that they can evade the law by getting special dispensations. I'd be upset the most at: > Congress might give Tesla even more tax breaks. A bill passed by the House of Representatives in the previous Congress would have retroactively reinstated a provision allowing full expensing of research and development expenses which could save the company up to $2.4 billion in taxes.
    - mrkandy 2y ago
      > people can't lobby to Congress Always assumed that the elections is exactly about it
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > people can't lobby to Congress to get tax breaks You've never called your elected? I've literally worked on the language of bills because I was the only one to call in about a bill that had to be voted on, nobody in my jurisdiction cared about and the staffer who was chargdd with it couldn't give fewer shits about the issue.
- stogot 2y ago
  Half of taxpayers pay 97.7% of federal income tax https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-of-the-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2020-update/ https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/summary-of-the-la...

purplethinking 2y ago

An interesting thought experiment what would happen if we treated people as corporations. I guess we'd have to raise income taxes quite a bit to make ends meet, as most people spend everything they make.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> what would happen if we treated people as corporations You'd rename line items and move on. Companies can't deduct any expense. The chief ones are things they've already paid tax on, e.g. wages subject to payroll and purchases subject to sales taxes.
- ffsm8 2y ago
  Uh, isn't that exactly like it is for people? They pay taxes on income and VAT

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]