Good. And it should be higher.

And how many of the corporations actually have to pay the taxes?

Misleading numbers? In my WSJ?

Wasn't it last week we learned that 2/3 of corporations pay no income tax?

EvilEgg: Wasn't it last week we learned that 2/3 of corporations pay no income tax?

came her to say this

Layer3Ninja
And how many of the corporations actually have to pay the taxes?

THIS.

Close the loopholes. Then we can talk about lowering the rate.

the wallstreet journal's daily lament for the plight of the american multimillionaire. and it's daily greenlight. yawn.

tchamber: Good. And it should be higher.

Dumbass. Or weak troll.

American has a hostile corporate environment. Why do they take their businesses overseas?..hmmmmmm.

GaryPDX: American has a hostile corporate environment. Why do they take their businesses overseas?..hmmmmmm.


You're right... it's corporate taxes that aren't paid by 2/3 of the corporations that make someone in India happy to work for $2.50/hour.

Blues_X: GaryPDX: American has a hostile corporate environment. Why do they take their businesses overseas?..hmmmmmm.


You're right... it's corporate taxes that aren't paid by 2/3 of the corporations that make someone in India happy to work for $2.50/hour.

ain't globalization grand?

Um, how much corporate tax is there in Kenya? Are they including industrialized nations in the numbers or all nations?

Taxes and bailouts have NOTHING to do with each other. I think everyone in the US is over taxed, individuals and businesses. The problem lies in propping up failing industries.

Can't make a profit flying people from point A to point B? Not my problem. You should fail and someone will find a profitable way to do it.

GM is dying because they were too stupid to see the writing on the wall and stop making land barges? Not my problem. They SHOULD go out of business so that they can clear the way for foward looking companies.

I'm a retarded mortgage broker who sold a $250k to people who can't afford a $20k car. Too bad. You just got screwed. You should go out of business so smart bankers can take your place.

... plus you guys pay way more in property taxes.

/Way more than Canadians.

Once again, people are putting the cart in front of the horse.

Pick a corporation...... who owns it? Stockholders? whoa......

The stock holders get a dividend. Then pay income tax on that.

Do you think the corporation sets its prices without considering its tax liability?

Or would you think they just might be smart enough to include any tax liability they'll have in the price of their product?

So, who, exactly is paying Exxon's corporate taxes?

YOU, you dumb asshole.. at the gas pumps.

Close the loopholes, raise the rates. Then wonder why you can't afford your 12 pack on Friday night.

tchamber: Good. And it should be higher.

I agree. We should tax corporations and businesses until they can no longer operate profitably.

OlafTheBent: ... plus you guys pay way more in property taxes.

/Way more than Canadians.

What? You guys actually own your property? Aren't those taxes just rent to the Crown?

/grin
//my how times have changed

EvilEgg: Wasn't it last week we learned that 2/3 of corporations pay no income tax?

Don't 2/3 of corporations have less than 10 employees?

EvilEgg: Wasn't it last week we learned that 2/3 of corporations pay no income tax?

Exactly. Iraq used to have a 100% voting rate under Saddam.

Sometimes the rates aren't all that important, I guess.

fuzzwell: tchamber: Good. And it should be higher.

I agree. We should tax corporations and businesses until they can no longer operate profitably in this country.

FTFY

real shaman: The stock holders get a dividend. Then pay income tax on that.

Actually, no, they pay capital gains on that.

lexnaturalis: Don't 2/3 of corporations have less than 10 employees?

I'm willing to bet that there is a reverse correlation between the size of a corporation and the likelihood it has a net outflow in taxes.

Too bad that it turns out that this assumption is wrong. As The New York Times writes, "Two out of every three United States corporations paid no federal income taxes from 1998 through 2005, according to a report released Tuesday by the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress"

STFU and quit whining about taxes Republicans, or go start your own country. You can have Texas if you want it.

benlonghair: Actually, no, they pay capital gains on that.

Hmm, no. Actually, they pay income tax on the dividend. Capital gains tax is when you sell your shares for a profit.

They are correct Corporate Welfare is incorrect.

The US practices Corporate Wealth Redistribution, we have the highest corporate profit tax rate in the world. But for corporations that are big enough (or able to dole out the cash to politicians) the rules are different. These corporations receive hefty hand outs from the government, special tax breaks, and Billion dollar credits. So while some corporations suffer under federal tax rules, others thrive because of it.

GaryPDX: What? You guys actually own your property? Aren't those taxes just rent to the Crown?

Actually, my family had property in the Boston area which was seized by the fledgling American Government in 1790 or so.

We want it back now. I hear it might be worth something.

Flab: Hmm, no. Actually, they pay income tax on the dividend. Capital gains tax is when you sell your shares for a profit.

I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and assumed me meant that the dividend tax rate had been reduced to the capital gains rate, rather than the typical "ordinary income" rate at which it sat pre-2002 or so.

EvilEgg: Wasn't it last week we learned that 2/3 of corporations pay no income tax?

No company pays taxes. It's just rolled into costs of goods sold and passed on to the end user.

Same with regulation fees and government permitting.

Hell I roll the cost of tolls into the costs.

Close the loopholes and stop handing "incentives" to industries that are so fat with sweaty cash that they can swim around in it Scrooge McDuck style.

kronicfeld: I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and assumed me meant that the dividend tax rate had been reduced to the capital gains rate

Not knowing anything about the various US tax rates, I had to go with the definiton of the words.

tchamber: Good. And it should be higher.

You do know that the evil corporations pass along their tax burden to you and I, right?

EvilEgg Wasn't it last week we learned that 2/3 of corporations pay no income tax?

Actually no. The article that was greenlighted was bullshiat. It's not true that 2/3 of corporations paid no taxes from 1998-2005. What the study said was that 2/3 of companies paid no tax in any given year. IOW, 2/3 of companies are either pass-through entities or had a year with a loss. There's a big difference there.

As far as this silly headline goes, corporate welfare should go away, but tax rates should be lowered too.

dogdaze: You do know that the evil corporations pass along their tax burden to you and I, right?

Actually, they tighten their own belts because they want to compete.

If all the competitors agree to raise their prices at the same time, it's called collusion.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: EvilEgg: Wasn't it last week we learned that 2/3 of corporations pay no income tax?

No company pays taxes. It's just rolled into costs of goods sold and passed on to the end user.

The statement by EvilEgg refers to the fact that 2/3 of the companies arrange things (usually legally) so it looks like they have 0 income, therefore 0 taxes to pay. There was a thread about it last week.

The remaining 1/3 do pay taxes. The Govt. sees that money.

While, it's true that they will factor those taxes into their cost structure, and that in the end, that money does comes from the consumer's pockets, saying that they don't pay taxes is incorrect.

Flab: Hmm, no. Actually, they pay income tax on the dividend. Capital gains tax is when you sell your shares for a profit.

Oh... I've always misunderstood that then. I was under the impression that capital gains were taxes on money made with money.

aden_nak: Close the loopholes and stop handing "incentives" to industries that are so fat with sweaty cash that they can swim around in it Scrooge McDuck style.

Look up the word: Boondoggle.

Sometimes countries, counties, and states will offer a little something something for a company to build a major factory (read: spend money on materials and labor) in a specific location. It's good business.

How does the corporate tax rate (loopholes aside) have anything to do with corporate welfare?

If you're billed $5 million a year in taxes, but just got a $5 million tax break, a $10 million bailout check because your industry is "lagging," or take advantage of $20 million local and state tax incentives to build in a certain area, or a $40 million farming subsidy, you're still getting your balls cupped by the government.

Okay, so can we stop with the corporate bailouts yet?

Etchy333: If all the competitors agree to raise their prices at the same time, it's called collusion.

Working in the building industry, I see this happening all the time. One manufacturer decides to increase their prices $1/msf, you can bet your sweet ass that the other big two will do exactly the same within a week or so. I don't know if that's collusion, but it sure seems like it. I see it all the time with steel and sheetrock. And if one backs off, the others will too.

Wow, I apologize for the sloppy sentence construction in my last post. I'm usually better than that. Parallel clause arrangement, dammit!

Flab: The statement by EvilEgg refers to the fact that 2/3 of the companies arrange things (usually legally) so it looks like they have 0 income, therefore 0 taxes to pay. There was a thread about it last week.

The remaining 1/3 do pay taxes. The Govt. sees that money.

While, it's true that they will factor those taxes into their cost structure, and that in the end, that money does comes from the consumer's pockets, saying that they don't pay taxes is incorrect.

Yeah I know its semantics. But it does not matter if the company in question writes a check to the federal government or not. If small company A does not right a check and large company B does write a check it really does not matter! Both companies are out zero dollars based on how they conduct commerce! The only way this is untrue is if a company does not take into account the tax burden when they are figuring their costs. And since a company that fails to do that will not be in business for long, its really not something you should take into account.

benlonghair: Working in the building industry, I see this happening all the time. One manufacturer decides to increase their prices $1/msf, you can bet your sweet ass that the other big two will do exactly the same within a week or so. I don't know if that's collusion, but it sure seems like it. I see it all the time with steel and sheetrock. And if one backs off, the others will too.

Oligopoly (pops)

OlafTheBent: GaryPDX: What? You guys actually own your property? Aren't those taxes just rent to the Crown?

Actually, my family had property in the Boston area which was seized by the fledgling American Government in 1790 or so.

We want it back now. I hear it might be worth something.

hahaha..bring the beer, it might take a while..:)

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Oligopoly (pops)

Interesting. I understand why they do it, especially now. If one of the big 3 (National Gysum, USG and GP) didn't go up, they'd be so flooded with business that they couldn't keep up. Still doesn't mean I think it's right.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: No company pays taxes. It's just rolled into costs of goods sold and passed on to the end user.

Same with regulation fees and government permitting.

Hell I roll the cost of tolls into the costs.

For about the millionth time, this is not how companies set the prices for goods.

The prices for goods (other than purely fungible commodities) are set by whatever gives us greatest return on the market.

When my company is making Widget Plus, we don't add up all of our production costs, taxes, etc, and then say, "And we'll add a 40% profit margin on that, and just hope people want to buy it at that price!"

We extensively research what price people will be willing to pay for a product before we begin selling it, and then target to price to maximize profit-- for some items, this means setting a very low individual profit and making it up in volume, for others it means setting a high price, shrinking the market but keeping individual sale profit high.

If an additional cost comes about during the process, we raise the price of the product as the absolutely last resort. We attempt to find an efficiency elsewhere, remove a feature that's costing the extra expense (and perhaps even lower the cost, then), or simply accept a smaller profit margin.


Why the fark people keep posting the ridiculous idea that companies just charge "cost + X" for a product, I have no idea. You make yoruself look like an idiot every time you do so.

/all corporate taxes should be abolished.

tchamber: Good. And it should be higher.

Because not enough production has already been moved overseas. Good idea.

OMG!!! THE HORROR!!!

Obdicut: If an additional cost comes about during the process, we raise the price of the product as the absolutely last resort. We attempt to find an efficiency elsewhere, remove a feature that's costing the extra expense (and perhaps even lower the cost, then), or simply accept a smaller profit margin.

Or, I might ad, we just cancel the product.

People pay taxes. Corporations don't. It's that simple.

bronyaur1: tchamber: Good. And it should be higher.

Because not enough production has already been moved overseas. Good idea.

Ain't globalization grand?