If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Warren Buffett: High corporate taxes are an American "myth"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 76
    More: Interesting, Warren Buffett, Americans, corporate tax  
•       •       •

1950 clicks; posted to Business » on 28 Feb 2012 at 9:09 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



76 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-28 08:21:35 AM
you mean corporations don't simply fill out a 1040EZ and pay the top rate???
 
2012-02-28 09:09:32 AM
Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?
 
2012-02-28 09:14:29 AM
OMG WELL I GESS THAT LIB-O-CRIT CAN PAY MORE IF HE WANTS 2
 
2012-02-28 09:22:01 AM
Isn't it that we have an "on-the-books" rate that's rather high (compared to say Europe) to make up for our lower individual tax rates, but that no one pays it?

/DNRTFA
 
2012-02-28 09:22:15 AM
"It's a myth that American corporations are paying 35 percent or anything like it," Buffett said, referring to the top marginal corporate tax rate. "Corporate taxes are not strangling American competitiveness."

The problem is not the rate, it's the complexity and the built-in corruption that comes with the corporate tax code.
 
2012-02-28 09:24:59 AM

meyerkev: Isn't it that we have an "on-the-books" rate that's rather high (compared to say Europe) to make up for our lower individual tax rates, but that no one pays it?


No one with enough lawyers and lobbyists.
 
2012-02-28 09:25:41 AM
No shiat.
 
2012-02-28 09:26:42 AM
A simple plan to fix the economy:


A Do Over
1. Everyone can keep up to one house.
2. All other assets pay for the military, free healthcare and a comfortable retirement for all Americans.
3. Mandatory retirement for everyone over the age of 55 effective immediately. 18 month exemption for police officers. Doctors, scientists, and engineers working in certain fields have a permanent exemption.
4. Free education.
5. Salaries for the military are doubled. (150% for "first responders")
6. All debts are null and void, sorry China, we're having a Do Over.



People forget that the economy isn't a natural phenomena. It is supposed to make everyone's lives easier.

/There is probably something in there that would fark things up in a way I can only imagine.
 
2012-02-28 09:28:06 AM
This is why we need fair taxes across the board. Set rates with no deductions for both personal and corporate. Also all money changing hands needs to be treated the same, i.e. as income, no special rates for capital gains or any of that other bullshiat.
 
2012-02-28 09:35:54 AM
Shaa, right. Next I suppose you'll tell me that reducing corporate taxes will not inspire companies to hire more people.
 
2012-02-28 09:36:38 AM

Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?


He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.
 
2012-02-28 09:38:42 AM

Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.


He probably knows something about supply and demand. You should look that one up.
 
2012-02-28 09:40:04 AM
Buffett's a farking hack.

/what else is new?
 
2012-02-28 09:41:02 AM
Oh. my

Lando Lincoln: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

He probably knows something about supply and demand. You should look that one up.


Oh, my . . . coporations do not pass-along their taxes to you out of the goodness of their own hearts. Don't let the Fark OWS crowd find out.
 
2012-02-28 09:42:35 AM

Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.


Not sure if serious, but tax burden falls on both producers and consumers and the burden is a function of elasticity of supply and demand.
 
2012-02-28 09:42:53 AM

Kit Carson: Oh. myLando Lincoln: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

He probably knows something about supply and demand. You should look that one up.

Oh, my . . . coporations do not pass-along their taxes to you out of the goodness of their own hearts. Don't let the Fark OWS crowd find out.


You're right, prices are not set by market forces but by tax rates.

\Actually you're wrong
\\and most likely a dumbass
 
2012-02-28 09:45:04 AM
You know what else is an american myth? That belief in getting after that american dream, becoming rich, and living that life. Does it happen? I'm sure it does in sparse numbers. Maybe about as often as a young black man makes it out of the ghetto through sports or entertainment. Which is weird because you have a shiat-ton of white people that would say 'Stop trying that dream, black men. It doesn't exist!' but will still believe that they are one step away from rolling in that american dream dough.
 
2012-02-28 09:45:12 AM

Gulper Eel: The problem is not the rate, it's the complexity and the built-in corruption that comes with the corporate tax code.


This is a good point, why hasn't anyone proposed solving this through a combination of lowering the corporate tax rate combined with closing a bunch of tax loopholes? It would both lower rates and reduce complexity...
 
2012-02-28 09:45:30 AM

dlp211: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

Not sure if serious, but tax burden falls on both producers and consumers and the burden is a function of elasticity of supply and demand.


That doesn't stop a corporation from attempting to pass all of its costs on to you. What's so difficult to understand?
 
2012-02-28 09:45:49 AM
I pay close to the 35% mark but then again I'm a small company with one principle shareholder....not a large company with billions of units of stock that I do all sorts of shennaigan magic with to avoid paying my fair share like Mr. Buffett.


Its funny how the guy who takes advantage of all the loopholes is looked upon as some sort of fair share spokesperson.
 
2012-02-28 09:46:57 AM

max_pooper: Kit Carson: Oh. myLando Lincoln: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

He probably knows something about supply and demand. You should look that one up.

Oh, my . . . coporations do not pass-along their taxes to you out of the goodness of their own hearts. Don't let the Fark OWS crowd find out.

You're right, prices are not set by market forces but by tax rates.

\Actually you're wrong
\\and most likely a dumbass


I see the "posting from my laptop while sitting in Econ 101" crowd has shown up.
 
2012-02-28 09:47:11 AM

Giltric: I pay close to the 35% mark but then again I'm a small company with one principle shareholder....not a large company with billions of units of stock that I do all sorts of shennaigan magic with to avoid paying my fair share like Mr. Buffett.

Its funny how the guy who takes advantage of all the loopholes is looked upon as some sort of fair share spokesperson.


This is a guy that wants the loopholes to close.
 
2012-02-28 09:47:24 AM

Kit Carson: dlp211: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

Not sure if serious, but tax burden falls on both producers and consumers and the burden is a function of elasticity of supply and demand.

That doesn't stop a corporation from attempting to pass all of its costs on to you. What's so difficult to understand?


That it is impossible for a corporation to pass it's costs onto you unless the corporation has significant market power and demand for the product is perfectly inelastic. Otherwise, the market will push the price towards equilibrium.
 
2012-02-28 09:48:56 AM

Slaves2Darkness: This is why we need fair taxes across the board. Set rates with no deductions for both personal and corporate. Also all money changing hands needs to be treated the same, i.e. as income, no special rates for capital gains or any of that other bullshiat.


There is no incentive to invest then. That's why the capitol gains tax is less than the income tax: To encourage the rich to reinvest their profits rather than simply taking the cash as salary. Of course, with the rich paying basically no income taxes these days, the old system is very broken.
 
2012-02-28 09:49:00 AM

threadjackistan: A simple plan to fix the economy:


A Do Over
1. Everyone can keep up to one house.
2. All other assets pay for the military, free healthcare and a comfortable retirement for all Americans.
3. Mandatory retirement for everyone over the age of 55 effective immediately. 18 month exemption for police officers. Doctors, scientists, and engineers working in certain fields have a permanent exemption.
4. Free education.
5. Salaries for the military are doubled. (150% for "first responders")
6. All debts are null and void, sorry China, we're having a Do Over.



People forget that the economy isn't a natural phenomena. It is supposed to make everyone's lives easier.

/There is probably something in there that would fark things up in a way I can only imagine.


Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahaah! Failed Econ 101 four times did we?

1. fark you I worked hard and paid for both houses, piss off you farking Commie. Alternatively if you manage to take away my assets I will openly revolt, in the streets shooting and burning shiat like schools, hospitals, and welfare offices to the ground until I am shot dead.

2. We are all ready paying for the military, healthcare for the poor, and retirement for
everyone. The only real problem we have is a revenue problem because one party refuses to acknowledge taxes must increase. I'm not sure what your biatch is here, unless of course it is that comfortable and who gets to decide that? Because comfortable to me would me a basically furnished government apartment, kitchen, bath, bedroom/living room about 600 sq ft. in a building with 10,000 other units all utilities paid, once a week grocery deliveries of government approved food, and health care provided by one on-site clinic.

3. ??? So, I'll be forced to retire at 55 and miss out on the 10 most profitable years of growth in my retirement plan, you know when my contributions are at their largest because I have worked my way up to a fat salary, I have the most invested in relatively save vehicles and will see the biggest returns because of the sheer size of my investments that took a almost 40 years to build up. Yeah your little plan farks everyone who has carefully built their careers and climbed up the corporate ladder.

4. Basic Education is free. Advanced education is heavily subsidized, and that is the problem. Essentially the student loan program gave colleges and universities free money, well free for them, so of course they increased their tuition to take advantage of the maximum amount of free money they could get.

5. Why? So you can feel good about it? Screw the military, we don't really have a problem filling those grunt positions now with what we are paying why the fark should we increase it? If anything we should invest more heavily in robots and automation to remove the human element, that way we can moderately increase salaries while massively decreasing the number of personnel needed. I mean just take a look at the new carrier class that is coming on line that reduces the crew size of the ship.

6. Guess who holds approximately 80% of the US debt, go on guess. What you have no clue? The people of the US. That is right far from being owned by China or any other foreign power most US debt is held by US citizens and companies. Guess what your little plan would do, the US credit rating gets slashed to C as not only do we screw over everybody, but for the first time in history the US defaults on it's debt, those US citizens and corporations who own that 80% are farked out of their money, and the economy fails banks are vaporize, buisness crash, the stock market craters, and panic sets in.

Your plan is the stupidest thing I've ever read on FARK and that is saying something.
 
2012-02-28 09:49:23 AM

Kit Carson: max_pooper: Kit Carson: Oh. myLando Lincoln: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

He probably knows something about supply and demand. You should look that one up.

Oh, my . . . coporations do not pass-along their taxes to you out of the goodness of their own hearts. Don't let the Fark OWS crowd find out.

You're right, prices are not set by market forces but by tax rates.

\Actually you're wrong
\\and most likely a dumbass

I see the "posting from my laptop while sitting in Econ 101" crowd has shown up.


Well any moran who has sat through at least one Econ 101 lecture without falling asleep can easily see that you don't know shiat about economics.
 
2012-02-28 09:50:12 AM

dlp211: Kit Carson: dlp211: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

Not sure if serious, but tax burden falls on both producers and consumers and the burden is a function of elasticity of supply and demand.

That doesn't stop a corporation from attempting to pass all of its costs on to you. What's so difficult to understand?

That it is impossible for a corporation to pass it's costs onto you unless the corporation has significant market power and demand for the product is perfectly inelastic. Otherwise, the market will push the price towards equilibrium.


Actually that was a bad retort, of course a corporation passes all it's costs onto you, otherwise it couldn't turn a profit. That said, a corporation can't raise it's profits simply by raising the price on it's product unless it has significant market power and the demand for the product is inelastic.
 
2012-02-28 09:50:28 AM

dlp211: Kit Carson: dlp211: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

Not sure if serious, but tax burden falls on both producers and consumers and the burden is a function of elasticity of supply and demand.

That doesn't stop a corporation from attempting to pass all of its costs on to you. What's so difficult to understand?

That it is impossible for a corporation to pass it's costs onto you unless the corporation has significant market power and demand for the product is perfectly inelastic. Otherwise, the market will push the price towards equilibrium.


And we all know that perfect competition is the rule, not the exception.
/sarc
//I guess Zucotti Park was a charade
 
2012-02-28 09:51:23 AM

Giltric: I pay close to the 35% mark but then again I'm a small company with one principle shareholder....not a large company with billions of units of stock that I do all sorts of shennaigan magic with to avoid paying my fair share like Mr. Buffett.


see, that is backwards. Small corporations with a small number of shareholders should pay the lowest rate... it provides the incentive to keep money in the business rather than distribute it to owners(as distributions would be taxed at a higher personal rate)
 
2012-02-28 09:56:38 AM

threadjackistan: Slaves2Darkness: This is why we need fair taxes across the board. Set rates with no deductions for both personal and corporate. Also all money changing hands needs to be treated the same, i.e. as income, no special rates for capital gains or any of that other bullshiat.

There is no incentive to invest then. That's why the capitol gains tax is less than the income tax: To encourage the rich to reinvest their profits rather than simply taking the cash as salary. Of course, with the rich paying basically no income taxes these days, the old system is very broken.


Incentives and rewards are the problem with the current tax system. Eliminate them, if you want to give welfare to investors don't hide in the tax code, call it what it is and set up the appropriate program. The biggest farking welfare queens in the US are not the poor or the middle class, but the rich and corporations with their tax breaks, government programs to encourage investing and jobs.

It is bull shiat if they don't want to invest to take advantage of the risk and reward that such activity provides to increase their money so the fark what? One of the problems we have in the economy is too much free government money. Also what is money good for? Beyond the amount that satisfies your wants and needs the only thing it is good for is acquiring more money.

Reduce spending by the government, tax breaks, and incentives will initially reduce the size of the economy quite a bit, but I maintain that it will increase the velocity of money as the government will not be taking as much out of the economy and using it to reward those who just hoard the money anyway.
 
2012-02-28 09:57:48 AM

Kit Carson: dlp211: Kit Carson: dlp211: Kit Carson: Howie Spankowitz: Pffffft...what would Warren Buffett know about corporations?

He doesn't appear to realize that corporations simply pass their taxes on to you.

Not sure if serious, but tax burden falls on both producers and consumers and the burden is a function of elasticity of supply and demand.

That doesn't stop a corporation from attempting to pass all of its costs on to you. What's so difficult to understand?

That it is impossible for a corporation to pass it's costs onto you unless the corporation has significant market power and demand for the product is perfectly inelastic. Otherwise, the market will push the price towards equilibrium.

And we all know that perfect competition is the rule, not the exception.
/sarc
//I guess Zucotti Park was a charade


No, perfect competition is not the rule, we both know that, but we also know that more markets are closer to perfect competition then not. But perfect competition is not needed in order to prevent undue market pricing even with fairly inelastic demand, as time causes demand to become more elastic and thus a higher price is detrimental longterm to the producer of the good.

Eliminating corporate taxes will have no effect on the selling price of goods, the salaries of employees(execs excluded), or a better overall welfare of the economy.
 
2012-02-28 09:58:19 AM

Lando Lincoln: Giltric: I pay close to the 35% mark but then again I'm a small company with one principle shareholder....not a large company with billions of units of stock that I do all sorts of shennaigan magic with to avoid paying my fair share like Mr. Buffett.

Its funny how the guy who takes advantage of all the loopholes is looked upon as some sort of fair share spokesperson.

This is a guy that wants the loopholes to close.


This is a guy who doesn't have to take advantage of the loopholes...just like I don't have to buy a gun for cash in a parking lot of a gun show without a background check.


Will the IRS send him a letter and say "Hey Warren, on your schedule 5 sub para 6 item 9 you know you could defer that loss and save 50 million dollars on your taxes this year?"

Cause the ATF isn't gonna tell me "Hey bud next time just buy it for cash in the parking lot and you won't have to go through our NICS check"

After all this time Warren has been in business this speedbump in his conscience just seems like too much theater.
 
2012-02-28 10:02:26 AM

threadjackistan: A simple plan to fix the economy:


A Do Over
1. Everyone can keep up to one house.
2. All other assets pay for the military, free healthcare and a comfortable retirement for all Americans.
3. Mandatory retirement for everyone over the age of 55 effective immediately. 18 month exemption for police officers. Doctors, scientists, and engineers working in certain fields have a permanent exemption.
4. Free education.
5. Salaries for the military are doubled. (150% for "first responders")
6. All debts are null and void, sorry China, we're having a Do Over.



People forget that the economy isn't a natural phenomena. It is supposed to make everyone's lives easier.

/There is probably something in there that would fark things up in a way I can only imagine.


I can appreciate your sentiment, but wow, that is one hopeless plan. Are we just going to sell all those seized assets (besides your up to one house, of course) to the pawn shop? So people without a house keep nothing? Why on earth does everyone over 55 have to retire? Do the doctors, scientists, and engineers working in certain fields have to work until they're dead? Do they have to do that just to provide everyone who isn't in those fields with their free retirement after 55? What about the free healthcare and education? Do you realize that canceling all US debt would cause the world's economy to collapse at the least and World War III at the worst? et cetera.
 
2012-02-28 10:09:07 AM
Slaves2Darkness:

1. Nice to know that your willing to make sacrifices and arent just in it to improve your own life at the expense of others.
2. Sounds like a prison.
3. As opposed to farking over everyone younger for the next forever?
4. Education isn't very subsidized for the students. Making education harder to pay for just squanders talent as does burying graduates under debt.
5. See your response to point 1. This point is just trying to get ahead of that problem.
6. Didn't all assets get seized in point one? So there really is nothing left to crater.

/Anyways, I'm just spit-balling here.
//How is my plan any worse than the wealthy's plan to burn us?
 
2012-02-28 10:11:21 AM

Kit Carson: That doesn't stop a corporation from attempting to pass all of its costs on to you. What's so difficult to understand?


If you raise taxes on consumers they just pass that on to corporations through decreased purchases and increased salary demands. So apparently it's impossible to tax anyone.
 
2012-02-28 10:11:54 AM

dlp211: Actually that was a bad retort, of course a corporation passes all it's costs onto you


No.

A good chunk are passed on to the corporation's own employees in the form of lower compensation, less-comprehensive benefits, all the way down to not fixing that farking pothole in the office parking lot until the CEO's car bottoms out in it.

Another chunk is passed on to investors (i.e. your pension/401(k)) in the form of weaker returns.

And then you get to higher prices and so forth.

The Homer Tax: Gulper Eel: The problem is not the rate, it's the complexity and the built-in corruption that comes with the corporate tax code.

This is a good point, why hasn't anyone proposed solving this through a combination of lowering the corporate tax rate combined with closing a bunch of tax loopholes? It would both lower rates and reduce complexity...


The measure passes, everybody pats each other on the back, and two years later all the loopholes are back and then some. An excellent idea if you are a politician pandering to the suckers who will put you over the magic 50-percent mark.

The tax and its accompanying subsidies should be zeroed out. Seeing as corporate tax collections are decreasing while subsidies keep chugging along, it's likely a better deal than we think it is.
 
2012-02-28 10:15:03 AM

Giltric: I pay close to the 35% mark but then again I'm a small company with one principle shareholder....not a large company with billions of units of stock that I do all sorts of shennaigan magic with to avoid paying my fair share like Mr. Buffett.


Its funny how the guy who takes advantage of all the loopholes is looked upon as some sort of fair share spokesperson.


It's because he's not whining "Boo hoo, class warfare! The mean poor people want me to actually pay taxes! Poor widdle me!" unlike certain candidates, congresspeople, pundits, and farkers.
 
2012-02-28 10:16:35 AM

Gulper Eel: dlp211: Actually that was a bad retort, of course a corporation passes all it's costs onto you

No.

A good chunk are passed on to the corporation's own employees in the form of lower compensation, less-comprehensive benefits, all the way down to not fixing that farking pothole in the office parking lot until the CEO's car bottoms out in it.

Another chunk is passed on to investors (i.e. your pension/401(k)) in the form of weaker returns.

And then you get to higher prices and so forth.

The Homer Tax: Gulper Eel: The problem is not the rate, it's the complexity and the built-in corruption that comes with the corporate tax code.

This is a good point, why hasn't anyone proposed solving this through a combination of lowering the corporate tax rate combined with closing a bunch of tax loopholes? It would both lower rates and reduce complexity...

The measure passes, everybody pats each other on the back, and two years later all the loopholes are back and then some. An excellent idea if you are a politician pandering to the suckers who will put you over the magic 50-percent mark.

The tax and its accompanying subsidies should be zeroed out. Seeing as corporate tax collections are decreasing while subsidies keep chugging along, it's likely a better deal than we think it is.


LOL, you actually believe that don't you.
 
2012-02-28 10:21:50 AM

itsdan: Kit Carson: That doesn't stop a corporation from attempting to pass all of its costs on to you. What's so difficult to understand?

If you raise taxes on consumers they just pass that on to corporations through decreased purchases and increased salary demands. So apparently it's impossible to tax anyone.


The stupid, it burns. Now someone who failed Accounting has chimed in.

(No one is talking about eliminating corporate taxes. Taxes simply are a cost that corporations try to pass-along to you. What difference does it make if a corporation only succeeds in passing a portion of them along? What happens to that portion when taxes are raised? Heck, that's not even econ, it's math.)
 
2012-02-28 10:24:52 AM

Gulper Eel: The tax and its accompanying subsidies should be zeroed out. Seeing as corporate tax collections are decreasing while subsidies keep chugging along, it's likely a better deal than we think it is.


Corporations should pay zero taxes?

Okay then....
 
2012-02-28 10:26:57 AM

Kit Carson: (No one is talking about eliminating corporate taxes


Someone in this very thread is, actually.

Kit Carson: What happens to that portion when taxes are raised? Heck, that's not even econ, it's math.


What happens to that portion when the taxes are lowered? I don't know, ask anyone who has bought a plane ticket in the last year.
 
2012-02-28 10:33:18 AM

Kit Carson: The stupid, it burns. Now someone who failed Accounting has chimed in.

(No one is talking about eliminating corporate taxes. Taxes simply are a cost that corporations try to pass-along to you. What difference does it make if a corporation only succeeds in passing a portion of them along? What happens to that portion when taxes are raised? Heck, that's not even econ, it's math.)



I wasn't saying eliminate corporate taxes, but you said raising taxes on corporations just leads to more costs being passed on to the consumer. I'd like to know why we don't apply the same logic to consumers? If you raise their taxes there's less money to give corporations. If you lower their taxes, for those in lower income brackets anyways, they'll spend all that extra cash where? Corporations. So if we raise taxes on corporations to keep consumer taxes the same or even lower them, they'll get more business which will offset their increased taxes. And of course if average worker taxes go up those workers will just demand higher salaries, the same way corporations can just demand higher prices for their goods.

If I fail at math/accounting, bear in mind I'm just applying your logic to a larger group.
 
2012-02-28 10:33:55 AM

dlp211: LOL, you actually believe that don't you.


I can provide multiple citations on the long-term decline in federal corporate tax revenue.

Note also that the Times article indicates that Buffett is incorrect (or should at least provide citation) in his contention that the effective US tax rate is low compared to other industrialized countries.
 
2012-02-28 10:42:54 AM

The Homer Tax: Gulper Eel: The tax and its accompanying subsidies should be zeroed out. Seeing as corporate tax collections are decreasing while subsidies keep chugging along, it's likely a better deal than we think it is.

Corporations should pay zero taxes?

Okay then....


You left out the second half - they should receive zero subsidies as well.

All the activity corporations go through to comply with and influence the ever-shifting tax code adds nothing to our economy; all it does is hide the true cost of government in a way that no citizen can have a prayer of calculating what they're really paying.

And who does this state of affairs fark over the most? The poor. Corporate taxes aren't entirely passed on in the cost of goods and services, but the amount that is passed along has the effect of a sales tax. I've seen some studies indicating that the hidden tax is in the 20-30% range, but let's assume for argument's sake that those studies are a load of exaggerated wharr. Even so, a hidden tax of just 2-3% on a working household living hand-to-mouth spending (lowball) 30 grand a year comes to $600-900 a year in hidden tax.

Which they can't pass on to anybody.
 
2012-02-28 10:48:07 AM

Gulper Eel: dlp211: LOL, you actually believe that don't you.

I can provide multiple citations on the long-term decline in federal corporate tax revenue.

Note also that the Times article indicates that Buffett is incorrect (or should at least provide citation) in his contention that the effective US tax rate is low compared to other industrialized countries.


I speaking about the idea that lower corporate taxes are passed on to employees and consumers. I don't disagree that corporations are reducing their tax burden every chance you get, but I will also point out that they aren't passing the savings along to us. I completely support eliminating subsidies and loopholes. I don't support eliminating corporate taxes or gov't backed loans.
 
2012-02-28 10:51:06 AM
CLASS WARFARE!!
 
2012-02-28 11:01:19 AM

dlp211: I completely support eliminating subsidies and loopholes. I don't support eliminating corporate taxes or gov't backed loans.


For every tax, there will be loopholes. It's politically inescapable. The only way to win this game is not to play it.

What kind of business is going to turn down having their tax bill, tax-lobbying and tax-compliance costs drop to zero...apart from the ones that have successfully corrupted the existing code?
 
2012-02-28 11:23:16 AM

Gulper Eel: dlp211: I completely support eliminating subsidies and loopholes. I don't support eliminating corporate taxes or gov't backed loans.

For every tax, there will be loopholes. It's politically inescapable. The only way to win this game is not to play it.

What kind of business is going to turn down having their tax bill, tax-lobbying and tax-compliance costs drop to zero...apart from the ones that have successfully corrupted the existing code?


You seem to believe that eliminating the taxes will eliminate the subsidies and loopholes. If there is one thing that we should have learned in the last 30 years, corporations will bilk the gov't for every cent they can.

Eliminating taxes altogether would just put the American taxpayer out of more of their own cash. There isn't a simple, politically feasible solution, and in the end we are all farked.

When politicians first have the willpower to eliminate subsidies and loopholes, then we can talk about the tax rate, not the other way around.
 
2012-02-28 11:28:43 AM

dlp211: You seem to believe that eliminating the taxes will eliminate the subsidies and loopholes.


Lord, no. They work hand-in-hand, they should disappear hand-in-hand.
 
2012-02-28 11:31:19 AM

dlp211: You seem to believe that eliminating the taxes will eliminate the subsidies and loopholes. If there is one thing that we should have learned in the last 30 years, corporations will bilk the gov't for every cent they can.


You think way too myopically.

The problem stems from the government having the power to tax income in the first place. Replace it with a consumption tax with a subsidy for spending up to the poverty level - like the FairTax does - and the problems associated with an income tax (marginal rates vs. effective rates/lobbying for loopholes/etc.) go away.
 
Displayed 50 of 76 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report