Pages:
Author

Topic: Janet Yellen to call for unified global corporate tax rate - page 2. (Read 672 times)

hero member
Activity: 2548
Merit: 950
fly or die
First of all a country should have companies that serve the population and other companies of that country. International competition comes later and shouldn't be a major part of any economy. If a country lives from attracting foreign companies, that country is a freeloader, making tax revenue go down everywhere. To the benefit of very few people.

LOL.. this is one of the funniest posts I ever saw in the Economics section of this forum. Dude.. this is a free world. People and companies are free to move anywhere of their liking. There are countries in the world where there is no corporate tax or income tax. I am talking about countries such as Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait. And countries such as Qatar are among the richest countries in the world, and they don't really need to attract anyone. Once again, crying about your tax revenue going down is not going to help. On one hand, you elect socialists such as Kamala Harris and Janet Yellen to power and then you complain that the companies are moving out.

What do Bahrain, Qatar or Kuwait bring to the world ? Do they make Nobel peace prize scientists ? Do they advance peace ? Do they even treat people living in these countries well ?

These countries can't exist and can't function without real countries doing the real work. Hence, freeloaders.

Mauser : of course money knows borders. If things escalate, money can stop flowing. It didn't flow that well until the 80's. Plenty of countries today have capital controls, ban foreign ownership of companies and real estate, etc.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
I don't think it's possible to find a solution for all the G20, even if 18 or 19 countries agree then there are a lot of advantages for one country to disagree. Money doesn't know borders and will always relocate to the most attractive countries. There are so many loopholes in tax laws which is why the big tax consultantancies are making so much money. In my opinion the best approach would be to simplify the tax laws tremendously. But this seems utopic at the moment.

Even if all the G20 nations agree on a uniform tax rate, it will not resolve the issue. Currently there are 193 nations that have United Nations membership. On top of this, we have dozens of unrecognized countries and territories which have their own tax structure. The US have no right to decide on the tax structure of foreign countries. If they are unable to compete with the other countries, then they should cancel their membership to the World Trade Organization (WTO) and ban the imports of foreign produce to their territory. The demand that other countries should adjust their tax structure with the US is laughable at the best. And let's not forget the fact that the demand came after US increased the tax rate from 21% to 28%. Previously they had no issue with this. Yellen is wrong if she thinks that the other countries will dance to her whims and fancies.
hero member
Activity: 1974
Merit: 534
President Trump makes a wonderful decision by reducing the corporate tax to 21% and in the season when the pandemic has caused alot of damage there's a need for an increase of corporate tax but the 28% seems too big and I think 25% will still be fair.

I don't understand the rules and regulations the G20 nation use to operate but countries like Puerto Rico will suffer if they comply with the plan to increase global corporate tax and I don't think it will fair to them if they are forced to comply.



I don't think it's possible to find a solution for all the G20, even if 18 or 19 countries agree then there are a lot of advantages for one country to disagree. Money doesn't know borders and will always relocate to the most attractive countries. There are so many loopholes in tax laws which is why the big tax consultantancies are making so much money. In my opinion the best approach would be to simplify the tax laws tremendously. But this seems utopic at the moment.
hero member
Activity: 1834
Merit: 566
President Trump makes a wonderful decision by reducing the corporate tax to 21% and in the season when the pandemic has caused alot of damage there's a need for an increase of corporate tax but the 28% seems too big and I think 25% will still be fair.

I don't understand the rules and regulations the G20 nation use to operate but countries like Puerto Rico will suffer if they comply with the plan to increase global corporate tax and I don't think it will fair to them if they are forced to comply.

legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
First of all a country should have companies that serve the population and other companies of that country. International competition comes later and shouldn't be a major part of any economy. If a country lives from attracting foreign companies, that country is a freeloader, making tax revenue go down everywhere. To the benefit of very few people.

LOL.. this is one of the funniest posts I ever saw in the Economics section of this forum. Dude.. this is a free world. People and companies are free to move anywhere of their liking. There are countries in the world where there is no corporate tax or income tax. I am talking about countries such as Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait. And countries such as Qatar are among the richest countries in the world, and they don't really need to attract anyone. Once again, crying about your tax revenue going down is not going to help. On one hand, you elect socialists such as Kamala Harris and Janet Yellen to power and then you complain that the companies are moving out.
hero member
Activity: 2548
Merit: 950
fly or die
How to unify corporate tax globally. Each country has an economic structure, a different economic environment, the application of corporate tax affects other issues in the overall national policy. Not to mention that each country has different geographical locations, so the tax rates between countries must be different to ensure that countries have competition in attracting businesses.

First of all a country should have companies that serve the population and other companies of that country. International competition comes later and shouldn't be a major part of any economy. If a country lives from attracting foreign companies, that country is a freeloader, making tax revenue go down everywhere. To the benefit of very few people.
legendary
Activity: 3346
Merit: 1352
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
The problem is not democrat party or republican party, that has been established long time ago, it is known for the past 30 years, USA is a nation with "2" parties but the reality is that they are basically the same and nothing changes. Why? Because both of them use the tax income wrongfully and they do not use it directly helping the people. Look at the military budget, Bush increased it, then Obama got elected and increased it, then Trump got elected and increased it, then Biden got elected and increased it, now it is nearly getting to 800 billion dollars a year, do you know what you can do with that?

You can solve almost every problem in all of USA if you used that directly helping to people, it would seriously be enough to cover half of all universal health care and also if you cap pharma companies charging idiotic prices that would be enough to cover every single person who got sick, from flu to end level cancer. This is not democratic or republican, it is problem with politicians.

I read a few days back that the American intervention in Afghanistan cost the tax payers more than $1 trillion. And a few years back, it was being said that the bill for Iraq intervention has passed $2 trillion level (now it must be even higher). And then there are additional bills to be paid from countries such as Libya, Syria and Kosovo. Without all these foreign interventions, I assume that the American federal debt would have been at least 50% lower. But then it would be bad for private corporations such as Raytheon and Boeing, whose revenues depend on these military interventions.
legendary
Activity: 3052
Merit: 1188
Although I don't think that individuals in large numbers will move from one country to another due to high tax rates, in the long term it will only make the employees unproductive. Also, before Yellen talks about a unified global tax rate, she should look towards unifying income tax within the United States. Because it differs from state to state. In states like California, the combined state+federal income tax is >50% for the top most group, while in Republican states such as Texas and Wyoming, it is 37%.

And the irony is that California is bankrupt, due to incompetent and corrupt handling of the tax revenue, while TX is in a relatively better position.

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2020/05/10/california-just-revealed-a-543-billion-deficit--signaling-deep-cuts-ahead
The problem is not democrat party or republican party, that has been established long time ago, it is known for the past 30 years, USA is a nation with "2" parties but the reality is that they are basically the same and nothing changes. Why? Because both of them use the tax income wrongfully and they do not use it directly helping the people. Look at the military budget, Bush increased it, then Obama got elected and increased it, then Trump got elected and increased it, then Biden got elected and increased it, now it is nearly getting to 800 billion dollars a year, do you know what you can do with that?

You can solve almost every problem in all of USA if you used that directly helping to people, it would seriously be enough to cover half of all universal health care and also if you cap pharma companies charging idiotic prices that would be enough to cover every single person who got sick, from flu to end level cancer. This is not democratic or republican, it is problem with politicians.
sr. member
Activity: 1988
Merit: 453
You are talking about the Laffer curve, the concept is accepted as true but economists are always arguing about what is its actual shape, governments seem to think that they can push taxes higher and higher and that they are going to get more revenue, but as you said it comes to a point in which people begin to think about whether it is worth for them to keep working so hard when they are getting so little out of it, in that case it is better to do something else that you enjoy and not work as hard, very high taxes like the ones we are seeing today are one of the reasons why the economy is in such a bad shape.

Agreed. Although I don't think that individuals in large numbers will move from one country to another due to high tax rates, in the long term it will only make the employees unproductive. Also, before Yellen talks about a unified global tax rate, she should look towards unifying income tax within the United States. Because it differs from state to state. In states like California, the combined state+federal income tax is >50% for the top most group, while in Republican states such as Texas and Wyoming, it is 37%.

And the irony is that California is bankrupt, due to incompetent and corrupt handling of the tax revenue, while TX is in a relatively better position.

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2020/05/10/california-just-revealed-a-543-billion-deficit--signaling-deep-cuts-ahead
member
Activity: 490
Merit: 11
How to unify corporate tax globally. Each country has an economic structure, a different economic environment, the application of corporate tax affects other issues in the overall national policy. Not to mention that each country has different geographical locations, so the tax rates between countries must be different to ensure that countries have competition in attracting businesses.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 1288
It will never happen. Only chance for her to make it happen is to send tanks enforce it. Countries will keep compete with taxes as they do right now. That is how capitalism work.  Let her rather call fro unified demolishing of all nuclear weapons. It would have the same result.
hero member
Activity: 1274
Merit: 622
While I think that a global corporate tax is a good idea, because it's fairer and will prevent companies from doing business in other countries, where it's cheaper, I doubt that many will agree to that. Like you said, it's an economical advantage for them, why should they lose this opportunity, so that the US can make more money? I fear that Biden's decision to impose higher taxes may turn out bad and scare away corporations. 
legendary
Activity: 3948
Merit: 3191
Leave no FUD unchallenged
There are more rich people than ever, and they're richer than ever, new billionaires every day, but taxes are too high ? Are you using some drug when writing this ?

100% this.  If the economy is in a bad shape, it's because the wealthiest people are sitting on more money than they could spend in a lifetime.  The money doesn't flow.  Those who would spend their money back into the economy (assuming they had any) barely have enough to live on.  Many people can hardly afford the bare essentials, let alone any luxuries they might crave.  I live in a nation that is supposedly a first world country, but they fudge the employment figures with zero-hour contracts.  People aren't really working to the extent the government like to pretend they are, but everyone plays along for reasons I still can't fathom.  Then they pretend inflation is only a few percent, but they conveniently ignore half the things people need to buy in order to live because, if they include those things, inflation would be a number that makes the government look as though they're handling the economy poorly.  Obviously we can't have that, so fudge those numbers too.  All the while, they're doing deals to sell public assets, to private companies (which they just so happen to have a connection with) and pocket the difference.  All in the name of capitalism.  Except it isn't anything remotely like capitalism anymore.  It's just corruption and thievery.  A crime syndicate in all but name.  

But yes, all the brainwashed people in this topic can keep bleating about a tax increase that's still lower overall than what many other nations already have.  Hell, back in the '80s, most places had a ~40% corporate tax.  I'm sure all these prognostications of mass corporate exodus are a little far-fetched if the US raise it to 28%.  
hero member
Activity: 2548
Merit: 950
fly or die
There are more rich people than ever, and they're richer than ever, new billionaires every day, but taxes are too high ? Are you using some drug when writing this ?
legendary
Activity: 2534
Merit: 1338
At 400K in the US you're in the top 2%, close to the 1%. That's not middle class.

In cities such as Los Angeles and San Francisco, 200K is not a big amount (that's what they get after the tax cut). And earning 400K in a city such as LA or SF can be much different from earning the same amount in a smaller and more affordable city such as Omaha or Memphis. If you further increase the taxes to 70% or 80%, then what is the point in working so hard? Instead of working for 40 hours a week and earning $400,000, I can opt to work for 20 hours a week and earn $200,000. These sort of insane taxes will only encourage unproductive activity.
You are talking about the Laffer curve, the concept is accepted as true but economists are always arguing about what is its actual shape, governments seem to think that they can push taxes higher and higher and that they are going to get more revenue, but as you said it comes to a point in which people begin to think about whether it is worth for them to keep working so hard when they are getting so little out of it, in that case it is better to do something else that you enjoy and not work as hard, very high taxes like the ones we are seeing today are one of the reasons why the economy is in such a bad shape.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
It isn't that easy to move your base of operations,that is why they are doing this because they know that it will be difficult for companies to get out and the only way that they can prevent this kind of thing from happening is when they lobby the Senators and the right people to protect their interest.

May not be easy. But definitely not impossible. Why do you think that reptilian overlord Yellen made such a statement? Being one of the most authoritarian individuals in the US government right now, if it was possible then she would have prohibited the companies from using this loophole. But it is not practical. The world is becoming smaller and smaller and the companies are finding it easier to relocate. Now it is up to the regimes to attract them by lowering the tax rate.
member
Activity: 1120
Merit: 68
This doesn't make sense to me at all, I mean if you are actually rising it to a level where corporations are leaving the nation, then charge them even more if they ever want to work with USA people, simple as that. Let's say you start to charge Google a lot more money, and then they decide to relocate to Ireland, if google ever wants to make money from USA citizens, they will have to pay 50% for all the USA based income, simple as that.
It isn't that easy to move your base of operations,that is why they are doing this because they know that it will be difficult for companies to get out and the only way that they can prevent this kind of thing from happening is when they lobby the Senators and the right people to protect their interest.
hero member
Activity: 2688
Merit: 588
This doesn't make sense to me at all, I mean if you are actually rising it to a level where corporations are leaving the nation, then charge them even more if they ever want to work with USA people, simple as that. Let's say you start to charge Google a lot more money, and then they decide to relocate to Ireland, if google ever wants to make money from USA citizens, they will have to pay 50% for all the USA based income, simple as that.

If you do that, you are going to either collect more taxes that way, or they will decide not to leave and you get your raise without them leaving. These companies relocate to other nations a lot and they get away with it because they are based on other nations, a very high foreign company policy would solve all of these problems but unfortunately politicians gets bribed and that notion gets deleted right away.
sr. member
Activity: 1988
Merit: 453
At 400K in the US you're in the top 2%, close to the 1%. That's not middle class.

Here in India, the top most slab (43%) kicks in if you earn more than $665,000. But very few people will come under that category. And here only around 2% of the population pays any income tax. Agricultural income is exempt from income tax, and more than half of the population is consisted of farmers. Those who earn less than $6,700 per year don't have to pay any income tax (that amounts to more than 90% of the population). If you take a home loan and go for 80C and reimbursements, then you can avoid income tax even if you earn around $12,000 per year. 
hero member
Activity: 1414
Merit: 574
Instead of working for 40 hours a week and earning $400,000, I can opt to work for 20 hours a week and earn $200,000. These sort of insane taxes will only encourage unproductive activity.

Why do you equate time not spent getting paid with being "unproductive"?  There are plenty of worthwhile things you can do with your time that don't involve making yourself financially wealthier.  Is money really the only thing you care about?  Are there no other motivations to spur you on? 

Actually, if talking only about money, a person's motivation for life is a relative reason and even he is not the only one like that.  There are many people who don't use their idle time as lazy and unproductive time.  Likewise those of you who fill your time with a lot of positive things even though they don't make money, and this is also not wrong.  I see both sides that cannot be blamed on each other.  It goes back to their respective choices.  But here the problem is that taxes are so high that people become demotivated to earn more.  The higher the income, the higher the tax issued.  Even though people have worked very hard to produce that high income.  The government with its various agendas regulates unilateral policies on behalf of government programs.  And the most annoying thing is that even the matters of private assets become interference by the government.  This is the weakness of a centralized economy.
Pages:
Jump to: