Obama: 'tax Inversions' Are Unpatriotic

Eorzea Time
 
 
 
Language: JP EN FR DE
Version 3.1
New Items
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Obama: 'tax inversions' are unpatriotic
Obama: 'tax inversions' are unpatriotic
First Page 2 3
 Odin.Godofgods
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3993
By Odin.Godofgods 2014-07-26 12:08:52
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says a loophole that lets companies dodge U.S. taxes by moving their headquarters overseas is unpatriotic.

Obama is denouncing "tax inversions" in his weekly radio and Internet address. He says companies are essentially renouncing their citizenship to avoid paying their fair share.

Obama says the best way to address the problem is through tax reform that lowers the corporate tax rate. But he says the problem can't wait. He's urging lawmakers to join the effort to close the loophole.

Obama says Americans don't get to pick which rules they follow and neither should companies.

In the Republican address, congressman Steve Daines of Montana says Obama is waging a war on the middle class. He's calling for the Senate to pass House-approved jobs bills.

Source
 Odin.Godofgods
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3993
By Odin.Godofgods 2014-07-26 12:10:31
Link | Quote | Reply
 
While the idea of companies going over seas is something that the avg person would see and get behind, i cant help but notice this line:

Odin.Godofgods said: »
Obama says the best way to address the problem is through tax reform that lowers the corporate tax rate.

Seems like an "reason" (more like a twisted excuse) to lower taxes for corporations.
Online
Posts: 42635
By Jetackuu 2014-07-26 12:13:59
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I'd say the best way to resolve it would be to eliminate the NAFTA, but hey.
[+]
 Odin.Zicdeh
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 6558
By Odin.Zicdeh 2014-07-26 13:07:57
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Capitalism, downfall...


Prophetic last words, but from whom?!
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-07-26 13:27:27
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Zicdeh said: »
Capitalism, downfall...


Prophetic last words, but from whom?!

Bill Gates ?
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-07-26 13:35:13
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Capitalist approach to reforming capitalism... Sorry, Obama, this is why we call you ineffective. The only way companies are going to take this bait is if it lowers their liability even more. If you want to address this particular issue, all business that takes place between a company or individual located within the US will need to be held to a standard rate, but that will discourage truly foreign companies from doing business within the US. This is one example of why purely capitalist approaches just do not work in real life.
[+]
 Bahamut.Zangada
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: zangada
Posts: 383
By Bahamut.Zangada 2014-07-26 13:36:35
Link | Quote | Reply
 
But it's patriotic to request 4 billion dollars for illegals.
[+]
 Bismarck.Bloodrose
Offline
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
user: Bloodrose
Posts: 4322
By Bismarck.Bloodrose 2014-07-26 13:39:47
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Zangada said: »
But it's patriotic to request 4 billion dollars for illegals.
It would be unpatriotic to go behind Congress to allocate that 3.7billion dollars with an Executive Order before going to Congress to approve, or disapprove, of the Emergency Spending.

And Ultimately, around 80-90% of those illegals will end up being sent back to their host countries, while the remaining 10-20% will have filled out the proper documents, and have a host family to look after them, legally.
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-07-26 13:51:29
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Zangada said: »
But it's patriotic to request 4 billion dollars for illegals.

Dealing with "illegals" is the least efficient way to deal with the problem. We spend billions on additional border security, housing, medical care, deportation procedings, etc every year.

Anyone who wants to deal with illegal immigration needs to deal with LEGAL immigration first. I would encourage everyone to take a look at USCIS/DOHS forms and procedures for resident visas and long-term status. Immigrating to the US is ridiculously expensive and difficult. Until legal immigration is feasible, illegal immigration will be a problem.
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-07-26 14:53:09
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Godofgods said: »
Quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says a loophole that lets companies dodge U.S. taxes by moving their headquarters overseas is unpatriotic.

Obama is denouncing "tax inversions" in his weekly radio and Internet address. He says companies are essentially renouncing their citizenship to avoid paying their fair share.

Obama says the best way to address the problem is through tax reform that lowers the corporate tax rate. But he says the problem can't wait. He's urging lawmakers to join the effort to close the loophole.

Obama says Americans don't get to pick which rules they follow and neither should companies.

In the Republican address, congressman Steve Daines of Montana says Obama is waging a war on the middle class. He's calling for the Senate to pass House-approved jobs bills.

Source
And what is his plan on adverting companies from relocating their offices overseas or creating subsidiaries that manufacture overseas and sell to domestic parent companies?

Oh right, going around all tax treaties that the US have made to other nations and collect taxes on foreign income made outside of the US, while demanding that the foreign nations collect on their behalf and deposit the money into the federal bank account.

Seem's illegal, doesn't it?

well....hi2u FATCA.

(psst, you want to know who's responsible for this bill? This was passed with ACA and HIRE Acts in 2010, so....Bush's fault!)
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2014-07-27 08:13:44
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Zangada said: »
But it's patriotic to request 4 billion dollars for illegals.

4 billion I spend that much on aftershave.
Offline
Posts: 55
By Yuukari 2014-07-27 08:51:16
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Jetackuu said: »
I'd say the best way to resolve it would be to eliminate the NAFTA, but hey.


'Nother Afternoon *** That ***.
 Cerberus.Doctorugh
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: Doctorugh
Posts: 317
By Cerberus.Doctorugh 2014-07-27 09:17:52
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Taxing corporations is just flat out stupid. If they wish to achieve whatever profit they are going for its simply added into their cost to the end consumer. The reason corporations are taxed (rather than raising sales or income tax on individuals), is because the government has a fall guy in between to take the political hit. "O noes greedy corps. not paying their 'fair share'"

A couple quick questions for those who don't understand:

Who monetarily benefits from "big tobacco" more? The government coffers (who simply collect) or the people who actually work and take risk for profit?

Who monetarily benefits from "big oil" more? The government coffers (who simply collect) or people who actually work and take risk for profit?
[+]
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-07-27 09:50:46
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Industries that require regulation should be taxed in a way that keeps the regulatory costs off the backs of the government. But, at this point, the government has grown too large to be supported by only private citizens.
[+]
 Garuda.Chanti
Online
Server: Garuda
Game: FFXI
user: Chanti
Posts: 11097
By Garuda.Chanti 2014-07-27 09:52:41
Link | Quote | Reply
 
The answer is fairly simple.

The government should not purchase any products, nor grant any contracts to foreign corporations unless there is no alternative*. Any corporation that offshores has all government contracts and purchases instantly voided.

*Like the British harrier aircraft for instance.
 Bahamut.Milamber
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: milamber
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-07-27 09:55:21
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Cerberus.Doctorugh said: »
Taxing corporations is just flat out stupid. If they wish to achieve whatever profit they are going for its simply added into their cost to the end consumer. The reason corporations are taxed (rather than raising sales or income tax on individuals), is because the government has a fall guy in between to take the political hit. "O noes greedy corps. not paying their 'fair share'"
This logic can be inverted by swapping corporations and individuals, and still applies.
It's a silly argument.
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-07-27 12:47:44
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Cerberus.Doctorugh said: »
Taxing corporations is just flat out stupid. If they wish to achieve whatever profit they are going for its simply added into their cost to the end consumer. The reason corporations are taxed (rather than raising sales or income tax on individuals), is because the government has a fall guy in between to take the political hit. "O noes greedy corps. not paying their 'fair share'"

A couple quick questions for those who don't understand:

Who monetarily benefits from "big tobacco" more? The government coffers (who simply collect) or the people who actually work and take risk for profit?

Who monetarily benefits from "big oil" more? The government coffers (who simply collect) or people who actually work and take risk for profit?
Believe it or not, most companies, especially the successful ones, are taxed at individual rates.

I'm not talking about the Walmarts or the Costcos, or even the Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft companies. I'm talking about your local grocery store (unless it is a major brand like Kroger), your gas station, your mechanic, your tax accountant, your florist, your favorite restaurant, and so on.

Unless they are structured as a "C" corporation, they are taxed at the highest rates (federally and state). That isn't including any industry specific taxes either (Medical Device Excise Tax for one example). The reason behind people not making their companies as "C" corporations is that the owners do not want to get taxed twice on their earnings, once for making the money through their business, another time for taking the money as a distribution (called "stock dividends"). There is no provision in the US IRC that prevents double taxation on "C" corporation shareholders who are active participants of their business.

So, if you think that corporations should be taxed at all, then you would have to admit that the individuals should not be taxed either, since a great portion of them are taxed at their individual rates and reported on their 1040.

Odin.Jassik said: »
Industries that require regulation should be taxed in a way that keeps the regulatory costs off the backs of the government. But, at this point, the government has grown too large to be supported by only private citizens.
Then what is to prevent the government from making excess regulations as a way to create more federal revenue?

"Oh, you run a gas station? Let me create a gas station regulation and charge you for us making sure you conform to said regulations."

And you think government corruption is bad now?

Garuda.Chanti said: »
The answer is fairly simple.

The government should not purchase any products, nor grant any contracts to foreign corporations unless there is no alternative*. Any corporation that offshores has all government contracts and purchases instantly voided.

*Like the British harrier aircraft for instance.
Believe it or not, most government contracts are locally* made.

*locally refers to the region, not the country in whole. A California corporation or partnership that only does business in California and Nevada would not be eligible to bid on a government contract in Florida. And I'm assuming you are talking about Federal contracts too.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-07-27 12:48:21
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Cerberus.Doctorugh said: »
Taxing corporations is just flat out stupid. If they wish to achieve whatever profit they are going for its simply added into their cost to the end consumer. The reason corporations are taxed (rather than raising sales or income tax on individuals), is because the government has a fall guy in between to take the political hit. "O noes greedy corps. not paying their 'fair share'"
This logic can be inverted by swapping corporations and individuals, and still applies.
It's a silly argument.
In most cases, they are one and the same.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-07-27 12:54:12
Link | Quote | Reply
 
You know, I'm actually surprised that nobody has anything to say in defense of FATCA....

I for one would have expected Pleebo to defend it. Maybe Kara and Zero, but Pleebo most likely.
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-07-27 13:07:44
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Industries that require regulation should be taxed in a way that keeps the regulatory costs off the backs of the government. But, at this point, the government has grown too large to be supported by only private citizens.
Then what is to prevent the government from making excess regulations as a way to create more federal revenue?

"Oh, you run a gas station? Let me create a gas station regulation and charge you for us making sure you conform to said regulations."

And you think government corruption is bad now?

Do you think before arguing or do you just argue for argument's sake? Regulation is established by congress, where the money comes from is irrelevant to the threat of overregulation. If anything, compartmentalizing funding is a better way to limit the scope of regulation. As well, when companies do a better job of self-regulation, their liabilities decrease and less oversight is needed. That's about as capitalist as you can get.
[+]
Online
Posts: 42635
By Jetackuu 2014-07-27 13:23:49
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
As well, when companies do a better job of self-regulation, their liabilities decrease and less oversight is needed. That's about as capitalist as you can get.
This right here!
 Bahamut.Kara
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Kara
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-07-27 13:33:28
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You know, I'm actually surprised that nobody has anything to say in defense of FATCA....

I for one would have expected Pleebo to defend it. Maybe Kara and Zero, but Pleebo most likely.
Why the hell would I defend the retardedness that is FATCA?
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-07-27 13:37:32
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You know, I'm actually surprised that nobody has anything to say in defense of FATCA....

I for one would have expected Pleebo to defend it. Maybe Kara and Zero, but Pleebo most likely.
Why the hell would I defend the retardedness that is FATCA?

Not you, but the mental caricature in his head.
[+]
 Cerberus.Pleebo
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: Pleebo
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-07-27 13:38:09
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You know, I'm actually surprised that nobody has anything to say in defense of FATCA....

I for one would have expected Pleebo to defend it. Maybe Kara and Zero, but Pleebo most likely.
I LUH U 2 BBY GURL
[+]
 Lakshmi.Zerowone
Offline
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
user: Zerowone
Posts: 6949
By Lakshmi.Zerowone 2014-07-27 13:43:45
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Funny somebody who claims to be a Tax Man suddenly mentions FATCA and it's passing in 2010 after spending the majority of 2013 and 14 making posts that Tax Inversions and all things that fall under it's umbrella do not exist and that anyone who said it did, didn't know what they were talking about.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-07-27 14:17:50
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Lakshmi.Zerowone said: »
Funny somebody who claims to be a Tax Man suddenly mentions FATCA and it's passing in 2010 after spending the majority of 2013 and 14 making posts that Tax Inversions and all things that fall under it's umbrella do not exist and that anyone who said it did, didn't know what they were talking about.
I didn't say that.

I said that the income was still required to be reported under consolidated financial statements, especially under a parent/subsidiary relationship. You said that the income is not reported under a consolidated structure.

Learn to read next time.
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Why the hell would I defend the retardedness that is FATCA?
Good, you understand FATCA better than I thought you would.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2014-07-27 14:19:29
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Industries that require regulation should be taxed in a way that keeps the regulatory costs off the backs of the government. But, at this point, the government has grown too large to be supported by only private citizens.
Then what is to prevent the government from making excess regulations as a way to create more federal revenue?

"Oh, you run a gas station? Let me create a gas station regulation and charge you for us making sure you conform to said regulations."

And you think government corruption is bad now?

Do you think before arguing or do you just argue for argument's sake? Regulation is established by congress, where the money comes from is irrelevant to the threat of overregulation. If anything, compartmentalizing funding is a better way to limit the scope of regulation. As well, when companies do a better job of self-regulation, their liabilities decrease and less oversight is needed. That's about as capitalist as you can get.
You stated that corporations should pay for the regulations themselves. I stated an obvious flaw in your logic.

I can't help it if you don't understand what you are typing.
[+]
 Odin.Jassik
VIP
Offline
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
user: Jassik
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-07-27 14:24:48
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Industries that require regulation should be taxed in a way that keeps the regulatory costs off the backs of the government. But, at this point, the government has grown too large to be supported by only private citizens.
Then what is to prevent the government from making excess regulations as a way to create more federal revenue?

"Oh, you run a gas station? Let me create a gas station regulation and charge you for us making sure you conform to said regulations."

And you think government corruption is bad now?

Do you think before arguing or do you just argue for argument's sake? Regulation is established by congress, where the money comes from is irrelevant to the threat of overregulation. If anything, compartmentalizing funding is a better way to limit the scope of regulation. As well, when companies do a better job of self-regulation, their liabilities decrease and less oversight is needed. That's about as capitalist as you can get.
You stated that corporations should pay for the regulations themselves. I stated an obvious flaw in your logic.

I can't help it if you don't understand what you are typing.

The "obvious" flaw is nothing more than a small person's childish fear of the mean mean government. Overregulation is an entirely separate issue, and the way I described is LESS prone to it than the current system. You're a moron.
[+]
 Bismarck.Bloodrose
Offline
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
user: Bloodrose
Posts: 4322
By Bismarck.Bloodrose 2014-07-27 14:27:23
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I swear, FATCA is just one acronym away from spelling a complete word.

But I can't seem to put my finger on it...
[+]
 Cerberus.Doctorugh
Offline
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
user: Doctorugh
Posts: 317
By Cerberus.Doctorugh 2014-07-27 15:00:22
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Industries that require regulation should be taxed in a way that keeps the regulatory costs off the backs of the government. But, at this point, the government has grown too large to be supported by only private citizens.
Then what is to prevent the government from making excess regulations as a way to create more federal revenue?

"Oh, you run a gas station? Let me create a gas station regulation and charge you for us making sure you conform to said regulations."

And you think government corruption is bad now?

Do you think before arguing or do you just argue for argument's sake? Regulation is established by congress, where the money comes from is irrelevant to the threat of overregulation. If anything, compartmentalizing funding is a better way to limit the scope of regulation. As well, when companies do a better job of self-regulation, their liabilities decrease and less oversight is needed. That's about as capitalist as you can get.
You stated that corporations should pay for the regulations themselves. I stated an obvious flaw in your logic.

I can't help it if you don't understand what you are typing.

The "obvious" flaw is nothing more than a small person's childish fear of the mean mean government. Overregulation is an entirely separate issue, and the way I described is LESS prone to it than the current system. You're a moron.
Lol calling someone names during an internet argument is like saying "I've got nothing else useful to add to this conversation, you win"
[+]
First Page 2 3