181–190 of 404 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corporations enjoy signficant benefits of being in the state, including, for example, a police force that protects them from attack, and a legal system that will resolve disputes they have both internally and with others. They should pay reasonable (not low) taxes in any event, not subject to the caveat you identify.
Everyone they employ already pays tax. Everyone that gets a dividend pays tax. Everyone that enjoys capital growth pays tax. Just looking at the direct corporate tax rate is grossly myopic.
If we are going to treat corporations as a fictional person, we should only be looking at the direct corporate tax rate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a mechanism designed to reduce economic inequality Income inequality. Totally different thing; really wealthy people can play all sorts of games with income, so it’s not relevant to them. And that’s the way they like this debate framed: ignore their enormous piles of wealth and instead focus on the earnings distribution of ordinary people. If anything, it just stops you getting anywhere near to joining their ran…
Really wealthy people are probably not paying much income taxes to begin with
Wealthy people do not take out mortgages. They borrow cash against their existing wealth. They then buy things with that. Then pay back against the loan. Writing it off too (as per tax law). The 'rich' have sold everyone a bill of goods how they are redoing the tax system for 'the people'. When the reality is they are writing a bunch more exemptions for themselves.
You can do the same thing. Many people when they figure it out 'level up'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone they employ already pays tax. Everyone that gets a dividend pays tax. Everyone that enjoys capital growth pays tax. Just looking at the direct corporate tax rate is grossly myopic.
> Everyone they employ already pays tax. But this is their tax they pay on the money _they_ earned. Not sure why this is okay for corporations to appropriate this tax as theirs. > Everyone that gets a dividend pays tax. In my country dividend tax has a lower rate. You have this insanity where a person making money out of their hard work pays more tax than a person living off dividends and doing nothing.
One aspect I haven’t seen mentioned in the comments or in the article: double taxation. One of the drawbacks of structuring a business as a c-corp is that you have double taxation: once, at the corporate rate then again at the individual income tax rate if the corporation distributed earnings to shareholders. An advantage of that, however, is that if you’re investing for the future, double taxation can be more effici…
I actually don't get why corporation should pay taxes. When the profit of the company is distributed, or paying the employees, the employees/shareholders will be taxed on that money.
What about the benefits that flow to foreign shareholders? You can’t effectively tax their capital gains.
Netflix recorded a worldwide income tax accounting expense of about 13.7% last year ($438M on $3.2B of Net Income). It also paid cash taxes of $292M (cash taxes differ from accounting taxes because of timing issues - just like revenue is not the same as cash-in). A lot of growing companies have US taxes that are quite low because they lose money for a long time while they're investing in growth. When they finally bec…
> A lot of growing companies have US taxes that are quite low because they lose money for a long time while they're investing in growth. When they finally become profitable, they're allowed to roll forward those losses (within limits) to offset their profits. Human beings cannot do the equivalent. Spend the entirety of your 20s making very little money because you are investing in growth and then make $800k as an ort…
And in your example you could also use student loan repayments for taxable income reductions in the same manor. Only the interest, but that is the same a business not being able to deduct capital investment.
With the assumption that we are treating debt like income for the individual, except that individuals do not report that as other income.
Is that calculation really correct? Does it count tax for all the employees? Does it count all specialized tax for things like gas or VAT, for all the things Netflix buys in their operation? What about all the media that Netflix buys and produces? What about all the taxes levied there on salaries and other activities? The article also talks about "income" and not "revenue"...
> Does it count tax for all the employees? Why do you think it is okay for a corporation to appropriate the tax employees pay as theirs? Employee pays this tax, not the corporation.
I'm not saying that the company shouldn't pay a direct tax on their profit, but that I want to know the real number counting everything. Focusing on some fraction of that number can be misleading, especially when the editors try to distill it into a short title, with possible agendas no less.
https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5tZWdhcGh...
Netflix recorded a worldwide income tax accounting expense of about 13.7% last year ($438M on $3.2B of Net Income). It also paid cash taxes of $292M (cash taxes differ from accounting taxes because of timing issues - just like revenue is not the same as cash-in). A lot of growing companies have US taxes that are quite low because they lose money for a long time while they're investing in growth. When they finally bec…
Netflix has been around for 20+ years