21–30 of 362 posts
Corporations should be taxed on revenue, not profit.
Restaurants and other low margin businesses would cease to exist under this plan.
Sales taxes for example vary widely yet have minimal impact on low margin business. Lower them and customers save money but restaurants margins stay the same.
Anyone got a list of the countries? I tried googling around a bit to try to find it. At least other articles[1] mention all G20 countries are on board. That would include India, Russia and most importantly China. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57573380
>>The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies.
>>In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered.
Was enough to address this concern:
>>If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the practice of global corporations seeking out low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland and the British Virgin Islands to move their headquarters to, even though their customers, operations and executives are located elsewhere.
Not only can the concerns that are being used to justify a global minimum tax be addressed through other means, the tax agreement itself is a terrible policy, because it freezes the evolution of tax policy for the whole world, presupposing that an income tax, and specifically a corporate income tax, is ideal.
There are structural problems with the corporate income tax, and many economists argue for eliminating it altogether, and replacing it with other types of taxes (e.g. a transaction tax, a carbon tax, a land tax, etc). But this locks it in place as a constant for all countries.
It's exactly this kind of homogenization of governance that Europe had to get past to prosper:
https://aeon.co/amp/essays/how-the-fall-of-the-roman-empire-...
Corporations should be taxed on revenue, not profit.
Restaurants and other low margin businesses would cease to exist under this plan.
Politically, it sounds great to say, "Make the corporations pay their share!", but who exactly are we targeting with these taxes? Is it the rich executives? Why not just raise taxes on the rich directly?
I suspect in most cases the tax burden is just shifted onto the lower-income workers or the customers somehow.
Imposing taxes on a legal entity always seemed fishy to me. Politically, it sounds great to say, "Make the corporations pay their share!", but who exactly are we targeting with these taxes? Is it the rich executives? Why not just raise taxes on the rich directly? I suspect in most cases the tax burden is just shifted onto the lower-income workers or the customers somehow.
Lot of times the money were not handed to the employee, executives included. They just stay at the company or paid to the financial company that owned the companies.
This alone: >>The deal also reportedly includes a framework to eliminate digital services taxes, which targeted the biggest American tech companies. >>In their place, officials agreed to a new tax plan that would be linked to the places where multinationals are actually doing business, rather than where they are headquartered. Was enough to address this concern: >>If widely enacted, the GMT would effectively end the…