111–120 of 140 posts
A unilateral global regime is the only complete solution to prevent capital from fleeing to lower-tax locales (e.g. Cayman Islands). That said, the same incentives for smaller countries to offer lower tax rates will make them unwilling to agree to a global regime. And a global taxation regime would require a degree of international cooperation that has never been seen. Janet is laying the groundwork for a potential p…
this is just a measure for fiscally irresponsible nations (i.e the US) the are advancing the moronic Magical Monetary Theory err, Modern Monetary Theory a check to ensure global competition for capital does not expose their fraud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like Delaware, the scumbag state - a tax haven
How is Delaware a tax haven?
> Delaware doesn’t tax “intangible assets,” and this encourages companies to move parts of their business to Delaware to avoid taxes in other states. This has led to Delaware being labeled a “tax haven.”
See also: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/09251...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This strikes me as incredibly imperialistic. Why should the USA get to decide what the tax rate is for the rest of the world?
You seem to think this will be a hard sell to most countries, where in fact 21% is below Corp Tax for most countries with clout. Most of the EU would be on board, China would be on board, all nuclear powers would be on board...
This is the only way to stop tax evasion and a race to the bottom, with devastating consequences to people to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars lost per year. The question is how to do this. The only way I see is unilateral action by the biggest markets: the EU and the US (plus Japan, Australia, NZ, Canada), to say "you cannot access our market if you stash your profits in a tax haven".
Yeah there’s 0 chance of that happening. The EU can’t even agree amongst themselves.
It get's harder as scale goes up. Not easier.
A unilateral global regime is the only complete solution to prevent capital from fleeing to lower-tax locales (e.g. Cayman Islands). That said, the same incentives for smaller countries to offer lower tax rates will make them unwilling to agree to a global regime. And a global taxation regime would require a degree of international cooperation that has never been seen. Janet is laying the groundwork for a potential p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An automatic rainbow unicorn pony supply would solve my rainbow unicorn pony shortfall, but that is also make-believe so never mind. This effort certainly will not accomplish the impossible thing they claim it will accomplish. Simultaneously it will cause a lot of problems for society that will make certain well-placed people even more money than they had before they installed the current government, which is the who…
I do not understand this post.
Of course, that is stupid. That loophole is what happens now, and the point of such a treaty would be tariffs or sanctions against non signatories.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a very silly way to look at it. Corporations extract value from society. Why shouldn't they pay back what they owe? And the state has democratic control and oversight (ideally at least, much to be improved). Corporations are completely unaccountable.
That's a strange worldview, corporations are typically seen as adding to the value of a society. They generally become profitable by providing people a better alternative than a competitor.
Can I also get zero income tax rate? Can I also get the freedom of movement to move to tax havens and hide my existence and income in a web of different identities?
People forget that the only way to level the playing field between Amazon and local shops is to cut taxes to 0 rather than layering on increasingly complex tax rules. Amazon thrives in the presence of corporate taxes.
Corporate taxes also create huge incentive to offshore jobs to tax havens.
Not to mention no corporate tax rates would mean no need for all sorts of expenses on legal and accountants for tax optimisation.
In the UK I think we acknowledge they are a bad idea by having a plan to step them down over time to some low level (and potentially even 0 eventually). Covid derailed that plan.