This number is actually a shame in the sense that it shows how little taxes are paid by other big companies.
Do you ever stop to contemplate how much payroll tax is paid by Amazon and Apple?
Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
141–150 of 183 posts
Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the idea is that corporations are the most efficient entities in the economy in terms of allocating capital. They have to be, or they go under. And when they have extra cash, investors tend to demand that it be deployed or paid back to them as dividends. So the natural incentive is for companies to run with the leanest possible capitalization and generate the biggest possible profits. So when you take cash aw…
> I think the idea is that corporations are the most efficient entities in the economy in terms of allocating capital. Anyone who has had a job knows it's not true.
I’m also sceptical of this claim.
It seems to me that the capitalist economics mostly end up in capitalisms favor because it simply ignores a lot of variables.
1) Capital is allocated according to the wishes of the capital owner, generally to gain more capital and buy luxury goods. My question then is what does the people who have no capital get out of this system!
They are of course free to sell their labour, which is different part of the equation all together.
You may trade the few chips you have made from selling your labor for capital, but the chips you will receive will be of extremely low values, compared to the vast fortunes accumulated by wealthy families over generations.
Often these capital owners are descendants from feudal lords and others who gained their capital via dubious means.
Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the idea is that corporations are the most efficient entities in the economy in terms of allocating capital. They have to be, or they go under. And when they have extra cash, investors tend to demand that it be deployed or paid back to them as dividends. So the natural incentive is for companies to run with the leanest possible capitalization and generate the biggest possible profits. So when you take cash aw…
> I think the idea is that corporations are the most efficient entities in the economy in terms of allocating capital. Anyone who has had a job knows it's not true.
>> I think the idea is that corporations are the most efficient entities in the economy in terms of allocating capital.
> Anyone who has had a job knows it's not true.
In an 'absolute' sense they may not be as there is (always) some waste, but is there a more efficient way / entity?
Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#144Here's some interesting thinking about different kinds of tax: https://economicsobservatory.com/which-taxes-are-best-and-wo... > "Raising the income tax rate has by far the least negative effect on GDP. In the long run, the simulation shows that the economy pretty much returns to baseline levels, with a slight increase in potential output. The opposite is true for corporation taxes. A rise in the corporation tax rate…
Who cares what the GDP is if the country is unpleasant or impractical to live in? Income tax is extremely retarded and our country was started by shooting people who suggested significantly less extreme taxes.
Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#145Here's some interesting thinking about different kinds of tax: https://economicsobservatory.com/which-taxes-are-best-and-wo... > "Raising the income tax rate has by far the least negative effect on GDP. In the long run, the simulation shows that the economy pretty much returns to baseline levels, with a slight increase in potential output. The opposite is true for corporation taxes. A rise in the corporation tax rate…
I really need a good explanation for the assertion about corporate taxes, as it makes no real sense. Frankly, it sounds like corporate propaganda.
> I really need a good explanation for the assertion about corporate taxes, as it makes no real sense. Frankly, it sounds like corporate propaganda.
Corporations have many tax avoidance strategies available, and the incentives to activate them based on tax changes, so basically because capital is much freer to move than labour (in most places) one would see the effects suggested in the linked article.
That being said I'm sceptical of this research, does anyone have more detailed links to the simulations on which the analysis is based?
Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#146Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corp income tax means the tax (30%) on profit(income-expenses) retained (not withdrawn to shareholders) year over year. Berkshire hathaway is famous for not paying dividends and keeping profits and never selling shares, so this makes sense. Most companies withdraw or reinvest as much profit as possible to reduce this tax.
How does this relate to my comment? The 5% is a relative measure against all other corporations in the USA.
Oh that would be pretty clear to me:
Corporate tax paid by Berkshire Hathaway / Sum of Corp Tax paid by all US corps = 5/100 = 1:20
It's clear what it means, how they measure it would be another story, but I'm sure there is public budget information that clearly indicates what the 2024 taxation for that type of tax was.
Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#148Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the idea is that corporations are the most efficient entities in the economy in terms of allocating capital. They have to be, or they go under. And when they have extra cash, investors tend to demand that it be deployed or paid back to them as dividends. So the natural incentive is for companies to run with the leanest possible capitalization and generate the biggest possible profits. So when you take cash aw…
The problem of course is that capital is mostly concentrated to a few, well connected families. How does that fit into the equation?
You are also assuming the tax incidence of corporation tax will fall mostly upon shareholders. For example if the incidence was 70% on workers and 30% on shareholders then this should not be a progressive form of taxation. I think most economists believe the tax incidence is shared between parts of the corporation (workers, consumers, and shareholders) but I don't think there is much consensus on the proportions.
Re: Berkshire Hathaway Now Pays 5% of All Corporate Income Taxes in America
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you say why employees of large and well funded businesses get to save $23k+ per year in 401k, but employees of small and less well funded businesses can only save $7k per year in an IRA?
You don't have to be large and well funded. You do have to have your own SEP-IRA, rather than a regular IRA, and almost any self-employed person could do that. I am self-employed, my business is essentially a sole proprietorship, and I get the higher limits because of the type of IRA. So the question is really: why do some people only get to save $7k a year in an IRA and others get to save much, much more?
I never wrote about self employed, I wrote
>employees of small and less well funded businesses
For example, a startup without the funds or time to do all the HR to allow for 401ks is disadvantaged because their employees cannot contribute as much to a retirement account as someone who works for a business that offers a 401k (or for themselves).
A person has the following choices:
1) work for a business offering a 401k (usually larger, well funded, etc)
2) work for themselves
3) work for a small, upstart business (usually smaller, not as well funded, etc)
Why does working for #3 disallow you from saving as much for retirement? Why are tax advantaged retirement savings a function of your employer at all?
Same for paying for health insurance with pre-tax income.