Sorry Ireland. The race you're leading to the bottom is coming to an end.
You'll have to survive on your abilities rather than undercutting the countries that actually produce the revenue you're taking as taxes for yourself.
So sorry!
This is really an EU rather than OECD issue. Tax laws reflect the fundamental choices of different EU countries in important areas of public expenditure, such as education, health and pensions. They influence private consumption, savings and the financial choices of businesses. This is why the power to raise taxes and set tax rates lies with national governments within the EU. This has been a fundamental tenet of the EU since the inception of the Common Market. So why the call for tax harmonization all of a sudden?
Accusations of “unfair” and “tax evasion” emanate from the much larger EU countries that have more lavish government social expenditures. That is their sovereign choice. But Ireland must also be permitted it’s own choices, otherwise, what is the point of being in the EU at all?
No, not at all -- this is definitely an OECD issue.
Ireland was neither the first tax haven nor is it the only tax haven leading the race to the bottom. Nor is it only the EU being impacted by this race to the bottom. All developed countries are, including the U.S.
That's why the U.S. is leading the way to eliminate what amounts to legalized cheating.
You haven’t addressed the central point that a number of large counties are trying to establish a minimum corporate tax of 15%. Why? Who gains from this? Surely you can’t be suggesting that if one country has low tax rates than that is “cheating.” Setting national tax rates is a legitimate way for nations to structure their economies and perhaps gain competitive advantage over other nations.
Many use the terms “tax haven and loophole” without defining what they really mean in the tax code. Having a lower tax rate than others is neither of those. So, I don’t get what you are trying to say with “race to the bottom.” It could equally be interpreted as an effort by those who desire greater state control over their economies to leverage a tax floor to force other nations with different priorities to structure their economies along the same lines.
Blanket tax harmonization will strangle the diversity of national economic structures, which will almost certainly be counterproductive to growth of the world economy over the long haul, and hit the poorest nations the hardest. Smaller less powerful nations should rightly fear this push by an already powerful block of nations. Ireland should stand its ground!
Who gains? That's the wrong question. Rather it should be "Who stops losing?" And that is related to your other question/point of "What is a race to the bottom".
You are obviously approaching this from the Libertarian, anti-tax point of view that, I think, can be summarized as "All taxes are bad because they take money from people and business and waste it down a black hole".
That is simply not correct.
Taxes are not taking money from others and funneling it down into some black hole. Like people and corporations, governments need revenue to operate, to do what they need to do. People get revenue primarily by receiving salaries and wages, Businesses receive revenue through sales. Governments receive their revenue primarily through taxation -- which has been going on since at least the Roman time. You can debate whether they use those tax dollars wisely -- but that is a separate question.
Essentially, Governments are there to serve both people and businesses by creating and supporting infrastructure, national defense and maintaining a stable, reliable, predictable society, etc... The money they collect does not go down some black hole.
So, what is the race to the bottom?
Janet Yellen can explain it better. But essentially that's when one nation tries to undercut all other nations -- where it sets itself up as a tax haven where it shifts the collection of tax dollars to itself from revenue corporations earn in other countries. It's a race to the bottom where nations who do nothing and contribute nothing try to out-do each other taking revenue from those nations that earned it.
This proposal ends that ability.
It sets a minimum tax that is paid to the country where a company does its business and earns its revenue.
In short, it puts government revenue where it belongs and stops the cheaters (like Ireland and others) who did nothing to earn it from taking it.
It's statement to companies is simple: "If you do business here, earn your revenue here, you pay taxes here. No more cheating."
Putting aside your that rather long winded diatribe to repudiate something I did not say, “All taxes are bad,” the government of Ireland is ethically and morally bound to do what is best for its people, regardless of what outsiders might insist. Sadly, I am unable to address your lack of economic acumen as you are entirely unprepared to hear it nor accept it from me.
I do have a moderate libertarian bent, but I certainly acknowledge that taxes always will (must) have their place in a cohesive society. But reasonable people can disagree about how much Government should dominate a society. I believe it is within each nation’s sovereign right to decide what that level of Government should be, and tax it’s citizens accordingly.
"Ethically and morally" mean the same thing, and are pretty meaningless terms in an area like a government's approach to corporate taxation.
Sorry Ireland. The race you're leading to the bottom is coming to an end.
You'll have to survive on your abilities rather than undercutting the countries that actually produce the revenue you're taking as taxes for yourself.
So sorry!
This is really an EU rather than OECD issue. Tax laws reflect the fundamental choices of different EU countries in important areas of public expenditure, such as education, health and pensions. They influence private consumption, savings and the financial choices of businesses. This is why the power to raise taxes and set tax rates lies with national governments within the EU. This has been a fundamental tenet of the EU since the inception of the Common Market. So why the call for tax harmonization all of a sudden?
Accusations of “unfair” and “tax evasion” emanate from the much larger EU countries that have more lavish government social expenditures. That is their sovereign choice. But Ireland must also be permitted it’s own choices, otherwise, what is the point of being in the EU at all?
No, not at all -- this is definitely an OECD issue.
Ireland was neither the first tax haven nor is it the only tax haven leading the race to the bottom. Nor is it only the EU being impacted by this race to the bottom. All developed countries are, including the U.S.
That's why the U.S. is leading the way to eliminate what amounts to legalized cheating.
You haven’t addressed the central point that a number of large counties are trying to establish a minimum corporate tax of 15%. Why? Who gains from this? Surely you can’t be suggesting that if one country has low tax rates than that is “cheating.” Setting national tax rates is a legitimate way for nations to structure their economies and perhaps gain competitive advantage over other nations.
Many use the terms “tax haven and loophole” without defining what they really mean in the tax code. Having a lower tax rate than others is neither of those. So, I don’t get what you are trying to say with “race to the bottom.” It could equally be interpreted as an effort by those who desire greater state control over their economies to leverage a tax floor to force other nations with different priorities to structure their economies along the same lines.
Blanket tax harmonization will strangle the diversity of national economic structures, which will almost certainly be counterproductive to growth of the world economy over the long haul, and hit the poorest nations the hardest. Smaller less powerful nations should rightly fear this push by an already powerful block of nations. Ireland should stand its ground!
Who gains? That's the wrong question. Rather it should be "Who stops losing?" And that is related to your other question/point of "What is a race to the bottom".
You are obviously approaching this from the Libertarian, anti-tax point of view that, I think, can be summarized as "All taxes are bad because they take money from people and business and waste it down a black hole".
That is simply not correct.
Taxes are not taking money from others and funneling it down into some black hole. Like people and corporations, governments need revenue to operate, to do what they need to do. People get revenue primarily by receiving salaries and wages, Businesses receive revenue through sales. Governments receive their revenue primarily through taxation -- which has been going on since at least the Roman time. You can debate whether they use those tax dollars wisely -- but that is a separate question.
Essentially, Governments are there to serve both people and businesses by creating and supporting infrastructure, national defense and maintaining a stable, reliable, predictable society, etc... The money they collect does not go down some black hole.
So, what is the race to the bottom?
Janet Yellen can explain it better. But essentially that's when one nation tries to undercut all other nations -- where it sets itself up as a tax haven where it shifts the collection of tax dollars to itself from revenue corporations earn in other countries. It's a race to the bottom where nations who do nothing and contribute nothing try to out-do each other taking revenue from those nations that earned it.
This proposal ends that ability.
It sets a minimum tax that is paid to the country where a company does its business and earns its revenue.
In short, it puts government revenue where it belongs and stops the cheaters (like Ireland and others) who did nothing to earn it from taking it.
It's statement to companies is simple: "If you do business here, earn your revenue here, you pay taxes here. No more cheating."
Putting aside your that rather long winded diatribe to repudiate something I did not say, “All taxes are bad,” the government of Ireland is ethically and morally bound to do what is best for its people, regardless of what outsiders might insist. Sadly, I am unable to address your lack of economic acumen as you are entirely unprepared to hear it nor accept it from me.
I do have a moderate libertarian bent, but I certainly acknowledge that taxes always will (must) have their place in a cohesive society. But reasonable people can disagree about how much Government should dominate a society. I believe it is within each nation’s sovereign right to decide what that level of Government should be, and tax it’s citizens accordingly.
"Ethically and morally" mean the same thing, and are pretty meaningless terms in an area like a government's approach to corporate taxation.
Sorry Ireland. The race you're leading to the bottom is coming to an end.
You'll have to survive on your abilities rather than undercutting the countries that actually produce the revenue you're taking as taxes for yourself.
So sorry!
This is really an EU rather than OECD issue. Tax laws reflect the fundamental choices of different EU countries in important areas of public expenditure, such as education, health and pensions. They influence private consumption, savings and the financial choices of businesses. This is why the power to raise taxes and set tax rates lies with national governments within the EU. This has been a fundamental tenet of the EU since the inception of the Common Market. So why the call for tax harmonization all of a sudden?
Accusations of “unfair” and “tax evasion” emanate from the much larger EU countries that have more lavish government social expenditures. That is their sovereign choice. But Ireland must also be permitted it’s own choices, otherwise, what is the point of being in the EU at all?
No, not at all -- this is definitely an OECD issue.
Ireland was neither the first tax haven nor is it the only tax haven leading the race to the bottom. Nor is it only the EU being impacted by this race to the bottom. All developed countries are, including the U.S.
That's why the U.S. is leading the way to eliminate what amounts to legalized cheating.
You haven’t addressed the central point that a number of large counties are trying to establish a minimum corporate tax of 15%. Why? Who gains from this? Surely you can’t be suggesting that if one country has low tax rates than that is “cheating.” Setting national tax rates is a legitimate way for nations to structure their economies and perhaps gain competitive advantage over other nations.
Many use the terms “tax haven and loophole” without defining what they really mean in the tax code. Having a lower tax rate than others is neither of those. So, I don’t get what you are trying to say with “race to the bottom.” It could equally be interpreted as an effort by those who desire greater state control over their economies to leverage a tax floor to force other nations with different priorities to structure their economies along the same lines.
Blanket tax harmonization will strangle the diversity of national economic structures, which will almost certainly be counterproductive to growth of the world economy over the long haul, and hit the poorest nations the hardest. Smaller less powerful nations should rightly fear this push by an already powerful block of nations. Ireland should stand its ground!
Who gains? That's the wrong question. Rather it should be "Who stops losing?" And that is related to your other question/point of "What is a race to the bottom".
You are obviously approaching this from the Libertarian, anti-tax point of view that, I think, can be summarized as "All taxes are bad because they take money from people and business and waste it down a black hole".
That is simply not correct.
Taxes are not taking money from others and funneling it down into some black hole. Like people and corporations, governments need revenue to operate, to do what they need to do. People get revenue primarily by receiving salaries and wages, Businesses receive revenue through sales. Governments receive their revenue primarily through taxation -- which has been going on since at least the Roman time. You can debate whether they use those tax dollars wisely -- but that is a separate question.
Essentially, Governments are there to serve both people and businesses by creating and supporting infrastructure, national defense and maintaining a stable, reliable, predictable society, etc... The money they collect does not go down some black hole.
So, what is the race to the bottom?
Janet Yellen can explain it better. But essentially that's when one nation tries to undercut all other nations -- where it sets itself up as a tax haven where it shifts the collection of tax dollars to itself from revenue corporations earn in other countries. It's a race to the bottom where nations who do nothing and contribute nothing try to out-do each other taking revenue from those nations that earned it.
This proposal ends that ability.
It sets a minimum tax that is paid to the country where a company does its business and earns its revenue.
In short, it puts government revenue where it belongs and stops the cheaters (like Ireland and others) who did nothing to earn it from taking it.
It's statement to companies is simple: "If you do business here, earn your revenue here, you pay taxes here. No more cheating."
Putting aside your that rather long winded diatribe to repudiate something I did not say, “All taxes are bad,” the government of Ireland is ethically and morally bound to do what is best for its people, regardless of what outsiders might insist. Sadly, I am unable to address your lack of economic acumen as you are entirely unprepared to hear it nor accept it from me.
I do have a moderate libertarian bent, but I certainly acknowledge that taxes always will (must) have their place in a cohesive society. But reasonable people can disagree about how much Government should dominate a society. I believe it is within each nation’s sovereign right to decide what that level of Government should be, and tax it’s citizens accordingly.
"Ethically and morally" mean the same thing, and are pretty meaningless terms in an area like a government's approach to corporate taxation.
Sorry I missed it. Just caught up. Also disagree about government having ethical obligations to do what is best for their constituents but also happy to sit out that argument.
Comments
https://www.dictionary.com/e/moral-vs-ethical/