So.... here in the US we decided that we had to reduce the corporate tax rate (further reducing the effective tax rate) such that many major corporations pay little to no corporate income tax...
...while at the same time the EU is considering a minimum corporate tax rate.
What's wrong with this picture?
What's wrong with it is what's missing from it.
Apple paid an effective ZERO POINT SEVEN (0.7) percent taxes on their income here in Europe, where they make about 30% of their profit, IIRC.
While there effective worldwide tax rate was at 26%.
What's wrong with this picture?
What does Apple make in Europe? How many employees do they have there? Every Apple employee in Europe pays income taxes there. Every device Apple sells there is hit with a VAT. Every European investor who makes money from investing in AAPL pays taxes on those investments to European governments.
Those who complain government simply wants more money ignore the fact that societies are built and maintained by those governments
Seriously? People: families, friends and communities build and maintain societies. As Thatcher said, a society run by government does not exist. People, families, communities and their values make a society. Governments are not your parents, governments are not your kindly uncle, governments aren’t your neighbours, they are not Santa Claus. At best they are the policeman, but these days they do a shit job of that too. In fact a real big chunk of today’s ills are the result of politicians believing they can bend and shape societies to their will.
As for this tax issue, Thatcher was right there too, 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of Other Peoples’ Money.' These kinds of government are always looking for more. OPM that is. But from the other, never themselves or their friends.
A worldwide corporate tax rate might be achievable, albeit difficult, but a country-by-country tax would be ruinous and overly complex/expensive. A better model might be similar to the one used in the music world; a central independent body collects the tax, and distributes it to the governments based on sales in that country.
The biggest problem I can see, beyond agreeing to a single unified rate (but let’s say 15 percent as a proposal), is getting tech companies not called Apple to reveal their actual hardware sales.
A company like Facebook will make billions in profit and generate maybe a dozen jobs and a mailbox office in each of three offshore tax havens, and still not pay any taxes. That is about to change in the next decade - hopefully.
Why should a "company like Facebook" with a dozen employees in a country--and therefore imposing negligible costs and reaping no benefits--be paying lots of taxes to that country? Presumably the consumers of that company are already paying income taxes and possibly also sales tax on the product (although not in Facebook's case). So why should these countries get a piece of the action?
Taxes are paid on INCOME, not on the number of employees.
“No employees” means, simply, zero positive effect whatsoever upon the local economy — none: all the money is siphoned off to wherever; none of it remains as employee wages, which could spent locally and stay in circulation. The money is just gone, drained from the economy.
Do you pay tax on income, or on the number of chairs you have in the office?
Those who complain government simply wants more money ignore the fact that societies are built and maintained by those governments
Seriously? People: families, friends and communities build and maintain societies. As Thatcher said, a society run by government does not exist. People, families, communities and their values make a society. Governments are not your parents, governments are not your kindly uncle, governments aren’t your neighbours, they are not Santa Claus. At best they are the policeman, but these days they do a shit job of that too. In fact a real big chunk of today’s ills are the result of politicians believing they can bend and shape societies to their will.
As for this tax issue, Thatcher was right there too, 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of Other Peoples’ Money.' These kinds of government are always looking for more. OPM that is. But from the other, never themselves or their friends.
Oh! So, all that work that Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Adams and others did was for nothing huh?
If you believe that, then perhaps you should go live as a subsistence farmer in a 3rd world country where there is no government to build and maintain a functional society. They have "People: families, friends and communities" too.
Do you think Apple and the few other great American companies stay in this country because of "People: families, friends and communities", Not a chance. It's because of the society built on the shoulders of our government and the brave people who fought and died to support it.
As for your "socialism" rant -- tell that to the grandmother feeding, clothing and sheltering herself on her Social Security check. Or the single mom trying to care for her disabled child.
Libertarianism sounds good as a rant and as a bunch of sound bites. But in practice it fails.
But something needs to change if we are to maintain stable societies.
Amazing how governments spending less is rarely advocated as a possible change
Governments, like corporations, sometimes need to spend more and sometimes need to spend less. There is no single rule that applies under all conditions.
A company like Facebook will make billions in profit and generate maybe a dozen jobs and a mailbox office in each of three offshore tax havens, and still not pay any taxes. That is about to change in the next decade - hopefully.
Why should a "company like Facebook" with a dozen employees in a country--and therefore imposing negligible costs and reaping no benefits--be paying lots of taxes to that country? Presumably the consumers of that company are already paying income taxes and possibly also sales tax on the product (although not in Facebook's case). So why should these countries get a piece of the action?
Taxes are paid on INCOME, not on the number of employees.
“No employees” means, simply, zero positive effect whatsoever upon the local economy — none: all the money is siphoned off to wherever; none of it remains as employee wages, which could spent locally and stay in circulation. The money is just gone, drained from the economy.
Do you pay tax on income, or on the number of chairs you have in the office?
"Taxes are paid on INCOME, not on the number of employees. " Depends where you live. In the UK you are taxed on the number of employees indirectly. Employers have to pay "Employers national insurance" as a percentage of the salary on every worker. Its around 15% of each workers salary. I always thought taxing a company for employing people was kind of absurd, but thats how the UK works it. I am a UK national.
A worldwide corporate tax rate might be achievable, albeit difficult, but a country-by-country tax would be ruinous and overly complex/expensive. A better model might be similar to the one used in the music world; a central independent body collects the tax, and distributes it to the governments based on sales in that country.
The biggest problem I can see, beyond agreeing to a single unified rate (but let’s say 15 percent as a proposal), is getting tech companies not called Apple to reveal their actual hardware sales.
A "worldwide tax rate" would presuppose a global government... and no one needs that. Countries should compete with each other. People should ideally be able to leave for greener pastures when they want and not be held hostage to their country of birth or the one they happen to live in at the moment.
the German idea about a minimum corporate tax rate is absurd, because countries use low corporation tax for competitive advantage, so that companies will choose them as a base. No doubt Germany dislikes Irelands very low and competitive corporation tax rate of just of just 12.5%. The EU has always been about Germany, and selling German goods to the rest of the EU, so no wonder Germany wants everyone to have the same corporation tax. They will be unlikely to achieve a uniform corporation tax, since many of the 27 member states will resist such a move. There is talk of the UK dropping corporation tax to 17% when we leave the EU. I am sure Germany will hate that too....
Comments
Seriously? People: families, friends and communities build and maintain societies. As Thatcher said, a society run by government does not exist. People, families, communities and their values make a society.
Governments are not your parents, governments are not your kindly uncle, governments aren’t your neighbours, they are not Santa Claus. At best they are the policeman, but these days they do a shit job of that too. In fact a real big chunk of today’s ills are the result of politicians believing they can bend and shape societies to their will.
As for this tax issue, Thatcher was right there too, 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of Other Peoples’ Money.' These kinds of government are always looking for more. OPM that is. But from the other, never themselves or their friends.
The biggest problem I can see, beyond agreeing to a single unified rate (but let’s say 15 percent as a proposal), is getting tech companies not called Apple to reveal their actual hardware sales.
“No employees” means, simply, zero positive effect whatsoever upon the local economy — none: all the money is siphoned off to wherever; none of it remains as employee wages, which could spent locally and stay in circulation. The money is just gone, drained from the economy.
Do you pay tax on income, or on the number of chairs you have in the office?
Seriously, I swear some of you must get off on this deluded ranting.
Depends where you live. In the UK you are taxed on the number of employees indirectly. Employers have to pay "Employers national insurance" as a percentage of the salary on every worker. Its around 15% of each workers salary. I always thought taxing a company for employing people was kind of absurd, but thats how the UK works it. I am a UK national.