Romney 2010 paid higher rate than 97% of taxpayers

[danefan]

There are a few countries that have an elective worldwide taxing structure along side a territorial regime. (UK for one example).

But Kalm isnt wrong on ETR. The effective rate of corporate tax in the US in most cases is much much lower than the statutory rate of 35%.

Compliance costs will never go away. No matter how you change the corporate tax code, companies will continue to pay guys like me to save them money. It's a good investment for them.

It's not just the costs in dollars, it's the cost in total man hours directed towards tax compliance instead of product development, customer service, research, etc.

What do you think? All of Tax Professionals would just drop our careers and focus on designing and making widgets?

[dbackjon]

So, if you are saying that Romney, at 14%, pays a higher rate than 97% of Americans, you are ADMITTING:
1) That Americans pay a VERY low tax rate
2) Lowering the rate further would have little or no impact on the economy
3) The tax rate is lower than the fair tax rate already
4) Raising the tax rate is needed to balance the budget

[danefan]

Raising the tax rate is not needed. Increasing tax revenue is one required part of the puzzle to fix the budget issues we have.

[kalm]

So, if you are saying that Romney, at 14%, pays a higher rate than 97% of Americans, you are ADMITTING:
1) That Americans pay a VERY low tax rate
2) Lowering the rate further would have little or no impact on the economy
3) The tax rate is lower than the fair tax rate already
4) Raising the tax rate is needed to balance the budget

Good point.

[D1B]

So, if you are saying that Romney, at 14%, pays a higher rate than 97% of Americans, you are ADMITTING:
1) That Americans pay a VERY low tax rate
2) Lowering the rate further would have little or no impact on the economy
3) The tax rate is lower than the fair tax rate already
4) Raising the tax rate is needed to balance the budget

Conks

[UNI88]

Look at the polls. EVERYONE is concerned what a Wall Street dork like Romney would do as President. How in the **** did you forget that people like Romney ruined us for 10-15 years? Amazing.

D, I am concerned about what Romney would do as President just as I'm concerned about what Obama will do if reelected. People mock Romney's business experience as irrelevant but I'm not sure Obama is qualified to run a lemonade stand in my driveway when it comes to understanding and managing the huge organization that is the federal government. I worry that Romney will try and cut taxes without reducing spending across the board (i.e. social services and military) and that our deficit will continue to spiral out of control. I worry that Obama will increase taxes and spend even more sending the country down the Mediterranean (Greece, Spain, Italy) path. I would prefer the moderate Romney who has demonstrated his ability to successfully start a company, run a state and turn around the Olympic games to the Romney that is pandering the far-right wing of the Republican party but I really don't know which one we'll get if he wins.

This election and the crappy choices that we have scare the sh!t out of me.

[UNI88]

So, if you are saying that Romney, at 14%, pays a higher rate than 97% of Americans, you are ADMITTING:
1) That Americans pay a VERY low tax rate
2) Lowering the rate further would have little or no impact on the economy
3) The tax rate is lower than the fair tax rate already
4) Raising the tax rate is needed to balance the budget

I have no problem with allowing all of the Bush tax cuts to expire. But the additional revenue should be applied to the deficit and not spent on short-sighted stimulus programs that have a temporary impact on jobs and no investment in the nation's infrastructure and the resulting positive long-term impact.

[dbackjon]

So, if you are saying that Romney, at 14%, pays a higher rate than 97% of Americans, you are ADMITTING:
1) That Americans pay a VERY low tax rate
2) Lowering the rate further would have little or no impact on the economy
3) The tax rate is lower than the fair tax rate already
4) Raising the tax rate is needed to balance the budget

I have no problem with allowing all of the Bush tax cuts to expire. But the additional revenue should be applied to the deficit and not spent on short-sighted stimulus programs that have a temporary impact on jobs and no investment in the nation's infrastructure and the resulting positive long-term impact.

I have no problem with that - any stimulus should be infrastructure related.

[89Hen]

I have no problem with allowing all of the Bush tax cuts to expire.

GFY

[BDKJMU]

So, if you are saying that Romney, at 14%, pays a higher rate than 97% of Americans, you are ADMITTING:
1) That Americans pay a VERY low tax rate
2) Lowering the rate further would have little or no impact on the economy
3) The tax rate is lower than the fair tax rate already
4) Raising the tax rate is needed to balance the budget

Good point.

Yeah, but you have to include 400-500 billion (or however much it is now adays) in compliance costs in the US every year.

[BDKJMU]

Another thing - any time spend in the Presidential debates or campaign discussing corporate tax reform is time wasted on something more important.

Neither the President or Romney have enough political power to push their version of comprehensive tax reform through Congress.

And everyone in Congress believes that Tax Reform needs to be "revenue neutral" - meaning no one can justify changing the tax code if it adds to the deficit.

The current estimates from both sides of the aisle and the supposedly neutral parties are pretty consistent:

Every 1% reduction in the corporate tax rate will cost between $100-$120 BILLION.

There are only a few ways to pay for that - broaden the base of income subject to taxes or some alternative taxing structure such as a consumption tax.

The UK is in the process of moving to a Territorial tax system and lowering its rate all the way down to 22%. How are they paying for it? Increases to the national consumption tax system (VAT). That will never fly in the US.

So in other words - nothing is going to happen for a while unless something crazy happens in the Congressional elections in November and either party gets absolute power in Congress.

Not if loopholes were closed at the same time.

[BDKJMU]

It's not just the costs in dollars, it's the cost in total man hours directed towards tax compliance instead of product development, customer service, research, etc.

What do you think? All of Tax Professionals would just drop our careers and focus on designing and making widgets?

Like you said, there would always be compliance costs, but don't you think if 400-500 billion or whatever its up to now in the US every year in compliance costs was drastically reduced, that the economy would get a big boost, create jobs, and the net effect would be more jobs throughout the US?

[danefan]

What do you think? All of Tax Professionals would just drop our careers and focus on designing and making widgets?

Like you said, there would always be compliance costs, but don't you think if 400-500 billion or whatever its up to now in the US every year in compliance costs was drastically reduced, that the economy would get a big boost, create jobs, and the net effect would be more jobs throughout the US?

Honestly no. Corporate culture is very simple these days.

Just about ever $ saved in corporate expenses (which tax compliance is) goes directly or indirectly to shareholders/owners.

[danefan]

Another thing - any time spend in the Presidential debates or campaign discussing corporate tax reform is time wasted on something more important.

Neither the President or Romney have enough political power to push their version of comprehensive tax reform through Congress.

And everyone in Congress believes that Tax Reform needs to be "revenue neutral" - meaning no one can justify changing the tax code if it adds to the deficit.

The current estimates from both sides of the aisle and the supposedly neutral parties are pretty consistent:

Every 1% reduction in the corporate tax rate will cost between $100-$120 BILLION.

There are only a few ways to pay for that - broaden the base of income subject to taxes or some alternative taxing structure such as a consumption tax.

The UK is in the process of moving to a Territorial tax system and lowering its rate all the way down to 22%. How are they paying for it? Increases to the national consumption tax system (VAT). That will never fly in the US.

So in other words - nothing is going to happen for a while unless something crazy happens in the Congressional elections in November and either party gets absolute power in Congress.

Not if loopholes were closed at the same time.

The $100-$120B per 100 bpt estimate is only one side of the equation. Decreasing the tax rate 1% and doing nothing else will cost the country $100-$120B.

If you repealed all tax expenditures (which would include the "loopholes" most refer to which are really special industry credits, deductions, amortizations, etc...), it is currently estimated that you could only get the corporate tax rate down to 28-30% and still be "revenue neutral."

[D1B]

Look at the polls. EVERYONE is concerned what a Wall Street dork like Romney would do as President. How in the **** did you forget that people like Romney ruined us for 10-15 years? Amazing.

D, I am concerned about what Romney would do as President just as I'm concerned about what Obama will do if reelected. People mock Romney's business experience as irrelevant but I'm not sure Obama is qualified to run a lemonade stand in my driveway when it comes to understanding and managing the huge organization that is the federal government. I worry that Romney will try and cut taxes without reducing spending across the board (i.e. social services and military) and that our deficit will continue to spiral out of control. I worry that Obama will increase taxes and spend even more sending the country down the Mediterranean (Greece, Spain, Italy) path. I would prefer the moderate Romney who has demonstrated his ability to successfully start a company, run a state and turn around the Olympic games to the Romney that is pandering the far-right wing of the Republican party but I really don't know which one we'll get if he wins.

This election and the crappy choices that we have scare the sh!t out of me.

Fair points, except Romney hasn't built shit.

[Baldy]

It's not just the costs in dollars, it's the cost in total man hours directed towards tax compliance instead of product development, customer service, research, etc.

What do you think? All of Tax Professionals would just drop our careers and focus on designing and making widgets?

Open a neighborhood H&R Block.

[Baldy]

D, I am concerned about what Romney would do as President just as I'm concerned about what Obama will do if reelected. People mock Romney's business experience as irrelevant but I'm not sure Obama is qualified to run a lemonade stand in my driveway when it comes to understanding and managing the huge organization that is the federal government. I worry that Romney will try and cut taxes without reducing spending across the board (i.e. social services and military) and that our deficit will continue to spiral out of control. I worry that Obama will increase taxes and spend even more sending the country down the Mediterranean (Greece, Spain, Italy) path. I would prefer the moderate Romney who has demonstrated his ability to successfully start a company, run a state and turn around the Olympic games to the Romney that is pandering the far-right wing of the Republican party but I really don't know which one we'll get if he wins.

This election and the crappy choices that we have scare the sh!t out of me.

Fair points, except Romney hasn't built shit.

Pure Ignorance.

[danefan]

What do you think? All of Tax Professionals would just drop our careers and focus on designing and making widgets?

Open a neighborhood H&R Block.

[AZGrizFan]

D, I am concerned about what Romney would do as President just as I'm concerned about what Obama will do if reelected. People mock Romney's business experience as irrelevant but I'm not sure Obama is qualified to run a lemonade stand in my driveway when it comes to understanding and managing the huge organization that is the federal government. I worry that Romney will try and cut taxes without reducing spending across the board (i.e. social services and military) and that our deficit will continue to spiral out of control. I worry that Obama will increase taxes and spend even more sending the country down the Mediterranean (Greece, Spain, Italy) path. I would prefer the moderate Romney who has demonstrated his ability to successfully start a company, run a state and turn around the Olympic games to the Romney that is pandering the far-right wing of the Republican party but I really don't know which one we'll get if he wins.

This election and the crappy choices that we have scare the sh!t out of me.

Fair points, except Romney hasn't built shit.

Douche1Bag: "I'm not really a retard, but I play one on the message board."

[D1B]

Fair points, except Romney hasn't built shit.

Douche1Bag: "I'm not really a retard, but I play one on the message board."

ASSGreaseFan: "If someone has money, they built it."

[AZGrizFan]

ASSGreaseFan: "If someone has money, they built it."

Douche1Bag: "If someone has money, they need to redistribute it to us lazy fucks who don't want to work for a living or earn what we get."

[D1B]

ASSGreaseFan: "If someone has money, they built it."

Douche1Bag: "If someone has money, they need to redistribute it to us lazy fucks who don't want to work for a living or earn what we get."

Uhhhhhh, not really ASSGreaseFan. I admire wealthy people who have worked hard to get where they're at, and then there's people like Romney and W. Both spoiled fuckheads born on third base and think they actually hit a triple.

You wanna hold these two up as pillars of business, ethics and success!? You truly are the board dipshit.

[AZGrizFan]

Uhhhhhh, not really ASSGreaseFan. I admire wealthy people who have worked hard to get where they're at, and then there's people like Romney and W. Both spoiled fuckheads born on third on third base and think they actually hit a triple.

You wanna hold these two up as pillars of business, ethics and success!? You truly are the board dipshit.

Not nearly as stupid as you holding up Obama as a pillar of business, ethics and success.

But hey, he won a Nobel Peace Prize, so he's got THAT going for him....

"I don't think Peace Prize winners should have a kill list."

[AZGrizFan]

D---my arm is gettin' tired from beatin' your ass on this thread.

I gotta go eat lunch. Don't let things get out of hand while I'm gone, brother.

[D1B]

D---my arm is gettin' tired from beatin' your ass on this thread.

I gotta go eat lunch. Don't let things get out of hand while I'm gone, brother.

The "I gotta go INSERT EXCUSE HERE" surrender!