• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Sanders and Trump: Much more alike than supporters of each would like to admit.

And now Sanders is up by 9 over Hillary in today's dem NH poll. It's not just the pubs. Both sides are going rogue populist. Could we really have a general with Sanders v. Trump or Carson? What would either cabinet look like? Would John Bolton or Paul Wolfowitz be too mild to be Trump's Secretary of State?
 
cville deac said:
And now Sanders is up by 9 over Hillary in today's dem NH poll. It's not just the pubs. Both sides are going rogue populist. Could we really have a general with Sanders v. Trump or Carson? What would either cabinet look like? Would John Bolton or Paul Wolfowitz be too mild to be Trump's Secretary of State?
Click to expand...

Palin said she wants to be Trump's Secretary of Energy, but only long enough to abolish it. Long-term gigs aren't Sarah's thing. Also said people should speak American.
 
Sanders' proposal to tax the worldwide income of US mulitnationals at the US rate less FTC might be the most idiotic policy proposal I have ever seen from a major party candidate. Even the nanny state Nordic countries are smart enough to understand that this is lunacy.

People are really dumb and this nonsense plays with them.

If we end up with Sanders vs Trump then this country deserves what it gets.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
Sanders' proposal to tax the worldwide income of US mulitnationals at the US rate less FTC might be the most idiotic policy proposal I have ever seen from a major party candidate. Even the nanny state Nordic countries are smart enough to understand that this is lunacy.
Click to expand...

Care to elaborate?
 
Strickland33 said:
Care to elaborate?
Click to expand...

The US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world by a good margin. 35% on income (not including state income taxes). The US is one of the few countries that tries to tax the worldwide income of US parents as well. Because of this, the US allows companies to set up foreign subsidiaries and defer income that these subsidiaries earn, provided they meet certain conditions, so that the US owned companies can compete on an equal footing in the countries that they have set up operations with local companies in these jurisdictions that pay the local corporate rates. This profit isn't taxed at the US rate until repatriated.

Sanders wants to eliminate this so US companies will have to pay 35% taxes on income they earn everywhere in the world, even when they are competing against companies in countries where they have a 15% or 20% tax rate. Needless to say, the ability of US companies to compete abroad would be severely handicapped. The local companies can undercut the US company by the difference in the US and local corporate tax rates and maintain the same profit % as the US company.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
The US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world by a good margin. 35% on income (not including state income taxes). The US is one of the few countries that tries to tax the worldwide income of US parents as well. Because of this, the US allows companies to set up foreign subsidiaries and defer income that these subsidiaries earn, provided they meet certain conditions, so that the US owned companies can compete on an equal footing in the countries that they have set up operations with local companies in these jurisdictions that pay the local corporate rates. This profit isn't taxed at the US rate until repatriated.

Sanders wants to eliminate this so US companies will have to pay 35% taxes on income they earn everywhere in the world, even when they are competing against companies in countries where they have a 15% or 20% tax rate. Needless to say, the ability of US companies to compete abroad would be severely handicapped. The local companies can undercut the US company by the difference in the US and local corporate tax rates and maintain the same profit % as the US company.
Click to expand...

You know that 35% line is not really true in practice. After all the deductions and credits thanks to our shitty, complex tax code the real rate isn't that high. For some it isn't anywhere close to that.
 
Alot of that is BS propaganda from sources who are trying to sway public opinion. They pull worldwide income of US multinationals and compare it to the tax expense on their financial statements and try to perform some ad hoc analysis to determine what they are paying in taxes.

Secondly, in many cases, the tax treatment of items makes alot more economic sense than the book treatment of items. If Company A goes out and issues stock and takes those proceeds and pays compensation with them, then they can expense those payments. If they issue options to employees and end up in the same cash position, then the book treatment will give you a wildly different answer. Tax treats things on a cash flow basis for the most part instead of getting into alot of the theoretical accounting treatment of book accounting where you can end up with answers that make no economic sense.

There are two main areas where a company can significantly lower their effective tax rate. (1) They have lots of operations overseas and can take advantage of lower international corporate tax rates and worldwide income allocation strategies, or (2) They are a growth start up company that issues alot of stock compensation.

In the last few years, we have had US companies wanting to invert to Canada and the UK. These aren't exotic tax haven countries. You need to ask yourself why the corporate tax laws in these countries would be so favorable to the US.

The US corporate tax code is the most unfavorable in the world. Don't kid yourself, that 35% rate factors into alot of corporate tax decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top