It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Some of the revenue hit is being blamed on changes affecting hedge funds, an important industry for Connecticut. Sullivan noted how several international hedge funds have recently failed, resulting in "significant retrenchment" from investors. That drop in tolerance for risk brings smaller margins and ultimately less personal income for the state to tax, he added.
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Edumakated
For sure. Corporations are paying way too much and are suffering horrendously because of it (only 2,000% executive profit growth instead of 10,000%). Let the Lower/Middle class fat-cats finally pay their fair share!
Corporations don't pay taxes...
The tax is just passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. Sooner or later, corporations will choose to locate to more tax favorable countries. Capital is fluid and will always seek to reduce expenses.
This is just straight up untrue. It's just a conservative talking point. If you feel otherwise, explain why it is easier to get a corporate job in high tax New York City but near impossible in low tax Wisconsin? But hey, here are some studies on it too.
Studies: Rich Don't Flee High-Tax States. No company in its right mind would leave this country for a lower tax rate in Somalia. Plus tax rates are higher in Europe than they are here.
Though, if you think about it you are being hypocritical. At first you say that corporations don't pay taxes then suggest that these same corporations that aren't paying taxes will flee high tax areas. Why? If they aren't paying them like you suggest then there is no need for them to leave.
Go look at your cell phone bill, airline ticket, or any number of invoices and you will often see surcharges for various taxes itemized. Businesses absolutely pass all taxes on to consumers in one form or another. Does it translate dollar for dollar? No, but it most certainly is taken into account.
At some point, taxes get too high and a company decides they can lower their cost of operations by moving. Regardless if the consumer is paying it directly or not, when you have competitors in lower tax areas, it means they can price more aggressively.
originally posted by: Aazadan
originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: Aazadan
I'm sorry but you're just wrong. One year I think it was like 6 or 7 years ago I paid a negative 19% tax. Yes I actually got back more money than I put in.
We need a flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage doesn't have to be much 10 or 12% would be more than enough to end up getting more than we already do. You got to understand that the Uber rich don't pay as much in taxes they use tax Havens like 501c's.
A flat tax is the only fair tax. I love it when people say the rich need to pay their fair share okay lowers their taxes by like 20% and then they'll be closer to paying their fair share.
The wealthy pay an effective rate of about 14 or 15% right now. Everyone else pays an effective rate of about 11%. Why should the middle class face a tax increase in the name of tax reform, when they're not the ones that can afford it?
Flat tax is just a code word for making the poor pay more in order to give the rich tax breaks. When the poor have so little in taxable assets, as is currently the case... then you simply can't make up any substantial amount of revenue by taxing them more. It doesn't matter what percent you tax them at.
originally posted by: bigdaveyl
You're not getting it.
Who cares if you're paying 10% or 12% of the standard deduction doubles?