It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Huge Corporate Profits- so Why do They Need a Tax Cut?

page: 4
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: UndeadWarrior



t doesn't stop them, but when the people and governments of the world change...some of these sick men and women will follow suit!

Or start a profitable war.




posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: seasonal
I seriously doubt that the equation is as easy as each of us keyboard warriors think it is.


The point is they wouldn't need to explore these options if our corporate rate wasn't insane.

Who it really hurts are small businesses that cannot invert or employ an army of lawyers and accountants to help find these loopholes or negotiate the deals.

The corporate tax isn't very progressive, ie, a smaller company gets taxed at the same rate as Apple or Exxon. In fact due to their lobbying efforts, the big boys probably pay less in percent sometimes. That's a major issue. The really big companies who park billions overseas are the ones hurting us from a tax perspective, not Smith Enterprises doing a million of revenue. I have no issue with behemoths paying more in taxes, that's how it works on the individual level. Congress is beholden to the big Multinationals rather than small business.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   
i thought most small businesses weren't corporations, so this whole argument is bogus, once again. In fact, I see businesses everywhere I go (I live in a pretty large city) so I don't see that there's any shortage of business or business profits.

What there is a shortage of is money for regular people.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

The solution is a total reset.

No safety nets. Nothing preserved.

Start from zero. Burn it all

Erase all traces of our legacy. Ask the new ones to be simple and kind. That is all.

We are wicked.

Either something takes our place or we limit ourselves.

This wont happen so we need to be destroyed.

Every time....



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Tax their stock market....a small tax on every transaction...

a lot of money is made on the stock market....where no products or services are produced....

time to regulate the profit for nothing mob.....



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: tri-lobe-1

Get rid of the stock market and half the problem is solved



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
BECAUSE the Federal tax rate for corporations is among the HIGHEST of any country at 35%. If you want productivity to rise, you cut taxes. Who do you think actually pays "corporate taxes"????? We do. Raise corporate taxes and the price of the product goes up a like amount. Pretty simple, really. When you raise taxes the government gets bigger. The government has never met a tax it doesn't like.

So after the tax cuts can we expect the price of products to go down a 'like amount'?



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Corporate taxes are used to prevent competition and promote cartels and monopolies. I would like to see all corporate taxes abolished of just have a simple flat rate national sales tax. Competition is the only thing we have to wring out the inefficiencies of exorbitant CEO compensation packages.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll

Of course not, silly.
Wages will go up.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015




I would like to see all corporate taxes abolished of just have a simple flat rate national sales tax.

Yeah. That way, when the poor buy food and stuff, the tax they pay will be a higher percentage of their earnings. And for the high wage earners it will be less.

Good idea. Sounds fair.

edit on 11/11/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

If that we're true, it would be a step in the right direction...but WHO's wages would go up? CEO, CFO, VPs, etc...



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: UndeadWarrior

Well, if they give dividends to stockholders, those would go up first. Followed by those other guys. Other employees, not so much. Probly.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

MOst high ranking employees in organizations are stockholders anyways, they wouldn't need the pay increase, they would just ask to be paid with more stock. At least, that is how it works for some of the big cheeses where I work, they must own a certain amount of shares to even be in that position, and they mostly get their raises and bonuses via shares(at the highest level of corporate structure of course).

In the end, no matter how much you tax large corporations, they will find a way to INCREASE the price to the domestics/customers, and INCREASE shareholder/owner incomes.

edit on 11-11-2017 by UndeadWarrior because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: UndeadWarrior

Yeah. It's been shown that trickle down, doesn't.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I think to often people confuse corporate profits with personal income and seem to be unaware of who the stockholders are.

Who actually owns the stock.

It's easy to think that the stock market is the playground of hedge funds and day traders, but in reality most of the stock market is owned by the average joe.

In fact, the largest chunk is doing one thing: helping people retire.

In a white paper, Steven Rosenthal and Lydia Austin of the Tax Policy Center have broken out exactly which kind of investors own the stock market. They found that a majority of corporate stock is owned by different types of retirement plans, the largest being IRAs and defined-benefit plans.




The idea should be to lower the taxes and remove the loopholes.
edit on 11/11/2017 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555




The idea should be to lower the taxes and remove the loopholes.
Toward what net result?



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I think that's fairly obvious. Without the loopholes, even with lower taxes they would still pay a bit more and all pay the same.

I don't like this winners and losers chosen by which one can take advantage of which loophole. Loopholes are paybacks or special favors IMO. Eliminating them or the possibility of them would help clean up the sewer in DC IMO.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555



Without the loopholes, even with lower taxes they would still pay a bit more and all pay the same.

So, the GOP is lying? Corporations won't have more money with which to raise wages (because what else would they do with higher profits)?

I'm shocked.


edit on 11/11/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I'm the wrong person to try and drag into a Right Left nonsense debate. I hate both Parties equally. If you want my view on that they should all be impeached and replaced both Dem's and Republicans.

My opinion is based on how I see it and have seen it for a long time now. I believe with a simple 10% tax on profits across the board we would see more revenue and everyone would be playing on a level field.

Small companies can't advantage the loopholes the large ones can and it puts them at an extreme disadvantage.



posted on Nov, 11 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

Sounds good on paper, and might be feasible. But defining profit is the problematic part and is precisely where those "loopholes" reside. One man's business expense is another man's yacht.

edit on 11/11/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
25
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join