Corporate Income Taxes - Close The Loopholes & Lower Taxes?

[EnlightenedChosenOne]

What should we do about the current corporate income tax situation?

finance.yahoo.com/news/the-insane-u-s--corporate-tax-system-145353359.html

We have the highest tax rates in the world, yet it seems so many large corporates hire armies of lawyers and accountants to (legally) shift cash around and drastically reduce their effective tax rate.

Is the current tax system screwing over the small to mid sized enterprises that don't have the resources to dodge taxes?

[tvc184]

I don't think there is anyone that likes our current system. In my opinion the best way would be some sort of progressive flat income tax. 

 

The "flat" being to get rid of most loopholes. 

[tvc184]

.............. and I think the fair or consumption tax that is advocated by many is stupid and unfair to the lower income people. 

[PN-G bamatex]

I'm personally for a (semi-)flat tax with a small deduction for charitable donations and no other deductions at all.

The more complex the tax code, the more easily it can be taken advantage of and the more corruption sets in. It's easier to hold people accountable when the laws are simple.

[tvc184]

I'm personally for a (semi-)flat tax with a small deduction for charitable donations and no other deductions at all.

The more complex the tax code, the more easily it can be taken advantage of and the more corruption sets in. It's easier to hold people accountable when the laws are simple.

 

That is why I said getting rid of most loopholes but it should have been exemptions. The problem with the "some exemptions" is that people will always want to be included in the exemption. 

[CraigS]

.............. and I think the fair or consumption tax that is advocated by many is stupid and unfair to the lower income people. 

Just curious. Why is this unfair? Taxes paid would be relative to your spending abilities.

[EnlightenedChosenOne]

Lower and middle class families spend more on consumption as a percentage of overall income than than a wealthy family.

Example, family X makes $25,000, spends $20,000 on consumer goods (excluding tax) and with an 8% consumption tax would pay $1,600 in taxes. The tax would be 6.4% of their overall income.

Now, family Y makes $1,000,000 a year and spends $200,000 on consumer goods (excluding tax) and with an 8% would pay $16,000 in taxes. The tax would be 1.6% of their overall income.

Family X pays more as a percentage but family y pays more in absolute terms.

Just curious. Why is this unfair? Taxes paid would be relative to your spending abilities.

[CraigS]

Lower and middle class families spend more on consumption as a percentage of overall income than than a wealthy family.

Example, family X makes $25,000, spends $20,000 on consumer goods (excluding tax) and with an 8% consumption tax would pay $1,600 in taxes. The tax would be 6.4% of their overall income.

Now, family Y makes $1,000,000 a year and spends $200,000 on consumer goods (excluding tax) and with an 8% would pay $16,000 in taxes. The tax would be 1.6% of their overall income.

Family X pays more as a percentage but family y pays more in absolute terms.



 

I should have read better the first time...."consumption tax" as in FOOD. That already isn't taxed. So, I assume TVC meant to leave it that way....if that's the case I agree, it should remain un-taxed.

[EnlightenedChosenOne]

Ahh yes, I agree.

But even in my scenario I don't think it's fair (assuming consumption means consumer goods)

I should have read better the first time...."consumption tax" as in FOOD. That already isn't taxed. So, I assume TVC meant to leave it that way....if that's the case I agree, it should remain un-taxed.

[CraigS]

Ahh yes, I agree.

But even in my scenario I don't think it's fair (assuming consumption means consumer goods)
 

Well, If it means anything other than FOOD....I'd have to agree with the tax. If you don't have money, one shouldn't be purchasing "toys" (unnecessary) items anyway. 

 

That's part of the problem, people aren't "ENTITLED" to a certain level of life, just life itself. But this has been discussed many times on other threads....the battle of those who believe in entitlements and those who don't. OR is it...the argument of what one should be ENTITLED to.

[Big girl]

Lower and middle class families spend more on consumption as a percentage of overall income than than a wealthy family.

Example, family X makes $25,000, spends $20,000 on consumer goods (excluding tax) and with an 8% consumption tax would pay $1,600 in taxes. The tax would be 6.4% of their overall income.

Now, family Y makes $1,000,000 a year and spends $200,000 on consumer goods (excluding tax) and with an 8% would pay $16,000 in taxes. The tax would be 1.6% of their overall income.

Family X pays more as a percentage but family y pays more in absolute terms.

I agree

[tvc184]

Just curious. Why is this unfair? Taxes paid would be relative to your spending abilities.

 

ESO already hit it. 

 

A family that is making $25,000 a year for a family of four is living paycheck to paycheck. Heck, many families making $75,000 a year are living paycheck to paycheck. The only difference is the size of the home, the number of vehicles and the quality of food. They are still spending almost every dollar on expenses whether it is bologna or steak. 

 

So if we take a family making $25K and remove all taxes except what they spend, they will be taxed on 100% of their income as they are literally spending every dollar that they make. Even if you exempt some things as non taxable, they are still spending every dollar.

 

Now let's move up to that millionaire and every area has plenty of them. Let's say a family is making $1M a year. How much of that is being spend on goods (or services if that is taxed) and how much is being put in stocks, the bank and other such ventures where goods are not purchased? They might be spending $200K on actual goods so they are only taxed on 20% of their income. Instead of our current progressive tax where the more you make, the higher your tax rate, we would have a regressive tax where the more you make the less percentage you pay as it is not being spent on goods or services as the "fair tax" proponents want. 

 

Of course in our fantasy world we could start taxing savings accounts, 401Ks, IRAs, etc. I am not talking about your interest income from those which is taxable but merely deposits. That is the only way you are going to get those millionaires to pay their "fair share". But who will it hurt? So when that family making $25K a year finally saves $500 and decides to start putting some away..... oops!, they are hit with a 10% tax at the time of deposit so that $500 is not only $450. See how long it will take at 1% interest from banks to make up that loss from merely making a deposit. 

 

Simply put, there is no way that we can tax goods and/or services only and have it hurt the rich guy and not destroy the less fortunate. The very rich might make millions or even billions a year but you can bet they aren't spending that money. The poor family on the other hand is spending every cent.