[sparkscoffee] Re: Emailing: Scan0158 - Captalism Stinks On Ice
- From: "D.J.J. Ring, Jr." <n1ea@xxxxxxxx>
- To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 22:44:35 -0400
It is NOT a level playing field.
USA gives corporations tax credits for building foreign factories.
This benefit opposed by TeaParty Republicans should be ended immediately.
Imagine giving bonuses for closing a USA factory and building it outside
USA and getting tax credits for doing that.
Stand with TeaParty and eliminate that law.
73
D
On Sep 28, 2014 1:37 PM, "Redacted sender sblumen123@xxxxxxx for DMARC" <
dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> DR
> Either I wrote it wrong or you read it wrong? Free Trade Agreements with
> Level Playing Fields removing protectionists tarrifts which has opened the
> gates for American firms to close their factories here and put them up in
> low cost countries especially China and I consider myself a protectionist.
>
> Stanley
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: D.J.J. Ring, Jr. <n1ea@xxxxxxxx>
> To: sparkscoffee <sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sat, Sep 27, 2014 8:24 pm
> Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Emailing: Scan0158 - Captalism Stinks On Ice
>
> Stan,
>
> Does that mean that you want to give a tax break to USA corporations who
> want to build factories in China.
>
> It's very lazy and presumptious to say "We agree to disagree".
>
> We do not, you're the one who agrees without yourself and didn't read
> the message.
>
> Why do you shy away from discussing economics and finances?
>
> Because deep down you know that socialism doesn't work?
>
> Even socially it doesn't work - Hong Kong wants to vote on democracy.
> Guess who is against it? The Communists, because communism isn't about
> everyone sharing, it's about POWER for the Communist Party, the people are
> just pawns made to pay the government who controls their life - and we're
> getting there too.
>
> Democratic Party: A bunch of rich men and women trying to convince
> everyone that the other rich men and women are taking advantage of the
> workers and making them poor.
>
> That reality. Both the Democrats and Old Republicans are like that,
> that's why we need the TeaParty to rescue USA from these failed policies.
>
> At least we are rid of the most racist attorney general in history.
> Imagine not prosecuting black on white crime? He did that and much more.
>
> 73
> DR
>
> 73
>
> DR
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Redacted sender sblumen123@xxxxxxx for
> DMARC <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> DR
>> We agree to disagree.
>>
>> Stanley
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: D.J.J. Ring, Jr. <n1ea@xxxxxxxx>
>> To: sparkscoffee <sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Fri, Sep 26, 2014 5:37 pm
>> Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Emailing: Scan0158 - Captalism Stinks On Ice
>>
>> Stanley,
>>
>> If Corporations paid NO taxes on income, then there would be more money
>> for them to invest in Research and Development, maybe a new plant near you
>> in Florida, and of course many new jobs because of all these things.
>>
>> One thing I forgot is that "We the People" have given Corporations a
>> TAX BREAK to move out of the Country to build foreign factories.
>>
>> No to me - that is plain INSANE. I am guessing you'd agree with me on
>> that - as does the author below.
>>
>> (More below). You can read just the first paragraph if you wish -
>> cutting Corp taxes results in POSITIVE income to the US Treasury.
>>
>> 73
>> DR
>>
>>
>> *Forbes*
>> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/07/30/president-obamas-plan-for-corporate-tax-reform-a-grand-bargain-or-simply-another-name-for-an-old-proposal/>
>>
>> http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2013/07/30/president-obamas-plan-for-corporate-tax-reform-a-grand-bargain-or-simply-another-name-for-an-old-proposal/
>>
>>
>> *President Obama's Plan For Corporate Tax Reform: A 'Grand Bargain' Or
>> Simply Another Name For An Old Proposal? *
>>
>> Earlier today, President Obama took some time away from motivating
>> sputtering baseball teams to propose a “grand bargain,” whereby the
>> President would be willing to reduce corporate tax rates if the additional
>> tax revenue were used to create jobs for the middle class.
>>
>> Now, if you’re particularly sharp, you might have noticed an oddity in
>> that opening sentence. Specifically, if corporate tax rates would go down,
>> why would there be additional tax revenue available to spend on job
>> creation?
>>
>> That’s because along with the promised tax rate reduction, President
>> Obama would broaden the tax base by eliminating many of the deductions and
>> preferences available under today’s law. The net effect of these two
>> changes would result in an increase in total tax revenue collections; in
>> other words, the reduction in rates would be more than offset by the lost
>> deductions.
>>
>> This is a bit of a departure from the President’s previous proposals
>> for corporate reform, which have always been promised to be revenue
>> neutral. In a revenue neutral plan, only enough deductions would be cut to
>> generate the revenue necessary to “pay for” the revenue lost to lower tax
>> rates. No more, no less.
>>
>> I say the President’s latest plan is a “bit” of a departure because the
>> goal would still be to have the “grand bargain” reform be revenue neutral
>> over a ten-year period; however, the plan would generate net revenue in its
>> initial years, which would then be spent on job creation efforts such as
>> investing in infrastructure, manufacturing and community colleges.
>>
>> So what exactly is in the President’s “grand bargain” plan?
>>
>> As best I can tell, the limited details of the proposal pitched today
>> align neatly with the President’s previously published and creatively named
>> “The President’s Framework for Business Tax Reform.” The headlining item of
>> that proposal – which was echoed today – is to reduce the maximum corporate
>> rate from 35% to 28%, a promise that is likely to win some appreciation
>> from the Republican Party.
>>
>> But that’s about all the Republican Party will like about this plan,
>> because let’s call it what it is: a tax increase to fund additional
>> governmental spending. Not exactly true to Republican core values.
>>
>> The President’s plan can be separated into three distinct categories:
>> general corporate reform, manufacturing industry reform, and international
>> reform.
>>
>> General Corporate Reform
>>
>> The President (correctly) points out that our current tax system —
>> replete with innumerable deductions, exclusions and preferences — benefits
>> certain industries over others. Take a gander at the following table, which
>> illustrates the effective tax rate paid by different industries in 2007 and
>> 2008, even though they were all subject to the same 35% marginal rate:
>>
>>
>>
>> The president believes that when eliminating deductions and
>> preferences, care should be taken to equalize the benefits of the code
>> across all industries. To that end, he has placed a number of provisions
>> on the chopping block, calling for the following changes:
>>
>> Elimination of “Last in first out” accounting. Under the “last-in,
>> first-out” (LIFO) method of accounting for inventories, it is assumed that
>> the cost of the items of inventory that are sold is equal to the cost of
>> the items of inventory that were most recently purchased or produced. This
>> allows some businesses to artificially lower their tax liability.
>> Elimination of oil and gas tax preferences. The President would repeal
>> the expensing of intangible drilling costs, and percentage depletion for
>> oil and natural gas wells. .
>> Taxing carried (profits) interests as ordinary income. The President
>> would eliminate the loophole for managers in investment services
>> partnerships and tax carried interest at ordinary income rates.
>> Eliminate special depreciation rules for corporate purchases of aircraft.
>> This would eliminate the special depreciation rules that allow owners of
>> non-commercial aircraft to depreciate their aircraft more quickly (over
>> five years) than commercial aircraft (seven years).
>> Addressing depreciation schedules. Current depreciation schedules
>> generally overstate the true economic depreciation of assets.
>> Reducing the bias toward debt financing. Steps would be taken to reducing
>> the deductibility of interest for corporations. This would reduce
>> incentives to overleverage and produce more stable business finances,
>> especially in times of economic stress.
>> Manufacturing Industry Reform
>>
>> While the president asserts that all industries should be treated
>> equally, his plan then goes on to bestow certain preferences specifically
>> on the manufacturers by proposing the following:
>>
>> Effectively cutting the top corporate tax rate on manufacturing income
>> to 25 percent and to an even lower rate for income from advanced
>> manufacturing activities by reforming the domestic production activities
>> deduction. The President’s would focus the current I.R.C. § 199 deduction
>> more on manufacturing activity, expand the deduction to 10.7 percent, and
>> increase it even more for advanced manufacturing. This would effectively
>> cut the top corporate tax rate for manufacturing income to 25 percent and
>> even lower for advanced manufacturing.
>>
>> Expand, simplify and make permanent the R&D Tax Credit. The President’s
>> framework would increase the rate of the alternative simplified credit to
>> 17 percent.
>> Extend, consolidate, and enhance key tax incentives to encourage
>> investment in clean energy.
>>
>> *International Reform*
>>
>> It is in the international arena that the president’s proposals most
>> deviate from those of his Republican counterparts. While Republican leaders
>> have loudly called for a move to a “territorial” tax system, whereby U.S.
>> corporations would only pay tax on U.S. income, leaving other nations to
>> tax foreign profits, President Obama wants to expand the current corporate
>> tax regime to tax profits earned by foreign affiliates of U.S. corporations
>> before they are repatriated to the U.S.
>>
>> The president’s proposals include the following:
>>
>> Require companies to pay a minimum tax on overseas profits.
>> Specifically, under the President’s proposal, income earned by subsidiaries
>> of U.S. corporations operating abroad must be subject to a minimum rate of
>> tax. This would stop our tax system from generously rewarding companies for
>> moving profits offshore. Thus, foreign income deferred in a low-tax
>> jurisdiction would be subject to immediate U.S. taxation up to the minimum
>> tax rate with a foreign tax credit allowed for income taxes on that income
>> paid to the host country. This minimum tax would be designed to balance the
>> need to stop rewarding tax havens and to prevent a race to the bottom with
>> the goal of keeping U.S. companies on a level playing field with
>> competitors when engaged in activities which, by necessity, must occur in a
>> foreign country.
>>
>> Remove tax deductions for moving productions overseas and provide new
>> incentives for bringing production back to the United States. The President
>> is proposing that companies will no longer be allowed to claim tax
>> deductions for moving their operations abroad. At the same time, to help
>> bring jobs home, the President is proposing to give a 20 percent income tax
>> credit for the expenses of moving operations back into the United States.
>>
>> Other reforms to reduce incentives to shift income and assets overseas.
>> The President would strengthen the international tax rules by taxing
>> currently the excess profits associated with shifting intangibles to low
>> tax jurisdictions. In addition, under current law, U.S. businesses that
>> borrow money and invest overseas can claim the interest they pay as a
>> business expense and take an immediate deduction to reduce their U.S.
>> taxes, even if they pay little or no U.S. taxes on their overseas
>> investment. The President would eliminate this tax advantage by requiring
>> that the deduction for the interest expense attributable to overseas
>> investment be delayed until the related income is taxed in the United
>> States.
>>
>> Republican leaders have already shouted down the President’s “grand
>> bargain” proposal, with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell taking
>> issue with the planned increase in revenue by calling it, “…just a
>> further-left version of a widely panned plan he already proposed two years
>> ago – this time, with extra goodies for tax-and-spend liberals.”
>>
>> Needless to say, the hyperpartisan environment that exists in Congress
>> today is not conducive to tax reform. One side is going to have to be
>> willing to budge, or today’s speech is as close as we’ll ever get to a
>> grand bargain.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Redacted sender Sblumen123@xxxxxxx for
>> DMARC <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> DR
>>> If we don't tax the corporations because they simply pass it on to us
>>> consumers including with other expenses and profits then would you be
>>> willing to have your taxes increased? If not, who is there left to tax?
>>> I didn't take a course in economics, did you? Think, think, think.
>>>
>>> Stanley
>>>
>>> In a message dated 9/22/2014 7:42:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>> dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>>
>>> DR
>>> Think, think,think. No taxes means BIGGER PROFITS to buy bigger mega
>>> Yachts, bigger mega Mansions etc.. Killing unions, lower wages, longer
>>> working hours, fewer holidays, shorter vacations, less safety rules etc,
>>> which is the same as less taxes to maintain or increase profits which we
>>> must not hurt, will also bring jobs and the factories back. Slave labor is
>>> the best. Think, think, think,
>>>
>>> Comrade B, the mensh
>>>
>>> In a message dated 9/21/2014 9:43:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>>> n1ea@xxxxxxxx writes:
>>>
>>> Corporations pass taxation costs to consumers. Eliminate corporation
>>> income taxes, you will increase gross national product because goods will
>>> cost.
>>> Only a socialist would be stupid enough to tax corporations.
>>> 73
>>> DR
>>> On Sep 19, 2014 4:43 PM, "Redacted sender Sblumen123@xxxxxxx for
>>> DMARC" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Everyone
>>>> Ask what you can do for your country, not what your country can do for
>>>> you. Patriotism Before Profitism,
>>>> Not Profitism Before Patriotism.
>>>>
>>>> Reducing Corporate Taxes to keep Businesses here is a form of bribary
>>>> and shifts the burden of necessary
>>>> taxes on the rest of us no matter how you slice it.
>>>>
>>>> Stanley
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your message is ready to be sent with the following file or link
>>>> attachments:
>>>>
>>>> Scan0158
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent
>>>> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail
>>>> security settings to determine how attachments are handled.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
