H50 2x22

( Brief not particularly insightful thoughts )

You heard it here ... again

U.S. Business Has High Tax Rates but Pays Less

Topping out at 35 percent, America’s official corporate income tax rate trails that of only Japan, at 39.5 percent, which has said it plans to lower its rate. It is nearly triple Ireland’s and 10 percentage points higher than in Denmark, Austria or China. To help companies here stay competitive, many executives say, Congress should lower it.

But by taking advantage of myriad breaks and loopholes that other countries generally do not offer, United States corporations pay only slightly more on average than their counterparts in other industrial countries. And some American corporations use aggressive strategies to pay less — often far less — than their competitors abroad and at home.

In addition to being complex and uneven, the United States corporate tax code is inefficient and has become a diminishing source of revenue. Corporate taxes accounted for about 9 percent of all federal revenue in 2010. At $191 billion, they were equal to 1.3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Most industrial countries collect more from companies, about 2.5 percent of output.

Assorted proposals being discussed in Washington call for the rate to be lowered officially to about 25 percent and some tax breaks to be eliminated so that revenue remains unchanged.

But some prominent business leaders, including the chief executive of Procter & Gamble, are pushing for the rate to be reduced without reining in tax shelters. That would make the United States virtually the only country to change corporate taxes in recent years in a way that ended up adding to its deficit.

Meanwhile, check out NJ Governor Chris Christie, fiscal conservative:

What corporate interest won’t Chris Christie subsidize with taxpayer dollars?

The New Jersey governor, press favorite, and conservative hero is unloading more taxpayer money to private interests. He’s doled out 100 million bucks to a Japanese company, handed real estate tycoon Mort Zuckerman $42 million, and is subsidizing a casino in Atlantic City with $261 million in cheap financing. The latest giveaway is astonishing: subsidizing a Canadian company with some $400 million in tax subsidies and cheap loans to finish the disastrous Xanadu mall in the Meadowlands, The New York Times reports. Half the $400 million is from future tax revenue the state will forego.

This is the guy who turned down federal funding for a badly-needed tunnel from New Jersey to New York, even though building the tunnel would have provided New Jersey with well-paying jobs (with associated taxes) and repaired the crumbling infrastructure, and even though rejecting the money meant New Jersey would have to repay the federal government $271 million - all because New Jersey couldn't afford that kind of spending.

Sure. New Jersey can't afford any kind of public spending that generates wealth for the public. When the money goes to the private sector, however - let the good times roll!

If only real-life people actually had to obey the same laws

Superman, future tax deadbeat?

The Son of Jor-el has a problem.

Not Kryptonite or Lex Luthor or those fashion-challenged creepshows from Superman II.

No, his beef is with — or rather, will be with — the IRS.

You probably heard that last week, in Action Comics #900, Superman said he planned to renounce his American citizenship in a speech before the United Nations.

He means well, of course, but in this case his good intentions have merely paved the road to big tax problems.

The gang at law firm Withers Bergman, in a note pleading with him to reconsider, explain:

Surrendering your U.S. citizenship triggers a deemed sale of your worldwide assets (the law is unclear on extraterrestrial assets). I mean, just think about what the giant gold key to the fortress of solitude is worth. That thing weighs tons and gold is $1,500 an ounce! We’re talking millions in capital gains tax. Oh, and all your keepsakes and mementos would be considered collectibles, so that stuff is taxed at 28%! It’s going to be a big bill. What’s your cash position like these days?

I hope you don’t think you’re avoiding gift and estate tax by doing this. You will be a Covered Expatriate, so if you make a gift or bequest to an American they will owe tax at the top rate. No brackets and you don’t get to use that shiny new $5 million exemption we keep hearing about. Yeah, those nice earrings you were going to give to Lois Lane, well they come with a big tax bill my friend. Nice job Romeo. Same thing for gifts to Jimmy Olsen or that Clark Kent guy you seem to be friends with. By the way, it’s weird that I can’t find a picture of you guys together. Oh well.

Truth is, you’re probably not even going to get out of U.S. income tax. Do you plan on being in the U.S. more than 4 months a year? We call it the Substantial Presence test amigo, and you’re going to get nailed by it. That’s right, give up U.S. citizenship and you still owe Uncle Sam the same amount every year.

This? Would be why I no longer subscribe to the WSJ

Once upon a time, before Murdoch took over, it was an amazing paper. The editorial page was toxic, but it kept a very firm wall between editorials and news, and the news pages were awesome.

Not so much anymore:

Lucky Duckies Waddle Onto the WSJ News Pages


The Wall Street Journal has a poor story today reporting that “High-Earning Households Pay Growing Share of Taxes.”

The paper’s editorial page has long pushed this issue, notoriously referring to folks who pay no income taxes as “lucky duckies.” You know, lucky enough to be so poor that they don’t have to pay taxes.

The Journal’s story would have you believe that the rich are shouldering almost all of the tax burden. But the federal income tax is just part of the overall tax burden, and the paper barely mentions that fact, while it conflates income taxes and overall federal taxes.

[T]here’s this from the Journal today:

They say it’s more important to look at the tax rates being paid by higher earners. In the U.S., the average tax rate for higher earners has fluctuated, but generally has declined for the top 10% from 29.6% in 1979, to 26.7% in 2007, according to the CBO, even as incomes for that group were rising.

That’s misleading. The Journal has been talking about federal income taxes up to now, but this CBO number includes all federal taxes, including payroll. The top 10 percent paid nowhere near a 26.7 percent federal income-tax rate in 2007. That number, according to the same CBO estimates, was 16.2 percent, and it was 18.8 percent, according to the IRS (spreadsheet), which oughta know.

If you want a real look at who pays taxes in the U.S., you have to include payroll and excise taxes for everybody, as well as state and local taxes, which are highly regressive...

Major, major insta-rec

With My Feet Toward the Stars. Reboot Kirk/Spock, but really so much more. Surreal and beautiful.