Analysis of Trump''s Tax Plan

Originally posted by dadudemon
https://taxfoundation.org/cbo-report-compares-us-corporate-tax-g20/

We are #1 in Statutory Tax Rates, #3 Effective Corporate Tax Rate, and # 4 in marginal tax rates for corporations.

Why do you say that the US has an incredibly low effective corporate tax rate when it is almost the highest in the world?

From the study: https://itep.org/the-35-percent-corporate-tax-myth/

It could also be argued that the figures by the Tax Foundation (sourced from CBO) paint an over-optimistic outlook. Other research has put the effective corporate rate as low as 12.5 or 14%. See below:

http://www.epi.org/publication/corporations-pay-between-13-and-19-percent-in-federal-taxes-far-less-than-the-35-percent-statutory-tax-rate/

Originally posted by lazybones
I'm pretty sure he's speaking of the effective corporate tax relative to the headline rate in the US, as opposed to the rates of international competitors. In which case, his claim is reasonable. Because as the link posted says, there is potentially a 20-point+ gap between the statutory and effective rate depending on the metric. 18% is 'incredibly low' compared to 39%. And although taking the 29% average rate makes the gap a lot smaller, using an average obfuscates some of the very low effective rates that certain major industries pay.

From the study: https://itep.org/the-35-percent-corporate-tax-myth/

It could also be argued that the figures by the Tax Foundation (sourced from CBO) paint an over-optimistic outlook. Other research has put the effective corporate rate as low as 12.5 or 14%. See below:

http://www.epi.org/publication/corporations-pay-between-13-and-19-percent-in-federal-taxes-far-less-than-the-35-percent-statutory-tax-rate/

I disagree with your conclusion on his words. He didn't mince words: he said "effective corporate tax rate" and that's verifiable, easy to look up, and to compare to other countries.

Your point boils down to: "Some corporations pay more than others." Well, yeah.

Edit - If you'd like to start a conspiracy theory discussion about the tax foundation being corrupt or that they are spreading lies, that's okay.

RIP to the billions who died over this plan.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
nom nom yummy corporate cash

Not even that, as they actually work for free. Why do you think Trump told his base that he "loves the poorly educated". Free labor, bro. Trump can even insult them to their faces and they cheer.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I disagree with your conclusion on his words. He didn't mince words: he said "effective corporate tax rate" and that's verifiable, easy to look up, and to compare to other countries.

Your point boils down to: "Some corporations pay more than others." Well, yeah.

Of those corporations in our sample with significant offshore profits, more than half paid higher corporate tax rates to foreign governments where they operate than they paid in the United States on their U.S. profits.

But none of that was actually my main point. My main point was that the 18% effective marginal rate could be seen as 'incredibly low' when contrasted with the 39% statutory rate, so that could be a more charitable interpretation of what DarthSkywalker was trying to say. But I suppose he'll have to clarify.

Edit - If you'd like to start a conspiracy theory discussion about the tax foundation being corrupt or that they are spreading lies, that's okay.

If true this is funny:

Heh: Former DNC Aide Sheepishly Admits Receiving Tax Reform Bonus, US Wages and Benefits Rise in 2017

If this woman truly did have this happen, does she feel guilty? How does she deal with the fact millions had to die for her to get this?

Anyways, I am suspicious about this being real though, note the last line:

"What you do with your money is completely up to you" Lol. Would any Democrat truly say that?

Originally posted by lazybones
Okay, we'll have to wait to see what he has to say about what he meant. I think it was ambiguous enough to have a more charitable interpretation, so I assumed that was the intended one.

Sorry, there's no wiggle room at all in his words. You're not being charitable. You're being a contrarian and dishonest.

Originally posted by lazybones
I never said anything like that, just that other studies tell a different story than they do. That's not a conspiratorial thing to say, but simply something you do when looking at a particular claim made by an ideologically slanted think-tank. As it happens, I think the Tax Foundation can put out some interesting pieces of analysis, I just don't think their commentary on this is entirely accurate.

Again, you want to start a conspiracy about the Tax Foundation. You do a lot of double-speak: more so than I have ever seen from anyone on KMC, before.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Sorry, there's no wiggle room at all in his words. You're not being charitable. You're being a contrarian and dishonest.

Again, you want to start a conspiracy about the Tax Foundation. You do a lot of double-speak: more so than I have ever seen from anyone on KMC, before.

Originally posted by lazybones
No, there is wiggle room

No there is not. You can take all of his words, in order, and find the exact numbers he's looking for and then see, quite clearly, that he's factually incorrect.

Originally posted by lazybones
Nonsense.

No, nonsense to you. You're exploring conspiracy theories but trying to hide your actual point. You're wrong.

NPR:
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/07/541797699/fact-check-does-the-u-s-have-the-highest-corporate-tax-rate-in-the-world

According to research done by Congressional Research Service, Effective Tax rate for the US is 27.1% and for all other OECD Countries, it averages 23.3

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41743.pdf

In 2014, "World Bank and International Finance Commission, which put the United States’ effective rate for 2014 at 27.9 percent. That’s second-highest behind New Zealand among OECD countries and 15th-highest among the 189 countries measured."

"In 2011, the Tax Foundation published a survey of 13 prior estimates of the United States’ effective tax rate from 2005 to 2011. All 13 studies pegged the U.S.’s rate as above average, but none had the U.S. rate first overall."

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/sep/09/eric-bolling/does-us-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-free-world/

None of these, none, support the position of "an incredibly low effective corporate tax rates."

Also, your source, the Economic Policy Institute, is well known for it's left leaning bias which is heavily funded by "Organized Labor":

"...EPI is obviously a Democratic labor-union front lobby."

"By just taking a look at the EPI board of directors, we find that 10 of the board members are heads or former heads of national unions, including Richard Trumka (AFL-CIO), Randi Weingarten (American Federation of Teachers), Andy Stern and Anna Burger (SEIU), Ron Gettelfinger (United Auto Workers), and Leo Gerard (United Steelworkers of America). Consider also that one of the institute's former senior economists, Jared Bernstein, is now the chief economist and economic policy advisor to Vice President Joe Biden."

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/economic-policy-institute/

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/516-economic-policy-institute/

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Economic_Policy_Institute

http://www.weeklystandard.com/just-a-reminder-the-economic-policy-institute-is-dominated-by-labor-interests/article/552391

Cherry picking ideas, for sure. Not research that aligns with mainstream economics, for sure.

You're wrong. Dead wrong. And so was Darthskywalker. Please accept you are wrong. This is the last I will respond. At this point, it is so very clear that both of you were wrong that your involvement in this conversation is suspect. You're either trolling or a delusional idiot.

You seem to be responding to a point that I did not make. I do not deny that the US corporate tax rates are high compared to their competitors, simply that the average rates (both effective and statutory) cannot possibly tell the full story because there are massive differences between industries. So massive that more than half of companies actually pay more tax to foreign governments where they operate than the US. This is from the first study I cited from ITEP (not EPI).

No, nonsense to you. You're exploring conspiracy theories but trying to hide your actual point. You're wrong.

NPR:
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/07/5417...te-in-the-world

According to research done by Congressional Research Service, Effective Tax rate for the US is 27.1% and for all other OECD Countries, it averages 23.3

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41743.pdf

And I feel that I have to stress this because you seem to have missed the point. I do not deny that the US has high corporate tax rates compared to competitors. I am simply pointing out that these figures utterly obfuscate the fact that more than half of companies pay more tax to foreign governments than the US. The headline rates (both effective and statutory) gloss over crucial nuance that is required to understand the mess that is the corporate tax code.

In 2014, "World Bank and International Finance Commission, which put the United States’ effective rate for 2014 at 27.9 percent. That’s second-highest behind New Zealand among OECD countries and 15th-highest among the 189 countries measured."

"In 2011, the Tax Foundation published a survey of 13 prior estimates of the United States’ effective tax rate from 2005 to 2011. All 13 studies pegged the U.S.’s rate as above average, but none had the U.S. rate first overall."

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...ate-free-world/

Also, your source, the Economic Policy Institute, is well known for it's left leaning bias which is heavily funded by "Organized Labor":

"...EPI is obviously a Democratic labor-union front lobby."

"By just taking a look at the EPI board of directors, we find that 10 of the board members are heads or former heads of national unions, including Richard Trumka (AFL-CIO), Randi Weingarten (American Federation of Teachers), Andy Stern and Anna Burger (SEIU), Ron Gettelfinger (United Auto Workers), and Leo Gerard (United Steelworkers of America). Consider also that one of the institute's former senior economists, Jared Bernstein, is now the chief economist and economic policy advisor to Vice President Joe Biden."

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/econ...licy-institute/

https://www.activistfacts.com/organ...licy-institute/

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.p...olicy_Institute

http://www.weeklystandard.com/just-.../article/552391

Cherry picking ideas, for sure. Not research that aligns with mainstream economics, for sure.

1. The EPI wasn't even the primary source I was citing, the primary source I was citing was ITEP, which is the one that probed the misleading average rates usually peddled by looking at a industry-by-industry breakdown and studying many companies over a 7 year period.

2. The EPI was citing other studies on the subject, not making its own calculations.

3. Appeal to motive is inherently fallacious. So even if I was citing it as the primary source, none of what you said rebuts what I'm saying.

Making America Great Again!!!

Millions dead from net neutrality, millions dead from the tax savings...oh the humanity!!

Donald Trump is a Genius!

(Bumping this up so it doesn't get lost. )

Originally posted by lazybones
You seem to be responding to a point that I did not make. I do not deny that the US corporate tax rates are high compared to their competitors, simply that the average rates (both effective and statutory) cannot possibly tell the full story because there are massive differences between industries. So massive that more than half of companies actually pay more tax to foreign governments where they operate than the US. This is from the first study I cited from ITEP (not EPI).

That article is not an academic study and leans on the same stats that are misleading for reasons that I have already laid out. That is that using national averages, be they statutory or effective, obfuscates the fact that more than half of companies pay more tax in foreign countries despite America's higher average rates, as per a 7-year long study by ITEP that I cited earlier. The corporate tax code is too complex to simplify into these single figures.

The study in question cites a range of statistics, some of which show a slightly lower rate than the OECD average and some which do not. The study also leans on the average rates which are misleading for reasons already outlined.

And I feel that I have to stress this because you seem to have missed the point. [B]I do not deny that the US has high corporate tax rates compared to competitors. I am simply pointing out that these figures utterly obfuscate the fact that more than half of companies pay more tax to foreign governments than the US. The headline rates (both effective and statutory) gloss over crucial nuance that is required to understand the mess that is the corporate tax code.

Again, not denying that the US corporate rates are high amongst the developed nations, I'm simply probing into what makes up those figures and explaining why they do not tell the full story. You have still yet to rebut the ITEP study which corroborates this viewpoint.

Again, never denied that the US doesn't have high rates compared to competitors, simply that the average rates do not nearly tell the full story. Try to grasp the nuance of my argument.

Well, a few things here:

1. The EPI wasn't even the primary source I was citing, the primary source I was citing was ITEP, which is the one that probed the misleading average rates usually peddled by looking at a industry-by-industry breakdown and studying many companies over a 7 year period.

2. The EPI was citing other studies on the subject, not making its own calculations.

3. Appeal to motive is inherently fallacious. So even if I was citing it as the primary source, none of what you said rebuts what I'm saying. [/B]

Quote by Me
And although America's corporate tax rate is indeed high by international standards...

No, I'm simply saying that such average figures are misleading as they gloss over the gargantuan differences between industries. In the study that I cited from ITEP, they found that more than half of companies actually pay more tax to foreign governments than the US, because of the complexities and massive variations in our corporate tax system between industries. The average rates, whether statutory or effective, don't tell the full story, not even close. This is the fundamental point that I'm making.

Originally posted by lazybones
You seem to be responding to a point that I did not make. I do not deny that the US corporate tax rates are high compared to their competitors, simply that the average rates (both effective and statutory) cannot possibly tell the full story because there are massive differences between industries. So massive that more than half of companies actually pay more tax to foreign governments where they operate than the US. This is from the first study I cited from ITEP (not EPI).

That article is not an academic study and leans on the same stats that are misleading for reasons that I have already laid out. That is that using national averages, be they statutory or effective, obfuscates the fact that more than half of companies pay more tax in foreign countries despite America's higher average rates, as per a 7-year long study by ITEP that I cited earlier. The corporate tax code is too complex to simplify into these single figures.

The study in question cites a range of statistics, some of which show a slightly lower rate than the OECD average and some which do not. The study also leans on the average rates which are misleading for reasons already outlined.

And I feel that I have to stress this because you seem to have missed the point. [B]I do not deny that the US has high corporate tax rates compared to competitors. I am simply pointing out that these figures utterly obfuscate the fact that more than half of companies pay more tax to foreign governments than the US. The headline rates (both effective and statutory) gloss over crucial nuance that is required to understand the mess that is the corporate tax code.

Again, not denying that the US corporate rates are high amongst the developed nations, I'm simply probing into what makes up those figures and explaining why they do not tell the full story. You have still yet to rebut the ITEP study which corroborates this viewpoint.

Again, never denied that the US doesn't have high rates compared to competitors, simply that the average rates do not nearly tell the full story. Try to grasp the nuance of my argument.

Well, a few things here:

1. The EPI wasn't even the primary source I was citing, the primary source I was citing was ITEP, which is the one that probed the misleading average rates usually peddled by looking at a industry-by-industry breakdown and studying many companies over a 7 year period.

2. The EPI was citing other studies on the subject, not making its own calculations.

3. Appeal to motive is inherently fallacious. So even if I was citing it as the primary source, none of what you said rebuts what I'm saying. [/B]

Originally posted by lazybones
(Bumping this up so it doesn't get lost. )
DDM, I know that you said that you wouldn't respond to me, but I implore you to see reason here. I am not denying that the average US corporate rates are higher than that of competitors. Indeed, I actually stated this fact before this conversation began:

No, I'm simply saying that such average figures are misleading as they gloss over the gargantuan differences between industries. In the study that I cited from ITEP, they found that more than half of companies actually pay more tax to foreign governments than the US, because of the complexities and massive variations in our corporate tax system between industries. The average rates, whether statutory or effective, don't tell the full story, not even close. This is the fundamental point that I'm making.

And I strongly implore you to eat shit with a very large spoon. You had your lying-ass handed to you. Your desperation to save face is noted. 🙂

👆

Edit - You even concede the point. Why you trollin' brah?

President Trump has your best interests at heart.

Originally posted by dadudemon
And I strongly implore you to eat shit with a very large spoon. You had your lying-ass handed to you. Your desperation to save face is noted. 🙂

👆

Edit - You even concede the point. Why you trollin' brah?

Originally posted by Me, before the conversation began
And although America's corporate tax rate is indeed high by international standards...

So I'll try in vain one last time, my gripes with these average figures as put forward by the Tax Foundation and others are that they gloss over the massive differences between industries, which result in more than half of companies paying more tax to foreign governments than to the US. This was from a concentrated study by ITEP over a 7 year period. You did not rebut this in your reply, and instead pivoted to appeal to motive against the EPI (not the main study that I cited), and the other stuff about average statutory/effective tax rates which are not relevant to my point.

And 'concede the point' would imply that I denied your claim that average tax rates are higher in the US than other countries. I didn't. My point was regarding the nature of these statistics and why they don't tell the full story and can therefore be misleading:

Originally posted by Me

And although taking the 29% average rate makes the gap a lot smaller, using an average obfuscates some of the very low effective rates that certain major industries pay.

Yeah, so the average effective tax rate that the Tax Foundation reports doesn't even remotely tell the full story. Especially as the differences between some major industries are so drastic. So drastic, in fact, that a majority of companies may actually pay more tax to foreign governments than they do to the US, as per the first study I linked, despite America's higher headline rate. Just looking at the average couldn't tell you that.

And I feel that I have to stress this because you seem to have missed the point. I do not deny that the US has high corporate tax rates compared to competitors. I am simply pointing out that these figures utterly obfuscate the fact that more than half of companies pay more tax to foreign governments than the US. The headline rates (both effective and statutory) gloss over crucial nuance that is required to understand the mess that is the corporate tax code.

Originally posted by lazybones
Nope, you just couldn't grasp the nuance of my argument...You just misinterpreted my argument.

Originally posted by DarthSkywalker0
[The USA] already [has] an incredibly low effective corporate tax rate.

Originally posted by dadudemon
We are #1 in Statutory Tax Rates, #3 Effective Corporate Tax Rate, and # 4 in marginal tax rates for corporations.

Why do you say that the US has an incredibly low effective corporate tax rate when it is almost the highest in the world?

Originally posted by lazybones
My main point was that the 18% effective marginal rate could be seen as 'incredibly low' when contrasted with the 39% statutory rate, so that could be a more charitable interpretation of what DarthSkywalker was trying to say.

hmm

Originally posted by dadudemon
hmm

You, on the other hand, clearly didn't understand what I was arguing in regards to corporate taxes. You thought that I was denying that the US has a higher average corporate rate than other countries. Hence your big reply trying to prove otherwise. In reality, I was just taking issue with parading averages as they obscure some pretty massive nuances and details which the study by ITEP details but the Tax Foundation and other studies omit.

Originally posted by dadudemon
hmm

Ok, dadudmon hold your horses. The effective corporate tax rate is really dependent on which measure you want to rely on. I happen to find the treasury data to be the most accurate.

As I already noted, the effective corporate tax rate is not an "effective" argument against the tax bill due to hidden taxes in the form of compliance costs/forced investment.

This is why why capital tax reductions have the greatest economic response. That being said, the economic growth that we are receiving is certainly not principally due to the tax bill(more on this in my 6-part Trump analysis).