Dean Baker on corporate taxes.

Post #351,337 by Another Scott 11/27/11 3:09:01 PM Reply	Dean Baker on corporate taxes. http://www.cepr.net/...other-fairy-tales This is not a philosophical question; it is a very concrete economic one. No one is forced to organize a business as a corporation. Anyone can operate any business as a partnership. Partnerships do not pay a separate tax, the partners only pay tax on the profits as individuals. In this sense, the corporate income tax is 100 percent a voluntary tax. It is paid only because people consider the benefits of corporate status to be worth more than the taxes that they must pay. This removes any logical possibility of double taxation. The corporate income tax is effectively the fee that stockholders pay for the benefits of corporate status. Interesting... Cheers, Scott.
Post #351,340 by boxley 11/27/11 3:43:53 PM Reply	why would it be anything else? The benefits of incorporation are many, largest one being sheltered from individual liability. Any distributions to shareholders is income to the shareholder. Anyone claiming anything else is blowing smoke. I may incorporate in the new year to get a few of the benefits and the tax rate will play into the decision. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #351,341 by beepster 11/27/11 6:56:09 PM Reply	Interesting? Not very... the argument that tax on dividends is double taxation is a cute one...but a stupid one. Not worth a column. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,369 by drook 11/28/11 10:11:35 AM Reply	So that argument doesn't keep coming up? Being made by supposedly serious people, like presidential hopefuls and sitting congresscritters? -- Drew
Post #351,372 by boxley 11/28/11 10:12:32 AM Reply	what makes you think that class understands incorporation? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #351,379 by beepster 11/28/11 11:02:09 AM Reply	Re: So that argument doesn't keep coming up? I said it was a stupid argument..why are you surprised that candidates and congresscritters are bringing it up ;-) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,382 by drook 11/28/11 11:42:06 AM Reply	Ahh, got it People you support keep making stupid arguments that are easily refuted, but columnists shouldn't take the time or space to actually refute them. -- Drew
Post #351,383 by boxley 11/28/11 11:45:41 AM Reply	partially correct People you support keep making stupid arguments that are easily refuted I see that with your links all the time but columnists shouldn't take the time or space to actually refute them depends on how stupid the idea is. Belaboring the obvious isnt always interesting Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #351,384 by beepster 11/28/11 12:27:36 PM Reply	Want to give some examples? including "people I support"? Would that be, like, some congressman somewhere that I don't live? some candidate that I haven't voted for, even in straw polls? There are many that support lower taxes, I don't see a ton of folks arguing that dividends are double taxation. Seen some about cap gains, but not dividends. (both arguments are stupid..not the lowering taxes part...but the trying to do it with the "illegal double tax" argument.) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,390 by drook 11/28/11 12:55:06 PM Reply	Google "double taxation" It's a recurring mantra from Republicans. They use it for foreign trade, federal/state/local taxes, inheritance tax, capital gains, dividends ... over and over and over they argue that money should only be taxed once, as though we're talking about a specific bill that was taxed when it went into my bank account. And if it was taxed when it went into my company's account, it shouldn't be taxed again when it goes into mine. The taxes are on transactions. As Baker points out, corporations exist specifically to act as a distinct entity for financial purposes. If that's the rule then transferring the money from that entity to a person is a transaction. And don't pretend "support" can only mean "vote for". -- Drew
Post #351,392 by boxley 11/28/11 1:07:37 PM Reply	I did, this may help explain your confusion http://www.myllc.com...ble-taxation.aspx Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #351,394 by drook 11/28/11 1:21:40 PM Reply	I'm not confused That just explains why people use the term. It's still just as wrong as when this thread started. -- Drew
Post #351,396 by boxley 11/28/11 1:43:30 PM Reply	thread started with an article that explains how stuff works. Beep and I agree with the Author that indeed, thats how stuff works. Why are you all in a lather again for? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #351,405 by drook 11/28/11 4:21:24 PM Reply	Look what I replied to the argument that tax on dividends is double taxation is a cute one...but a stupid one. Not worth a column. If people are still making the false claim, then refuting that claim is still worth a column. -- Drew
Post #351,395 by beepster 11/28/11 1:27:21 PM Reply	Hmm Article was on dividends. Not inheritance, not cap gains, not any of the other you listed. I happen to agree that the transfer of corp profits to individual owners is indeed a transfer and can be taxed because the corp is a distinct entity to itself. And again, you have gone and lumped me into a party as if I'm registered to it and support it (financially, voting-wise)..and while my views more often than not are closer aligned with them than with dems, I am registered with no party affiliation and have OFTEN voted for democratic candidates. So there. Unless you want to cast aspersion on democrats too...you may want to check your generalizations and the door, big fella ;-) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,406 by drook 11/28/11 4:23:57 PM Reply	Article was on "double taxation" The specific flavor happened to be dividends, but it's the same argument made for all the other instances. And now you're saying "support" means only votes and donations. I didn't mean it that narrowly, and you know that, but getting wrapped up arguing the point is a distraction. And you know that, too. -- Drew
Post #351,410 by beepster 11/28/11 4:49:00 PM Reply	Not a distraction at all its now pretty much the core of the discussion, as I've already agreed dividends are not double taxed. And no, it wasn't worth a column...especially one that made no new points in the discussion. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,417 by drook 11/28/11 5:45:56 PM Reply	Yes Whether it's worth a column is exactly the core of the discussion. It was my point. I raised it. That's what I'm discussing. You want to argue about what "support" means. You want to simply re-assert your original claim that it wasn't worth a column. As long as people keep re-asserting the same false claims, someone needs to keep refuting them. -- Drew
Post #351,420 by beepster 11/28/11 5:57:56 PM Reply	Then you shouldn't have said this... "People you support keep making stupid arguments that are easily refuted, but columnists shouldn't take the time or space to actually refute them." You brought up the support aspect, which I challenged...and have not linked to a current argument about this particular taxation point, the entire basis for which you say a current column is relevant. a google search of "double taxation in republican debates" leads only to a post where Cain's 9-9-9 plan is defended AGAINST claims that Romney made that his plan layered taxes. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,422 by drook 11/28/11 6:56:35 PM Reply	That's interesting After trying twice to qualify what "support" means, you just offered up the Republican debates. It seems you know what "support" means after all. -- Drew
Post #351,423 by beepster 11/28/11 7:04:24 PM Reply	Pedantic your assumption, as usual, was just that. And you used that assumption to make a point. And, as I've now shown you, both your assumption AND your point were incorrect. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,430 by drook 11/28/11 10:50:48 PM Reply	Okay, you win You're willing to move the goalposts more than I'm willing to chase them. -- Drew
Post #351,431 by beepster 11/28/11 11:02:33 PM Reply	I didn't move anything you said that "everyone is saying it" and so it needed a column. Turns out, no one is currently saying it. Bother for you. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,433 by drook 11/29/11 4:12:31 AM Reply	Yes, "everyone", that's just what I said -- Drew
Post #351,439 by beepster 11/29/11 8:06:45 AM Reply	ok, nit correction people I support, with the direct assumption that those would be Republicans. Believe follow on included members of Congress. If you show me 3 quotes from within the last month from candidates (R or D) or congressmen mentioning dividends being double taxed, I'll concede. Otherwise... Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,442 by folkert 11/29/11 8:36:25 AM 11/29/11 8:39:35 AM Reply	This enough? http://abcnews.go.co...ght-on-substance/ http://www.decodedsc...sals-decoded/5519 http://online.wsj.co...560162304238.html There was only 5900 articles in the last month regarding this. Searching in News for the last month and for the following: "Double Taxation" Republican Candidate Edited by folkert Nov. 29, 2011, 08:39:35 AM EST Expand All History
Post #351,443 by beepster 11/29/11 8:50:32 AM Reply	Nope...reason First one is on Cain's plan and the critique of it. Second one I'm inclined to grant credit for, though it does not contain a quote of Newt saying this. Third is about elimination of tax on repatriated earnings...which is double taxation and keeps capital out of the country. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,457 by folkert 11/29/11 12:52:16 PM Reply	I just picked the first three that came up... Seriously there was over 5900 unique articles, you expect me to go through even a hundred to gather things up for you to refute your mantra? Sorry Beep... you can do your own work.
Post #351,481 by beepster 11/29/11 5:24:19 PM 11/29/11 5:24:46 PM Reply	You were doing drooks work, not mine Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are. Edited by beepster Nov. 29, 2011, 05:24:46 PM EST Expand All History
Post #351,447 by boxley 11/29/11 11:26:58 AM Reply	how about something not written by the attack left? the first link contains so many inaccuracies it could have been written by the whitehouse Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #351,451 by beepster 11/29/11 12:30:14 PM Reply	Re: how about something not written by the attack left? The first one isn't even about the subject at hand...its about the layering of taxes that is supposed to happen under Cain's 9-9-9 plan. Has nothing to do with investment taxes and/or repatriation taxes. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #351,397 by boxley 11/28/11 1:45:11 PM Reply	Dean Baker wants to bail out europe using the Fed http://www.aljazeera...143150223756.html makes some interesting points. Although thats what the IMF should be doing as lender of last resort. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #351,408 by drook 11/28/11 4:32:33 PM Reply	Did you read all the way to the end? Perhaps the Europeans will respond to this affront by putting some serious people in charge of the ECB who are committed to maintaining a functioning economy in the eurozone. If that is the outcome, it will be a win-win for all involved. But if they can't rise to the task, we should not allow the ECB ideologues to wreak havoc on the lives of tens of millions of innocent people in Europe, the developing world, and here in the United States. Dean Baker wants the ECB to fix their own problem. If they don't, he says the Fed can protect the U.S. economy from the fallout. -- Drew

Welcome to IWETHEY!