Can any Obama supporters explain how Obama's corporate tax proposal works?
He wants to raise the taxes on large corporations, but yet give them a tax break for keeping their jobs here in the U.S. Which one is it?
Chelfi...you only answered 1 question. Now what about the other tax?
No matter how you look at it...the taxes on corporations are either
2) Offset (at best)
There's no other way around it. Mathmatically, these corporations would be better off by moving their respective companies overseas and pay the tariffs on products and services imported into the U.S.
- RoyLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
Regardless of his many disparate ideas, his bottom line is a huge net increase in taxes from businesses and the wealthy, enough to pay for health care, education, and tax cuts for 95% of all taxpayers. I don't see much incentive in that formula for businesses to shun the prospects of lower taxes and cheaper labor in other parts of the world.
That's the big problem with Obama.... each promise sounds nice, but when you add it all up, it's nonsense and cannot be reconciled.
- Anonymous5 years ago
Obama's tax proposal had been released for months, and yes. America's greatest economic period, when the middle class grew most, was when we had much more progressive tax policy. Trickle-Down, Supply-Side, Reagonomics (whatever you want to call the same tax philosophy), theorized that if we lowered the burden on the wealthy, it would stimulate economic growth, which would in turn create jobs, and grow the middle class, while at the same time increasing tax revenues, because the government would be collecting lower rates on a higher GDP. Every single element of that theory failed. The economy grew, but not at rates higher than when America had a more progressive tax policy, the working class (the ones that were supposed to be trickled on) have seen their real wages flat or lower, and the government revenues did not grow as theorized. Obama is suggesting a slight shift toward more progressive tax policy, and I support that. I would in fact support a much more aggressive shift toward progressivity, perhaps to the tax structure before Reagan passed the biggest middle class tax increase in our countries history, TEFRA. Ronald Reagan cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans from 70% to 28%, and did not cut spending. Since the country was not running a surplue, the reduced tax revenue (which was not replaced by the theorized smaller piece of a bigger pie), was replaced by higher taxes on American workers, who account for 70% of our nations economic growth and what could not be shifted to the consumer class, was shifted to their children in the form of deficit spending. The failure of supply-side theory is that they think that people who produce stuff are the engine of the economy, and it completely ignores the demand side of the equation. This tax policy has been crushing the middle class, and they simply cannot afford to continue increasing demand anymore, so it doesn't matter how well people manage to produce products, the demond of the overall economy is going down, which will bring GDP down, which will reduce the wealth of the wealthiest Americans, and reduce the quality of life for all Americans. Policies that strengthen the middle class make America a stronger country and provide the producers with stronger, more consistent long economic growth.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
As far as politics goes, I'm just an average American with a high school education. Most of what comes out of any candidates mouth goes right over my head anyway. If any candidate wants to REALLY speak to the average American, don't use there college education to try and impress me with a bunch of 4 syllable words that I don't know what they mean. Every week the story changes on who voted on what bill and the mud slinging has begun.
Until the system changes to a true popular vote that wins the election, I refuse to vote as long as the electoral college decides the winner. On any amendment or article number that's on the ballet and I vote in favor of that amendment, the opposition doesn't like the result of the vote that the people have chosen and now it's tied up in the courts for a few years. So why bother wasting my time going to vote? I know if I don't vote I shouldn't whine about the outcome, and I'm fine with that. Congress has the final say of anything the President proposes anyway. Just because the President wants something done, Congress needs to approve it. There are times when I doubt our system, but right now it's all wa have.
- Scott KLv 71 decade ago
I can tell from your response that this isn't a bonafide question. But, Obama doesn't plan to change the tax rates for corporations. He plans on closing loopholes in the law that allow some businesses to pay little or no tax. It's interesting to note that pages of special deals are implemented into the tax code that are so complex that only one business (not industry) can reasonably take advantage of the code. If you're making money from foreign labor, expect to pay more than if you're using American labor.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
Well personally I think Obama is just a puppet for the DNC, and just says what they tell him to say. But to answer your questions, here it is plain a simple. I will even take it a step further and give you both McCain's and Obama's Tax Plans.
They don't mean anything. All the promises you hear from candidates don't add up to a hill of beans. You cannot do anything as president without approval from congress. Everybody blames George Bush for the past 8 years, but people forget that the only power (besides Presidential Decree) is the power to veto, which the US Senate can overrule if necessary. Just like a small town mayor, can't do anything without approval from the local board, Alderman or Councilman, whichever. So there you have it, without congress, nothing can get done, with congress nothing still gets done. So when you get down to it, the President really don't have any power, without the approval of congress. Thanks for reading....
- Anonymous1 decade ago
He wants to eliminate tax breaks for companies to offshore our jobs.
There it is.
Did you know most US corporations paid less than 1% income tax since 2005? You can talk about the marginal rate, and then you can look at the effective rate and realize the marginal rate is BS.
I have no problem with not giving companies a write off for expenses to move jobs overseas.
- ChelfiLv 71 decade ago
Both -- he will give a tax break to corporations which establish facilities inside the US to provide US citizens with jobs. US corporations which keep their jobs overseas or which outsource all of their manufacturing will have fewer loopholes to avoid paying taxes.
- 1 decade ago
Why couldn't it be both, raise the tax rates but provide breaks for certain behaviors.
But AFAIK he isn't talking about raising the rates. I thought his plan was to close the loopholes in the code.
- 1 decade ago
He wants to raise taxes on ONLY those that make over 250,000.... what was that... those are the people that give other people jobs... Wait.. he is lowering their taxes... only taxing the rich... lowering taxes on corporations... errrrrrr uhhhhhhhhhhhhh ohhhhhhhhhh uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
He doesn't have a freaking clue what he is doing.
It take that back... he KNOWS what he wants to do... he is having a hard time keeping it from the American people.
- SordenhiemerLv 71 decade ago
Apparently you are not aware that there are different means of taxation. You can easily increase taxes paid on foreign investment and profits while cutting taxes for domestic investment and profits.
Perhaps you should do a little research?