Monday, April 22, 2013 5:39:20 PM
The main aversion I have towards a flat tax is that the cost of say paying 13% on an income of $10,000 hurts the poorer taxpayer more than paying 13% on an income of $100,000. Same goes for sales tax hikes,they still are unfair to those eking out a living.
Its like Apple. Why would Apple sit on all that capital, well they feel the markets are too volatile and are holding back investing since they believe the returns aren't good enough. Same goes for the banks, its why there should be a federal bank that pays interest to its citizens, not a federal reserve private bank that earns profit for its investors. A stimulus of capital to bring production inland would help greatly as well as a repeal of NAFTA and fair tariffs. I read that the USA has a 2% tariff on Chinese goods yet China has a tariff of 20% on US made goods. These "Free Trade" agreements are imbalances that pool capital from governments and into transnational investor pockets. We need a parallel univers
Monday, April 22, 2013 3:55:35 PM
But what is to stop a corp from paying their ceos $1/yr. and providing stocks in lieu of wages. That's actually a pretty good question... I`d like to see a flat-rate tax for everything - income and capital gains included. So, when someone sold stock, then the net profit from that would be taxed as normal income. It`s my parallel universe (cause it won`t happen).
[quote]Should there be corp tax if a corp is sitting on vast sums of $$$ and not investing it? [/quote] Well, I can understand the reasoning for wanting to tax capital or assets that are "sitting" but even money in a checking account is economically active (the woes of fractional reserve banking). Plus, why would a company want to sit on capital? There are better ways of investing money to ensure at least a small return on it.
You make a very interesting argument regarding the differences between personal income tax and corporate income tax. I have heard that many corps that do not pay their tax burden instead are given the tax credit since they employ thousands of workers and the workers do pay their payroll taxes. We all are paying more payroll taxes at this point, from less than 5% to a higher 6.2%. There is need for fairer taxing, But what is to stop a corp from paying their ceos $1/yr. and providing stocks in lieu of wages. I can imagine if Romney had his way, with no taxes on capital gains then the super wealthy shareholders would certainly not pay their fair share or any in taxes, payroll wages included. Yes, I believe that you make a good assessment, the tax system must be overhauled and simplified removing these loopholes and placing a fairer tax on corps.
Should there be corp tax if a corp is sitting on vast sums of $$$ and not investing it?