Bush Was Even Worse for the Debt than Obama

[kentonio]

Yes, you moron.

Not American, so don't know your tax system. Wouldn't that be Corporate tax rather than income tax?

[KrazyHorse]

What a ********er.

He deserved the prize. He also performed a useful function during the Bush years, especially with regards to non-economic issues (in particular "security" related issues). However, he has become a shill for ever-increasing amounts of fiscal "stimulus" for reasons which I believe have far more to do with his urge for more redistribution than with any coherent view of macroeconomics.

EDIT: note that I have no problem with redistribution per se. I would simply like to have it done in an efficient way (via cash transfers) and to have an open discussion about what we're doing when we do it.

[Hauldren Collider]

Work which he's now busy refuting, incidentally...

Are you serious? Is there no level of intellectual dishonesty to which Krugman will not stoop? I didn't realize he was that bad.

He is a very smart guy, though.

[KrazyHorse]

Not American, so don't know your tax system. Wouldn't that be Corporate tax rather than income tax?

It is a tax on the income of corporations as defined in the tax code. ****.

[kentonio]

It is a tax on the income of corporations as defined in the tax code. ****.

Interesting. I just nipped and read a bit more of Pathway to Prosperity and individual and business taxes are dealt with quite seperately in that document. Which was what we were talking about. ****.

[KrazyHorse]

In other words, you have no ****ing clue what you're talking about. Corporate income taxes and individual income taxes should be treated distinctly, and so should unearned and earned individual income taxes. However, both in the US and elsewhere the generally accepted term "income" is applied to the sum of unearned (realized) and earned income for individuals, and to the profits of corporations as defined by the relevant accounting standard.

The term is inexact, but as I said is in broad use in the US and elsewhere (see, e.g. the wikipedia entry on corporate tax, which covers a number of jurisdictions).

[Dinner]

Corporations pay income tax now?

Most small and medium sized ones do. Some large ones, if they have bad accountants or lobbyists don't do as well (though typically at a lower rate than small or medium sized ones), while a huge number of them, like GE, pay jack cheese or even pay a negative rate (they're given free money) simply because they have good accountants and better lobbyists.

[Hauldren Collider]

GE actually didn't pay taxes last year because of poor profitability, not loopholes. It is, however, a major beneficiary of loopholes.

[Asher]

GE actually didn't pay taxes last year because of poor profitability, not loopholes. It is, however, a major beneficiary of loopholes.

Err. No, they didn't pay because of loopholes. Creative accounting meant all of their profitable businesses were based overseas, and the losses based in the USA. Convenient for the tax code.

They earned $5.1B in profits and didn't pay a cent in income tax. Actually, their income tax rate was negative 77%.

And you call Krugman dishonest...

[kentonio]

In other words, you have no ****ing clue what you're talking about. Corporate income taxes and individual income taxes should be treated distinctly, and so should unearned and earned individual income taxes. However, both in the US and elsewhere the generally accepted term "income" is applied to the sum of unearned (realized) and earned income for individuals, and to the profits of corporations as defined by the relevant accounting standard.

The term is inexact, but as I said is in broad use in the US and elsewhere (see, e.g. the wikipedia entry on corporate tax, which covers a number of jurisdictions).

HC claimed:

Income taxes will be lowered and loopholes removed, that's the entire point of revenue neutral reform. This means that big companies with lots of tax lawyers or rich people with lots of tax lawyers pay their fair share.

The Ryan plan doesn't talk about lowering corporate income tax it plans to eliminate it and bring in that Business Consumption Tax. It also doesn't seem to affect loopholes in the slightest for individual income tax, as it strangely seems to let people choose to continue as they are or move across to a simplified system

Now you could well be right KH, I know **** all about tax systems and I could be reading this stuff completely wrong, but does any of it realistically do what is being claimed?

[Dinner]

It was loopholes and accounting gimmicks because they posted great earnings reports to shareholders. Isn't it funny how they always seem to report different numbers to the taxman than they do to investors and it's always in the company's favor?

[Hauldren Collider]

Err. No, they didn't pay because of loopholes. Creative accounting meant all of their profitable businesses were based overseas, and the losses based in the USA. Convenient for the tax code.

They earned $5.1B in profits and didn't pay a cent in income tax. Actually, their income tax rate was negative 77%.

And you call Krugman dishonest...

I read that their profits were amortized over two years, and they lost significant money in their financial services business. So their net profit over two years was zero.

[Asher]

I read that their profits were amortized over two years, and they lost significant money in their financial services business. So their net profit over two years was zero.

No.

[Asher]

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-03/news/30354085_1_tax-rate-income-tax-federal-income

Guess What? General Electric Didn't Pay Any Income Taxes In 2010 Either
Vivian Giang|November 03, 2011

In March, we reported that General Electric made $5.1 billion in U.S. profits, yet managed to dodge paying any federal taxes. The data was based on a study conducted by Capital IQ and the NYT on companies between 2005 to 2009.

Believe it or not, in 2010 GE had a tax rate of negative 76.6% on $4.2 billion in profits, according to a recent report issued by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

Another big dodger Pepco Holdings profits totaled $229 million and a tax rate of negative 118%.

The study examined 280 companies in the Fortune 500 that were profitable within the past three years and found that 30 of these companies have paid nothing due to tax subsidies and loopholes. In 2008, 22 companies paid no federal income tax and this number increased to 37 by 2010.

This is because certain tax codes implemented are geared specifically for companies to expand their businesses. For example, the oil and gas industry is able to write off massive drilling expenses. Tax laws also allow companies to write off capital investments before the assets are actually used up.

The report says:

Today corporate tax loopholes are so out of control that most Americans can rightfully complain, “I pay more federal income taxes than General Electric, Boeing, DuPont, Wells Fargo, Verizon, etc., etc., all put together.” That’s an unacceptable situation.

[Arrian]

The Super Committee negotiations have shown this to be complete bull****. Toomey offered the Dems $400 billion in increased revenue and they didn't take it.

Only in America. It's only a $400B revenue increase if you stipulate that the Bush/Obama tax cuts will be extended, instead of being allowed to expire. At this point, since I don't expect any sort of sane tax reform is possible, I'm for expiration.

-Arrian

p.s. Paul Ryan is a cowardly fraud. Huge cuts to Medicare and SS for people who are not yet old (can't piss off the base, after all), plus regressive tax reform, and unless my memory fails me, zero "defense" cuts. Courage? Please. This is standard GOP boilerplate, but since Ryan has hypnotic eyes +5 or something, the media ate it up.