His 2016 budget will impose a one-off 14% tax on US profits stashed overseas, as well as a 19% tax on any future profits as they are earned.
The $238bn (£158bn) raised will be used to fund road projects in the US.
"This transition tax would mean that companies have to pay US tax right now on the $2 trillion they already have overseas, rather than being able to delay paying any US tax indefinitely," a White House official said.
The official said that after this one-off tax, the 19% permanent tax firms would have to pay on overseas profits "would level the playing field, and encourage firms to create jobs here at home."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31085912
Surely whether you are a conservative, republican, democrat or whatever you gotta welcome this proposal?
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat if you are just plain anti-Obama? Who'd that remind you of?
His 2016 budget will impose a one-off 14% tax on US profits stashed overseas, as well as a 19% tax on any future profits as they are earned.
The $238bn (£158bn) raised will be used to fund road projects in the US.
"This transition tax would mean that companies have to pay US tax right now on the $2 trillion they already have overseas, rather th ...[text shortened]... hether you are a conservative, republican, democrat or whatever you gotta welcome this proposal?
DEFINITION OF 'DOUBLE IRISH WITH A DUTCH SANDWICH'
A tax avoidance technique employed by certain large corporations, involving the use of a combination of Irish and Dutch subsidiary companies to shift profits to low or no tax jurisdictions. The double Irish with a Dutch sandwich technique involves sending profits first through one Irish company, then to a Dutch company and finally to a second Irish company headquartered in a tax haven. This technique has allowed certain corporations to dramatically reduce their overall corporate tax rates.
INVESTOPEDIA EXPLAINS 'DOUBLE IRISH WITH A DUTCH SANDWICH'
The double Irish with a Dutch sandwich technique is just one of a class of similar international tax avoidance schemes. Each involves arranging transactions between subsidiary companies to take advantage of the idiosyncrasies of varied national tax codes. These techniques are most prominently used by tech companies because these firms can easily shift large portions of profits to other countries by assigning intellectual property rights to subsidiaries abroad.
Not sure which companies do this stuff? You could try to Google it.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/28/business/Double-Irish-With-A-Dutch-Sandwich.html?_r=0
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by finneganIt works for the eventual lucrative repatriation of profits to the parent company for distribution to stockholders and other uses, when one additional measure is taken. That is to convince Congress to grant a "one time" reduction in tax rates to "encourage" the transfer. It's "one time" until they do it again. It's a way for members of congress to repay corporations for campaign support allowable by other favorable campaign laws. Money money money makes the world go round.
DEFINITION OF 'DOUBLE IRISH WITH A DUTCH SANDWICH'
A tax avoidance technique employed by certain large corporations, involving the use of a combination of Irish and Dutch subsidiary companies to shift profits to low or no tax jurisdictions. The double Irish with a Dutch sandwich technique involves sending profits first through one Irish company, then to a ...[text shortened]... p://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/28/business/Double-Irish-With-A-Dutch-Sandwich.html?_r=0
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/06/repatriatedtaxbreak.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_tax_holiday
Companies known to use:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement#Companies_using_the_arrangement
Abbott Laboratories[10][11]
Adobe Systems[12]
Apple Inc.[2]
Eli Lilly and Company[12]
Facebook[8]
Forest Laboratories[12]
General Electric[8]
Google[12][8][13]
IBM[14]
Johnson & Johnson[8]
Microsoft[12]
Oracle Corp.[12]
Pfizer Inc.[12]
Starbucks[8]
Yahoo![15]
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201211/r1039486_11965856.jpg
Originally posted by JS357But it's not bribery! It's ummm... financial motivation.
It works for the eventual lucrative repatriation of profits to the parent company for distribution to stockholders and other uses, when one additional measure is taken. That is to convince Congress to grant a "one time" reduction in tax rates to "encourage" the transfer. It's "one time" until they do it again. It's a way for members of congress to repay corpor ...[text shortened]... ]
Starbucks[8]
Yahoo![15]
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201211/r1039486_11965856.jpg
Originally posted by JS357That makes no sense to me. Republicans as far as i can tell are patriotic, they start their speeches with jingoistic rhetoric like, 'I believe in America'. This proposal would surely appeal to them because it purports to coerce companies to focus on retaining American jobs. Conservatives will surely be happy that the proposal is just and levels the playing field and Democrats should be glad that the money is being used to fund infrastructure.
What if you are just plain anti-Obama? Who'd that remind you of?
If people are really just anti-obama then I really don't hold out much hope for them, they are unreasoning and a victim to their prejudice and fighting against their own interests.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell here's a patriotic Republican member of the House Budget Committee, Marlin Stutzman of Indiana:
That makes no sense to me. Republicans as far as i can tell are patriotic, they start their speeches with jingoistic rhetoric like, 'I believe in America'. This proposal would surely appeal to them because it purports to coerce companies to focus on retaining American jobs. Conservatives will surely be happy that the proposal is just and levels the ...[text shortened]... , they are unreasoning and a victim to their prejudice and fighting against their own interests.
“We’re in a global market and if profits are being made in Asia and [a company] wants to reinvest there, that should be a company’s prerogative to do so,” Mr. Stutzman said.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-one-time-14-tax-on-overseas-earnings-1422802103
Of course, the proposal doesn't stop any company from investing anywhere they please, but expect that to be a right wing talking point. Oh and it's probably a "job killer".
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePeople are not unreasoning so much as defective in their reasoning and the way we reason is wide open to manipulation by a range of well known techniques of persuasion. People can be induced to act contrary to their objective best interests by appealing emotively to their prejudices. Among those prejudices is the appeal to nationalism, which is directed not primarily to conservative politicians, who deploy jingoistic rhetoric as a substitute for substantial political thinking, but to conservative voters.
That makes no sense to me. Republicans as far as i can tell are patriotic, they start their speeches with jingoistic rhetoric like, 'I believe in America'. This proposal would surely appeal to them because it purports to coerce companies to focus on retaining American jobs. Conservatives will surely be happy that the proposal is just and levels the ...[text shortened]... , they are unreasoning and a victim to their prejudice and fighting against their own interests.
Originally posted by finneganRight wingers certainly are not going to appeal to "nationalistic" sentiment in this case; it's hard to make a "nationalistic" argument as to why US companies should be able to evade US taxes by parking their profits overseas.
People are not unreasoning so much as defective in their reasoning and the way we reason is wide open to manipulation by a range of well known techniques of persuasion. People can be induced to act contrary to their objective best interests by appealing emotively to their prejudices. Among those prejudices is the appeal to nationalism, which is directed no ...[text shortened]... goistic rhetoric as a substitute for substantial political thinking, but to conservative voters.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"In an interview with National Journal magazine published October 23, 2010, McConnell explained that "the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."
That makes no sense to me. Republicans as far as i can tell are patriotic, they start their speeches with jingoistic rhetoric like, 'I believe in America'. This proposal would surely appeal to them because it purports to coerce companies to focus on retaining American jobs. Conservatives will surely be happy that the proposal is just and levels the ...[text shortened]... , they are unreasoning and a victim to their prejudice and fighting against their own interests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitch_McConnell