05 Aug '11 15:40>
Originally posted by normbenignThen they pay extra taxes themselves and the price does not change.
And if the company has already found the "sweet spot"?
Originally posted by Kunsoo"you can only push costs on the consumer if the consumer is willing to pay them."
That's a bit of a facile look at economics. It makes common sense, but the point is that you can only push costs on the consumer if the consumer is willing to pay them. When California passed its first cigarette tax by ballot, which was a quarter, everyone assumed it would be passed on to the consumer. Turns out, that the increase in price led to a decline ...[text shortened]... hink corporations oppose taxes so vehemently? Because they care so much about their consumers?
Originally posted by normbenignThey absorb them by reducing internal costs, perhaps including share dividends. That's what happened with tobacco in California.
"you can only push costs on the consumer if the consumer is willing to pay them."
Again supply and demand. If costs such as taxes can't be passed on directly, other measures may be available to reduce costs, quality or service.
The notion that businesses big and small can absorb taxes without consideration is absurd. One way or the other the con ...[text shortened]... y the tax, but the time and manpower to comply, and to figure out how to pass on the costs.