General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBREAKING: Obama to take executive actions to make it more difficult for corporations to dodge taxes
Treasury takes steps to discourage offshore tax-shifting inversions
The Obama administration on Monday announced long-awaited executive actions to try to discourage companies from reincorporating abroad to reduce their U.S. taxes.
The steps -- technical revisions to the tax code -- will "substantially reduce the economic benefits" of firms that try so-called corporate tax inversions in the future, Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew said.
But he and President Obama continued to call on Congress to address the issue either through a broad overhaul of corporate taxes or targeted legislation, which would be more effective in curtailing a maneuver that has become more popular among corporations seeking to avoid the high U.S. tax rate.
"Weve recently seen a few large corporations announce plans to exploit this loophole, undercutting businesses that act responsibly and leaving the middle class to pay the bill, and Im glad that Secretary Lew is exploring additional actions to help reverse this trend," Obama said.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-corporate-tax-inversion-treasury-lew-20140922-story.html
Andy823
(11,495 posts)sheshe2
(84,005 posts)And he forges on alone. Cali_Democrat.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)I support President Obama. And I'm proud to say it.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)I know when someone says that it's meant to ruffle feathers and bring forth angry responses, but I actually like it because it supplies some really good laughs. I feel the same when the 'there is no difference between Hillary and Obama' dirty limerick is repeated ad nauseum.
Apparently the President has more than one doppelganger.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)And it has to be more than window dressing.
Please, make me eat my words.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Cha
(297,935 posts)threads just to take a dump. And, who really cares what that kind of person thinks?
When I ever gotten on an Obama threads "just to take a dump"?
Cha
(297,935 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)Your comment was on a reply to me.
Cha
(297,935 posts)Accepted
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)Again, I'll believe it when I see it. Too damn many broken promises from this President to take anything he says at face value.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)Talk talk is dirt cheap.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)I doubt you even know what tax inversion is or how these rules would work.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Ask if I care what you think.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Don't let him get to you.
I read the article and others. I haven't been able to find the actual rules, yet. I also know what tax inversions are and I am still with you. Let's see the rules and see if they work. Even all the articles I've read say "should" and "may" make it harder.
I hope they do and will.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... insult my intelligence, well, by implying that if I "don't understand something" when in reality, I simply disagree with them. It's nothing more than a cheap shot and it says more about the one using it than their target.
marym625
(17,997 posts)Besides it being insulting, it shows how little they want to understand about the opposing point or lack of their ability to explain their point. Or both
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)That isn't a point. It's a remark. There is no facts associated with it and no evidence that it has any substance beyond being a snide remark.
marym625
(17,997 posts)We will have to wait to see if this actually causes change. That's a point of view and it opposes the point that the rules are in place so it will cause change. A point of view isn't a fact other than the fact the person holds that point of view. Maybe if that person was asked why they hold that point of view, rather than getting snide remarks in response, they could have backed it with facts. Even the OP says, "to try to discourage"
I don't understand how we can all be going toward the same goal and can't discuss without attacking. The person said they're skeptical but hope it works. In response they're accused of not reading or understanding. Now I am accused of going to Obama threads "just to take a dump" by someone else. Something I have never done.
Maybe, if the question was asked, "what makes you think this" instead of a condescending response, there could have been an actual discussion. Or maybe allow people their opinions without being called stupid. .
My point of view is that too many people on DU think it's their way or no way.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)There as no substance to it. It was a throwaway remark to attack the President.
Nothing about that comment says the poster actually intends to wait for this to develop to formulate a viewpoint. It's basically saying Obama lies about a lot of shit and I don't believe him - and won't until I see it.
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/I'll+believe+it+when+I+see+it
It's clear this poster is not impartial to this and has already concluded it's a lie.
marym625
(17,997 posts)"Please make me eat my words"
And besides that, so what? Is President Obama never supposed to be criticized? Is it wrong to be disappointed and to question while still remaining hopeful that you're wrong? Does that mean that because there's a disagreement you should immediately start calling someone stupid?
For dog's sake. I am absolutely blown away at this. You post something then you better expect there will be people that disagree with you. There are valid reasons to not believe what is said will happen, will happen. Are the rules of DU suddenly that you can't comment unless you 100% agree with the post?
As far as facts, neither the OP nor the linked article state what the new rules are. The fact it says "try to" proves that it is not a fact it will work.
The comment was reasonable. New rules that will "try to" cause change means we have to wait to see if they actually DO. To voice that you won't believe it until you see it and state that you hope they do work is a reasonable thing to say. To be angry because someone disagrees with you is not reasonable.
bobduca
(1,763 posts)Last edited Fri Sep 26, 2014, 08:39 AM - Edit history (1)
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]
Never be satisfied with anything.
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... the way of it..
Obama will NO DOUBT get the blame...
as usual
I've stop listening long ago to that line of thinking
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Perhaps it might make more sense to make the changes FIRST, see what effect they have, before bragging about what they are going to do.
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... vs an unbiased way of looking at what is happening
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
FSogol
(45,579 posts)flamingdem
(39,335 posts)Cha
(297,935 posts)Oh, I know.. they want to Bundy Mooch while they have the advantages of living in America and dare to call themselves patriots.
from your link, Cali.. Thank you~
"Some multinational corporations including pharmaceutical firm AbbVie Inc. and Burger King Worldwide Inc. have agreed to buy smaller companies in foreign countries with much lower tax rates and move their headquarters there, sheltering billions of dollars from U.S. taxes.
The Obama administration has questioned the "economic patriotism" of those companies, saying the moves were not done for economic reasons but simply to avoid paying their fair share of U.S. taxes for scientific research, roads and other publicly-funded items"
Yeah!
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Ah, here it is:
pampango
(24,692 posts)The Obama administration cracked down Monday on certain overseas corporate mergers and acquisitions, aiming to curb American companies from shifting their ownership abroad to shirk paying U.S. taxes. New regulations from the Treasury Department will make these co-called corporate inversions less lucrative by barring creative techniques that companies use to lower their tax bill. Additionally, the U.S. will make it harder for companies to move overseas in the first place by tightening the ownership requirements they must meet.
"This action will significantly diminish the ability of inverted companies to escape U.S. taxation," Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew said. He added that for some companies considering inversions, the new measures would mean inverting would "no longer make economic sense."
Democrats generally supported the action as the best the administration could do without action from Congress while Republicans faulted the administration for not making a greater effort to work with Congress to enact comprehensive corporate tax reform.
"The administration has made a good effort but administrative action can only go so far," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement. "This rule makes some companies think twice before inverting, but legislation is sorely needed."
Republicans pointed out that the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world and argued that Obama should be pursuing efforts to simplify the tax code, not punish companies.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tim-hortons-burger-king-merger-fallout-u-s-cracks-down-on-tax-inversions-1.2774913
republicans don't like this and, once again, push for lower corporate taxes.
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)Corporate taxes should be lowered in nominal rate and simplified.
Here's how I would do it. Cos should pay the lowest of:
20% of their net income (EBIT) as reported to shareholders
10% of their gross profit as reported to shareholders
2% of their gross revenue.
I wonder how much zero-tax folks in GE really want lower and simpler corporate taxes?
pampango
(24,692 posts)corporations end up paying more in taxes even though the tax rate is lower.
I doubt that the "zero-tax folks at GE" really want a lower tax rate if it results in them actually paying taxes that they don't pay now.
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Shares in drugmakers AstraZeneca (AZN.L) and Shire (SHP.L) fell sharply on Tuesday after the U.S. Treasury took steps to curb "inversion" deals that allow companies to escape high U.S. taxes by reincorporating abroad.
The move could jeopardise an agreed deal for AbbVie (ABBV.N) to buy Shire for (33.54 billion pounds) and deter Pfizer (PFE.N) from making another attempt to acquire AstraZeneca, after a $118 billion takeover attempt failed in May.
The slide in both companies shares wiped out around $8 billion in their combined market value, with AstraZeneca down 5.0 percent and Shire losing 6.1 percent by 1115 GMT (12:15 p.m. BST). AbbVie lost 4.6 percent in pre-market U.S. dealings.
Smith & Nephew (SN.L) and Swiss biotech group Actelion (ATLN.VX), two other perennial targets of bid speculation, fell 3.5 percent and 2.2 percent respectively.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/23/uk-taxinversion-treasury-astrazeneca-idUKKCN0HI0HN20140923
librechik
(30,678 posts)and building new factories here. With daycare facilities, and worker ownership an option.
madokie
(51,076 posts)I'll take care of this side you concentrate on that side.
Atman
(31,464 posts)Capitalism has reached its zenith. This was foretold decades ago. Perfect Capitalism destroys itself. Once you've got every shareholder and every consumer in your grips, what is left? Nothing. You are required by your corporate charter to keep making profits. When you've ripped the guts out of your entire system, where are these profits coming from?
It was an idea. It failed. It utterly failed.
marym625
(17,997 posts)I wish everyone would understand that
malthaussen
(17,230 posts)Pisces
(5,602 posts)librechik
(30,678 posts)IRS is executive. He could use the tax code to stop them.
Hope this works. And the 1% don't figure out how to block him or use it against him
GoCubsGo
(32,099 posts)If they control all of Congress, they will reverse that and every other executive order in a heartbeat through their reprehensible laws. GOTV.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)littlemissmartypants
(22,852 posts)THERE IS NO MIDDLE CLASS!
THE MIDDLE CLASS IS DEAD!
Someone please inform the president, the rooms full of yes men moles and his cabinet.
Love, Peace and Shelter.
~ littlemissmartypants
progressoid
(50,011 posts)BlueJac
(7,838 posts)what about health care, social security and medicare? Nukes.....YES WE CAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am tired of Congress and their entitlements!!!!!!!!!!!!
muntrv
(14,505 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Get a gop senate and president the middle class will remain dead forever.
GOTV 2014 & 2016
colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)We'll see if anything much comes of it.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)They will simply move on to the next loophole.
Let's start with the big picture - how is it that almost all of the largest corporations in the US pay little to no taxes, and in some case actually "pay" negative taxes? Especially since the US now has the highest (nominal) corporate tax rate in the world?
It's because the tax code has been overwhelmingly engineered to produce these outcomes. Those corporations sitting on the outside, not able to exert enough pull to get the tax code changed to their advantage, are subsidizing all the others - often even their own competitors.
Make the code simple enough that any citizen can check a company's profits and calculate how much they should correctly be paying in taxes with a single, simple equation. This level of simplicity is needed to restore some level of honesty to the system.
red dog 1
(27,903 posts)One in four corporations pay no federal income taxes at all
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/sep/26/bernie-s/sanders-one-out-four-corporations-pay-no-taxes/
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)C Moon
(12,225 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,250 posts)this be a great opportunity for him to put those powerful weapons to work? I'd love to see him take up this issue, and get it through both houses of Congress, and onto the president's desk.
AllyCat
(16,259 posts)Lenomsky
(340 posts)Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)If Medtronic wants to go to Ireland, our federal healthcare dollars should go to an American company instead. Same goes for Burger King, get off our military bases. We will get an America company to do it.
Not one dime for any of these bastards.