Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

1) Eliminate Corporate Income Taxes completely. Corporations would still be responsible for property taxes, sales taxes, employment taxes, etc.

2) Eliminate all Corporate tax BREAKS, with a poison pill provision – any future tax breaks would trigger a retroactive 40% income tax rate.

3) Treat dividend and long-term capital gains as ordinary income


Have at it!

Problem with #3: The money I've invested is money that I've already earned and been taxed once. It is worth less if it does nothing due to the government/Fed policy of promoting inflation. Why should that money be taxed again?

ATrain wrote:Problem with #3: The money I've invested is money that I've already earned and been taxed once. It is worth less if it does nothing due to the government/Fed policy of promoting inflation. Why should that money be taxed again?

Companies should have greater earnings/dividends due to no corporate income taxes.

Also, you have not been taxed on the gains yet. You invest $100 in a stock. You sell the stock for $140. You are only taxed on the $40 gain, not the $100.

Why should this gain be taxed less than productive income?

Neither corporations nor businesses pay taxes. They collect taxes for the government.

Reverse DOMA, but add a 100% surtax to all transactions related to gay weddings...

Rob Iola wrote:Reverse DOMA, but add a 100% surtax to all transactions related to gay weddings...

I try to make a serious proposal, and that is the best you can come up with?

dbackjon wrote:

Rob Iola wrote:Reverse DOMA, but add a 100% surtax to all transactions related to gay weddings...

I try to make a serious proposal, and that is the best you can come up with?

You want real corporate tax reform? Tell idiot Donks to stop preventing upstanding US corporations like Boeing from being competitive with overbearing regulations - immediately you'll spike the tax base and then we can talk about tax rates, breaks, and capital gains...

dbackjon wrote:

ATrain wrote:Problem with #3: The money I've invested is money that I've already earned and been taxed once. It is worth less if it does nothing due to the government/Fed policy of promoting inflation. Why should that money be taxed again?

Companies should have greater earnings/dividends due to no corporate income taxes.

Also, you have not been taxed on the gains yet. You invest $100 in a stock. You sell the stock for $140. You are only taxed on the $40 gain, not the $100.

Why should this gain be taxed less than productive income?

Investments aren't productive income? I mean, for some ventures that is true, but George Bailey said that my money was used to build my neighbors house, and so on. Is that now not true?

dbackjon wrote:

ATrain wrote:Problem with #3: The money I've invested is money that I've already earned and been taxed once. It is worth less if it does nothing due to the government/Fed policy of promoting inflation. Why should that money be taxed again?

Companies should have greater earnings/dividends due to no corporate income taxes.

Also, you have not been taxed on the gains yet. You invest $100 in a stock. You sell the stock for $140. You are only taxed on the $40 gain, not the $100.

Why should this gain be taxed less than productive income?

Because it's speculative, and investment capital. There is no guarantee of profit, or even recovery of the initial investment. Making investors pay ordinary tax rates on investment profits would cause them to look elsewhere to put their money.

GannonFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:


Companies should have greater earnings/dividends due to no corporate income taxes.

Also, you have not been taxed on the gains yet. You invest $100 in a stock. You sell the stock for $140. You are only taxed on the $40 gain, not the $100.

Why should this gain be taxed less than productive income?

Investments aren't productive income? I mean, for some ventures that is true, but George Bailey said that my money was used to build my neighbors house, and so on. Is that now not true?

Maybe productive was a bad choice of words - why should money earned on an investment be taxed less than money earned by working?

Wedgebuster wrote:

dbackjon wrote:


Companies should have greater earnings/dividends due to no corporate income taxes.

Also, you have not been taxed on the gains yet. You invest $100 in a stock. You sell the stock for $140. You are only taxed on the $40 gain, not the $100.

Why should this gain be taxed less than productive income?

Because it's speculative, and investment capital. There is no guarantee of profit, or even recovery of the initial investment. Making investors pay ordinary tax rates on investment profits would cause them to look elsewhere to put their money.

Like where?

Rob Iola wrote:

dbackjon wrote:


I try to make a serious proposal, and that is the best you can come up with?

You want real corporate tax reform? Tell idiot Donks to stop preventing upstanding US corporations like Boeing from being competitive with overbearing regulations - immediately you'll spike the tax base and then we can talk about tax rates, breaks, and capital gains...

Can you give me examples of overbearing regulations?

dbackjon wrote:

Rob Iola wrote: You want real corporate tax reform? Tell idiot Donks to stop preventing upstanding US corporations like Boeing from being competitive with overbearing regulations - immediately you'll spike the tax base and then we can talk about tax rates, breaks, and capital gains...

Can you give me examples of overbearing regulations?

Ever been to North Charleston? They could kinda use the investment...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/01/busin ... ing&st=cse" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. — Boeing’s gigantic new $750 million airplane factory here is the pride of South Carolina, the biggest single investment ever made in a state that is far more associated with old-line textile mills than state-of-the-art manufacturing. In just a few weeks, 1,000 workers will begin assembling the first of what they hope will be hundreds of 787 Dreamliners.

That is, unless the federal government takes it all away.

In a case that has enraged South Carolinians and become a cause célèbre among Republican lawmakers and presidential hopefuls, the National Labor Relations Board has accused Boeing of illegally setting up shop in South Carolina because of past strikes by the unionized workers at its main manufacturing base in the Seattle area. The board is asking a judge to order Boeing to move the Dreamliner production — and the associated jobs — to Washington State.

...

The Boeing example is what capitalism is all about - invest $750 Million in a new plant, hire a bunch of people, build products in demand around the world, make a profit, and reward your investors. If anything goes wrong with that picture, then investors are not rewarded. It's that risk, and the underlying process, that weigh in on the tax considerations (among other things) - if the taxes are too high, then the investment goes elsewhere and comes from other sources...

Rob Iola wrote:The Boeing example is what capitalism is all about - invest $750 Million in a new plant, hire a bunch of people, build products in demand around the world, make a profit, and reward your investors. If anything goes wrong with that picture, then investors are not rewarded. It's that risk, and the underlying process, that weigh in on the tax considerations (among other things) - if the taxes are too high, then the investment goes elsewhere and comes from other sources...

Not to mention Boeing has added over 3K jobs at the Everett, Washington plant. I just wrote a term paper in my Employment Law class on this NLRB case. It's a ridiculous case in which Boeing has broad support across party lines. The NLRB makes no qualms about the fact that they are going against their own administrative rules in an attempt to require companys to make unions equal partners when deciding whether or not to build new plants elsewhere.

dbackjon wrote:

ATrain wrote:Problem with #3: The money I've invested is money that I've already earned and been taxed once. It is worth less if it does nothing due to the government/Fed policy of promoting inflation. Why should that money be taxed again?

Companies should have greater earnings/dividends due to no corporate income taxes.

Also, you have not been taxed on the gains yet. You invest $100 in a stock. You sell the stock for $140. You are only taxed on the $40 gain, not the $100.

Why should this gain be taxed less than productive income?

Because of the risk you assume, as Wedgie said.

Would you advocate refunds...say, I invest $100 of already taxed money and lose $40. Will the government give me the taxes back that I paid on that $40?

dbackjon wrote:

Wedgebuster wrote:
Because it's speculative, and investment capital. There is no guarantee of profit, or even recovery of the initial investment. Making investors pay ordinary tax rates on investment profits would cause them to look elsewhere to put their money.

Like where?

Overseas perhaps.

Can you give me examples of overbearing regulations?

A number of years ago, I worked for a mining company that spent over 7 years getting a site approved for mining of granite for aggregates. All the studies were done, hearings held and approvals were given, by the book. The final sign off came from the Army Corps of Engineers regarding a potential wetland on the property. Two of the three conditions that would have led to the property being declared a wetlands existed, but not the third, so the permit was granted.

After clearing all of the hurdles and investing millions of dollars, after 3 years of operations, the Corps came back in and got a restraining order to shut the operation down to re-study whether their earlier finding that wetlands did not exist on the property was valid and mining should continue, because two of the three conditions of a wetlands existed.

The company had to then sue the Corps in Federal Court to follow the Corps's own guidelines in making this determination that all three conditions must be met before a tract of land can be determined to be a wetland.

Eventually the company won by forcing the Corps to follow the Corps on rules and the plant was re-openned.

This appears to be overbearing to me and is not productive.

PS - The main customer of this mine is the Department of Transportation....

Wedgebuster wrote:

dbackjon wrote:


Companies should have greater earnings/dividends due to no corporate income taxes.

Also, you have not been taxed on the gains yet. You invest $100 in a stock. You sell the stock for $140. You are only taxed on the $40 gain, not the $100.

Why should this gain be taxed less than productive income?

Because it's speculative, and investment capital. There is no guarantee of profit, or even recovery of the initial investment. Making investors pay ordinary tax rates on investment profits would cause them to look elsewhere to put their money.

Agreed. Investment means risk, and losses are as frequent as gains. Risk premium justifies lower cap gains rates.

dbackjon wrote:1) Eliminate Corporate Income Taxes completely. Corporations would still be responsible for property taxes, sales taxes, employment taxes, etc.

2) Eliminate all Corporate tax BREAKS, with a poison pill provision – any future tax breaks would trigger a retroactive 40% income tax rate.

3) Treat dividend and long-term capital gains as ordinary income


Have at it!

I would combine steps 1 and 2 to bargain significantly lower corporate tax rates for elimination of loopholes. The "poison pill" is problematic, in my view, because of the Constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws. As for item 3, I also posted in support of Wedgie's perspective. There's also the double-taxation issue as to corporate dividends.

Ivytalk wrote:

dbackjon wrote:1) Eliminate Corporate Income Taxes completely. Corporations would still be responsible for property taxes, sales taxes, employment taxes, etc.

2) Eliminate all Corporate tax BREAKS, with a poison pill provision – any future tax breaks would trigger a retroactive 40% income tax rate.

3) Treat dividend and long-term capital gains as ordinary income


Have at it!

I would combine steps 1 and 2 to bargain significantly lower corporate tax rates for elimination of loopholes. The "poison pill" is problematic, in my view, because of the Constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws. As for item 3, I also posted in support of Wedgie's perspective. There's also the double-taxation issue as to corporate dividends.

If we are not taxing corporate income, how is it double taxation?

As for the risk/reward, why should the government be in the business of evaluating risk? That should be your OWN calculation, and tax rates needed to provide this capital should not be a factor.

dbackjon wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:
I would combine steps 1 and 2 to bargain significantly lower corporate tax rates for elimination of loopholes. The "poison pill" is problematic, in my view, because of the Constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws. As for item 3, I also posted in support of Wedgie's perspective. There's also the double-taxation issue as to corporate dividends.

If we are not taxing corporate income, how is it double taxation?

As for the risk/reward, why should the government be in the business of evaluating risk? That should be your OWN calculation, and tax rates needed to provide this capital should not be a factor.

What is the government doing with regards to "evaluating" risk? They don't have to evaluate anything to come to the conclusion that investments in things like stock markets are a greater risk than say Treasury bonds. It's clearly more risky and there are plenty of outside entities that verify this. It's very much akin to the corporate tax rate debate - trying to come up with a solution that ignores the reality that money will go to places where it can make the most money just guarantees a solution that won't work. Other places aren't going to tax capital gains the same as income - doing it here just cements the idea that the money will go somewhere else.

dbackjon wrote:1) Eliminate Corporate Income Taxes completely. Corporations would still be responsible for property taxes, sales taxes, employment taxes, etc.

2) Eliminate all Corporate tax BREAKS, with a poison pill provision – any future tax breaks would trigger a retroactive 40% income tax rate.

3) Treat dividend and long-term capital gains as ordinary income


Have at it!

I like it.

now you need to eliminate most if not all individual deductions and drop marginal tax rates significantly so that the negative impact of capital gains aren't that significant.

dbackjon wrote:

Rob Iola wrote: You want real corporate tax reform? Tell idiot Donks to stop preventing upstanding US corporations like Boeing from being competitive with overbearing regulations - immediately you'll spike the tax base and then we can talk about tax rates, breaks, and capital gains...

Can you give me examples of overbearing regulations?

Are you fucking kidding?

Here...start with this...I dare you.

http://www.noaa.gov/lawenforcementupdat ... report.pdf

There's a good two hours reading there...but if you have the guts to see how NOAA/Dept of Interior uses bureaucratic rules/regs to extort money from the fishing industry, and even uses the threat of those regs. to force companies out of business...you'll begin to understand why businesses hate our govt. Take notice of the Yellow Tail Fin Letter of Authorization requirement, and "change of horsepower" engine notification. The regulators/attorneys who employed those regs to fine/punish the businesses/people in that industry should be hung from the neck as traitors. U.S. Federal bureaucrats make Nazi Germany look like bleeding heart pussies.

travelinman67 wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Can you give me examples of overbearing regulations?

Are you fucking kidding?

Here...start with this...I dare you.

http://www.noaa.gov/lawenforcementupdat ... report.pdf

There's a good two hours reading there...but if you have the guts to see how NOAA/Dept of Interior uses bureaucratic rules/regs to extort money from the fishing industry, and even uses the threat of those regs. to force companies out of business...you'll begin to understand why businesses hate our govt. Take notice of the Yellow Tail Fin Letter of Authorization requirement, and "change of horsepower" engine notification. The regulators/attorneys who employed those regs to fine/punish the businesses/people in that industry should be hung from the neck as traitors. U.S. Federal bureaucrats make Nazi Germany look like bleeding heart pussies.

As a follow up to the NOAA's integrity-bereft problems which Obama has arrogantly been ignoring...Sen. Brown publicly calls for NOAA Director Lubchenco to (finally) be fired.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massac ... noaa_head/

GLOUCESTER, Mass.—Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown is calling on President Obama to fire the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, saying she's worsened the fishing industry's problems.

Brown said Saturday in a press conference at the Gloucester waterfront that Obama should replace Jane Lubchenco.

In a statement, Brown said Lubchenco was indifferent to the industry's struggles and wrongly committed to a new management system he says is destroying fishing jobs.

Brown joins Massachusetts Rep. John Tierney and North Carolina Rep. Walter Jones, who last year called for Lubchenco's dismissal.

A NOAA spokesman said Lubchenco has always sought success for fishermen and wants to partner with them to build a profitable industry. He pointed to NOAA's commitment this week of millions to fund required on-board catch observers, a cost fishermen had worried they'd have to absorb.

Hmmm...lessee here...not enough money for police and fire...not enough money for federal marhalls on every flight...but there's enough taxpayer money for our government to hire and pay a "catch observer" on every fishing vessel???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Boot-in-the-ass-don't-let-the-door-hit-you-on-the-way-out time.