• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown calls for Burger King boycott over Tim Hortons deal

AliHajiSheik said:
My understanding is that profits are taxed where they are earned, but in the US, we tax repatriated profits that were already taxed in other countries. This is why so much profits are still sitting offshore thereby avoiding the double taxation. Are you aware of anything that indicates that this isn't the case today?
Click to expand...


i don't believe that is true. They should be taxed where they are earned but I don't think that's the law.
 
Hari Seldon said:
1. You could be right, never really paid it too much attention.

2. Exactly, he didn't care what morons thought. And NYC prospered.

3. When the healthcare system is overwhelmed because that is all you eat and I am unable to get proper care it sure is my problem. If insurance companies are forced to raise premiums across the board to take care of you fat azz it sure is my problem. Like I said healthcare is not an unlimited resource.

4. Killed is one thing, major trauma is another. The cost of taking care of a paraplegic, a permanently brain damaged individual etc. is enormous and sure does effect me. Not to mention the medical resources they use which are now unavailable to me and mine.
Click to expand...
1. So you want an authoritarian to tell you how to live. Not me. I prefer freedom.

2. NYC has seen more wealth flee the city than ever. It's only the poor that have to suffer there.

3. & 4. Healthcare is not a right.
 
MTAtech said:
i don't believe that is true. They should be taxed where they are earned but I don't think that's the law.
Click to expand...

This opinion piece on Reuters indicates that it is, although it is not a substantial amount in BK's case:

If Burger King was letting foreign cash pile up overseas rather than repatriating it and giving Uncle Sam a cut, that would be another matter. But Burger King only had about $900 million of total cash on its balance sheet as of June 30. Burger King’s pre-tax foreign income was just under $200 million last year, so future tax savings don’t get anywhere close to explaining the $2 billion jump in Burger King’s market value, let alone the lift in the shares of its quarry.
Click to expand...

Analysis & Opinion | Reuters
 
Montecresto said:
Except that nobody pays that rate. Compare what's actually paid to the rest of the world, it looks different then.
Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think that's a lie, because corporations sure don't act like they are paying a reduced rate.
 
MTAtech said:
Once again, the STATUTORY corporate tax-rate is the highest in the world. The amount of taxes, after deductions and credits, is not. (see: GAO: Effective Tax Rates Can Differ Significantly from the Statutory Rate) In fact, many profitable corporations pay no taxes.

What BK is doing is taking advantage of a tax loophole that allows for changing a corporate address without changing operations, as a way of avoiding taxes. Thus, a change in the tax code is warranted -- taxing profits where they are earned, regardless of where the corporate headquarters is located.
Click to expand...

Profits are already taxed where they are earned. BK will still pay US income taxes on profits they make in the US after they move their HQ to Canada. The US, however, will no longer have the right to expect BK to pay US income taxes on worldwide profits. Income taxes on worldwide profits will be paid to Canada instead after the money is repatriated ... to Canada. In a sense this will not be a change in what BK is doing since they are already holding a lot of cash in foreign banks that they refuse to repatriate to the US because of the high taxes. A number of other multinational corporations based in the US are doing the same thing. Apple comes to mind.

Perhaps you mean to say that BK should continue to pay income taxes on worldwide profits to the US after it moves to Canada. I can assure you that neither Canada nor any other foreign nation would stand for that, and there are many many companies that currently operate in the US that would cease their operations here if the US were to adopt such an insane policy.
 
j-mac said:
1. So you want an authoritarian to tell you how to live. Not me. I prefer freedom.

2. NYC has seen more wealth flee the city than ever. It's only the poor that have to suffer there.

3. & 4. Healthcare is not a right.
Click to expand...

1. You are too funny. I think Bloomberg did a fine job. He's pro business, I thought the right liked that. He also tried to deal with obesity. He may have been wrong and it probably didn't accomplish much but at least he highlighted the problem. Tell what "freedoms" were denied to New Yorkers under his administration other than mega big gulps? Authoritarian rule? Please. Try living in the Middle East.

2. You have no idea what you are talking about. New high rises are going up all the time. They are required to have some low income housing but the rest is for the wealthy. Times square is now a tourists paradise, most of the peep shows and dilapidated buildings are gone. Housing prices are increasing throughout all the boroughs. If anything the poor are being pushed out of the city. (Much of this under Bloomberg) The latest are tech companies. They are popping up in NYC left and right.

3., 4. Until you are prepared to keep people from entering an emergency room unless they can pay or have proper insurance it sure is a right in the US. At least economically. I disagree in principal and freely admit I believe its a right. As long as we are required to continue to treat everyone it makes much more economic sense (and I would argue moral) to have everyone be insured and prevent illnesses from becoming much more expensive ailments.
 
Turned down a free lunch a BK yesterday,

Thanks for the heads up aye. :thumbs:
 
AliHajiSheik said:
My understanding is that profits are taxed where they are earned, but in the US, we tax repatriated profits that were already taxed in other countries. This is why so much profits are still sitting offshore thereby avoiding the double taxation. Are you aware of anything that indicates that this isn't the case today?
Click to expand...

Yes. Most nations tax the overseas profits of all corporations that are incorporated in their borders. I've already posted the link twice.
 
sangha said:
Yes. Most nations tax the overseas profits of all corporations that are incorporated in their borders. I've already posted the link twice.
Click to expand...

I extended you the courtesy to go back through this entire thread. Alas, there are no such links from you.
 
Ikari said:
Take it up with the government. Corporations are taxed.
Click to expand...

Did someone deny that? I made no such claim that they cant be taxed. I took issue with your claiming that they should be taxed because they are people.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
This should serve to explain it:
Corporate personhood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Wikpedia is not a law, and It doesnt. Did you read it?

This doctrine forms the basis for legal recognition that corporations, as groups of people, may hold and exercise certain rights under the common law and the U.S. Constitution. For example, corporations may contract with other parties and sue or be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. The doctrine does not hold that corporations are flesh and blood "people" apart from their shareholders, executives, and managers, nor does it grant to corporations all of the rights of citizens.
Click to expand...
 
Helix said:
incorrect; i think it's poor policy, given the competition from other nations. personally, i'd support cutting it down really low, collecting it from every corporation, and increase revenue by taxing individuals instead of corporations. for example, i support taxing all individual income as income above a cap, including investment income.




it's slimy because they are using a bunch of loopholes to duck out of taxes when the little guy can't afford to do that and has to pay it. Apple doing its little pretend corporation scam to avoid taxes is slimy, too.
Click to expand...

The little guy would do it if he could, which means everyone is slimy. Which means no one is.
 
jonny5 said:
The little guy would do it if he could, which means everyone is slimy. Which means no one is.
Click to expand...

Interesting logic. And incorrect, as most absolutist arguments are.
 

UPDATE:

Burger King announced yesterday they are keeping their headquarters in Miami, Florida.

In other words they are staying in the US.
MIAMI, Aug. 29 (UPI) -- Those employed by Burger King's headquarters in Miami are breathing easier. The company said it won't be moving out of Miami for now.
Click to expand...

Read more:

Burger King to keep headquarters in Miami - UPI.com
 
mac said:
Corporations are people....not in a literal sense, but in a philosophical and legal sense.
Click to expand...

You said
Corporations are people with all the same rights and responsibilities.
Click to expand...

Your Wiki link says
nor does it grant to corporations all of the rights of citizens.
Click to expand...

I gonna guess you still don't see your fail
 
jonny5 said:
Its your opinion that the little guy doesnt use every 'loophole' they can find?
Click to expand...

there's a difference between a small business using a minor loophole to save a little money and a global corporation using a headquartering scam to avoid almost all taxes. sort of like the difference between a playground fistfight and a world war.

either way, my plan would solve it : cut the corporate tax rate significantly, collect it from every corporation, and tax individual income instead.
 
Helix said:
there's a difference between a small business using a minor loophole to save a little money and a global corporation using a headquartering scam to avoid almost all taxes. sort of like the difference between a playground fistfight and a world war.

either way, my plan would solve it : cut the corporate tax rate significantly, collect it from every corporation, and tax individual income instead.
Click to expand...

As per your plan, outgoing Ways and Means Chair Dave Camp was surprisingly allowed to put forth his tax rewrite overhaul.
McConnell promptly declared it DOA--and it never saw the light of day on the House floor.

Retiring Camp was term-limited as Chair, which Rep. P. Ryan takes over next year.
My gut feeling on Ryan is he wants to do the right thing--but he bounces back-and-forth because of TEA-pressures.

I'd love to see Ryan forget about being President as long as he's allowed to be Chair of W&M and get the House in order.
Ryan's a protege of Jack Kemp as I'm sure you know and I often call him the most knowledgeable man in DC on the economy.

We haven't had a shutdown so far this year due to the "small" agreement between Ryan and Sen. Murray, crafted in secrecy.
Yet a small cut in COLA to Veteran's pensions was fought off by neos and military-state pols from both parties, costing the Treasury billions.
The decreases in the increases to the budget must be brought under control in all sectors, IMHO; the guts of any grand-bargain .
 
minnie616 said:

UPDATE:

Burger King announced yesterday they are keeping their headquarters in Miami, Florida.

In other words they are staying in the US.


Read more:

Burger King to keep headquarters in Miami - UPI.com
Click to expand...

Just because they are keeping their HQ in the US, does not mean they are keeping their tax registration. After all officially Apple is a US company with their HQ in the US, but their whole tax avoidance system has them tax wise being registered in Ireland and elsewhere.
 
Hari Seldon said:
1. You are too funny. I think Bloomberg did a fine job. He's pro business, I thought the right liked that. He also tried to deal with obesity. He may have been wrong and it probably didn't accomplish much but at least he highlighted the problem. Tell what "freedoms" were denied to New Yorkers under his administration other than mega big gulps? Authoritarian rule? Please. Try living in the Middle East.

2. You have no idea what you are talking about. New high rises are going up all the time. They are required to have some low income housing but the rest is for the wealthy. Times square is now a tourists paradise, most of the peep shows and dilapidated buildings are gone. Housing prices are increasing throughout all the boroughs. If anything the poor are being pushed out of the city. (Much of this under Bloomberg) The latest are tech companies. They are popping up in NYC left and right.

3., 4. Until you are prepared to keep people from entering an emergency room unless they can pay or have proper insurance it sure is a right in the US. At least economically. I disagree in principal and freely admit I believe its a right. As long as we are required to continue to treat everyone it makes much more economic sense (and I would argue moral) to have everyone be insured and prevent illnesses from becoming much more expensive ailments.
Click to expand...

1. Reason mag had a pretty good take on the progressive anti freedom putz that is Bloomberg....

"Bloomberg is an authoritarian. He's not an authoritarian in the way Josef Stalin or Pol Pot was authoritarian, but every instinct tells you he's a man who would use any power given to him to govern every aspect of public and private life whenever necessary -- or, more precisely, whenever he finds it necessary, which is frequently. All said, he's exactly the type of person who makes the Constitution a necessity.
Anyone who believes your caloric intake is government's prime concern should be watched carefully, of course; but no matter what crusade the man's on, his rationalization for limiting personal freedom is a dangerous one. Some of his proposals are popular (smoking bans), and others are less so (limiting portion sizes and banning ingredients), but all of them set precedents that distort the relationship between government and citizens. The jump from minor infringements on personal liberty to giant ones is a shorter one than you think. Allow a politician to tell you what your portion sizes should be and the next thing you know you're letting Washington force you to buy insurance you don't want.
If the Bloomberg administration believes that salt -- "the greatest public health threat facing" New York City -- is worth losing your freedom over, imagine what he'd have planned after a terrorist attack.


Read more: Michael Bloomberg's Authoritarian Instincts - Reason.com

2. Wrong again....According to Investors business daily:

"If there is anything New York doesn't need it's more reasons for Empire State residents to flee.
Over the last decade (2001-11) New York's population fell by 1.6 million. Many disgruntled New Yorkers said enough, packed up and left the state. This was a larger population drain than suffered by any other state. Congratulations.


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: New York Finds High Taxes Send State's Wealthy Fleeing - Investors.com
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

3. Until "I" am prepared? So I have to change to your warped way of thinking about our constitution and rights eh?

NO!

Show me in the constitution where Health care, or Medical services are in the bill of rights.....I'll wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom