• 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!

CBO: International Comparisons of Corporate Income Tax Rates

DA60 said:
https://www.debatepolitics.com/gove...-tax-rates-post1067039949.html#post1067039949
Click to expand...


Sorry.. that again.. does not explain how I can pass my corporate income taxes onto my retail customers.

If I pass my corporate taxes onto my customers by raising their prices.. I will lose most of my marketshare.. since my competitors did not pay as much corporate income tax as I did.

not to mention competing with foreign products that don't pay the income tax I do.

So again.. how do I pass income tax onto my retail customers.. when my competitors all have different income taxes they paid.. (some zero).
 
I think DA 60 is getting a little confused by the topic.
All money paid out by a corporation comes from somewhere and it's usually from revenues which usually come from consumers. But that isn't the point.

IF taxes go up from 30% to 40%, companies will not raise prices to pay the extra tax. There's an abundance of research that proves that and a derath of research that refutes.
 
KLATTU said:
Perhaps you should have read it. There are references to a number of studies on this topic. Conclusions vary. But, if you are stuck in left wing ideology{ cue robot voice.....CORPORATIONS ALL BAD.....GOVERNMENT GOOD......MUST TAX} - two graphs are all you need .
;)
Click to expand...
Again, putting words in my mouth.

Yes, if that is all it takes to show that in the US there is no correlation between bottom quintile wage gains and declining effective corporate taxes, so be it....2 graphs.
 
jaeger19 said:
Sorry.. that again.. does not explain how I can pass my corporate income taxes onto my retail customers.

If I pass my corporate taxes onto my customers by raising their prices.. I will lose most of my marketshare.. since my competitors did not pay as much corporate income tax as I did.

not to mention competing with foreign products that don't pay the income tax I do.

So again.. how do I pass income tax onto my retail customers.. when my competitors all have different income taxes they paid.. (some zero).
Click to expand...

Oh come on now....think please.

Every American company that makes what you make pays the same corporate tax (more or less). Plus, the tax is already in place, it is not rising...if anything, it is falling.

Ansd any tax raise would be felt equally amongst your domestic competitors - so they would all be raising prices the same.

As for foreign competition? Well, differences in taxation/regulation has long been a problem for corporations all over the world.

If you do not get it now - so be it.

WE are done here.


Good day.
 
KLATTU said:
I think DA 60 is getting a little confused by the topic.
All money paid out by a corporation comes from somewhere and it's usually from revenues which usually come from consumers. But that isn't the point.

IF taxes go up from 30% to 40%, companies will not raise prices to pay the extra tax. There's an abundance of research that proves that and a derath of research that refutes.
Click to expand...

I think KLATTU has a problem answering posts that are answering his questions.

Are you blind? Did you not read the very op ed piece you linked to?

It said:

'Therefore, corporations cannot raise prices to compensate for the corporate income tax because they will be undercut by businesses to which the tax does not apply. It should also be noted that the states have substantially different corporate tax regimes, including some that do not tax corporations at all, and we do not observe that prices for goods and services vary from state to state depending on its taxation of corporations.

That leaves two remaining groups that may bear the burden of the corporate tax: workers and shareholders.'

(though I do not agree with this completely - you obviously do).

Are workers and shareholders consumers (assuming they don't live in the woods/off of the land)?

Yes or no?


And I said: 'Corporate taxes are just double taxes as the corporations just pass the cost onto the consumer.'

It doesn't matter how the costs are spread out. in the end, the consumer/masses foot the bill. Whether it is shareholders through lower dividends or workers through lower wages/benefits or buyers through higher prices. The company does not magically eat the cost...they pass it on to the consumers/masses.


And btw - I did not say ALL of the tax burden was put onto prices. I just said much of it does.

But who cares? What matters is the taxes are passed onto the consumers/masses. Which was/is my point.
 
Last edited:
KLATTU said:
I think DA 60 is getting a little confused by the topic.
All money paid out by a corporation comes from somewhere and it's usually from revenues
Click to expand...
Funny and ironic about who is confused. A corporate tax is on the profits, not revenue. And I already posted Bruce Bartlett explaining how is it not passed on to consumers.
 
DA60 said:
I think KLATTU has a problem answering posts that are answering his questions.

Are you blind? Did you not read the very op ed piece you linked to?

It said:

'Therefore, corporations cannot raise prices to compensate for the corporate income tax because they will be undercut by businesses to which the tax does not apply. It should also be noted that the states have substantially different corporate tax regimes, including some that do not tax corporations at all, and we do not observe that prices for goods and services vary from state to state depending on its taxation of corporations.

That leaves two remaining groups that may bear the burden of the corporate tax: workers and shareholders.'

(though I do not agree with this completely - you obviously do).

Are workers and shareholders consumers?

Yes or no?


And I said: 'Corporate taxes are just double taxes as the corporations just pass the cost onto the consumer.'

Figured it out yet...duh?
Click to expand...
Ok I missed that. My bad.
I was thinking you were equating consumers with retail customers.
 
KLATTU said:
Ok I missed that. My bad.
I was thinking you were equating consumers with retail customers.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.

TO be fair...I did think cost rises were the primary (but by no means only) source of funnelling the taxes to consumers. But I now see it might not be in many cases.

Sorry if I got a bit rude....bad habit of mine. I tend to attack those who disagree with me.

Good for business. LOUSY for socializing.

:)
 
Last edited:
Gimmesometruth said:
Funny and ironic about who is confused. A corporate tax is on the profits, not revenue. And I already posted Bruce Bartlett explaining how is it not passed on to consumers.
Click to expand...
I think your'e just arguing to argue.
I was the one that said it was not passed on to consumer, until DA 60 set the record straight that shareholders and workers are considered consumers.Bartlett used consumers and retail customers interchangeably.

Here's a good study I came across. The author conclude that a tax hike is detrimental to employment while a tax cut does not translate to higher wage/more employment unless implemented during a recession. Hmmm
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/feds/2016/files/2016006pap.pdf

As far as I know, these two authors are legit. that is, they aren't partisan liberals whose work always has to viewed skepticalli. They tend to come to a conclusion FIRST and then backfill in the supporting data.
 
Last edited:
KLATTU said:
I think your'e just arguing to argue.
I was the one that said it was not passed on to consumer, until DA 60 set the record straight that shareholders and workers are considered consumers.Bartlett used consumers and retail customers interchangeably.
Click to expand...
Yer both horribly confused, conflating what a person is with when/how a tax is paid. A corporate tax is not paid when a worker/consumer/shareholder purchases a good....beyond the fact that that you just claimed it was placed on revenue.

Here's a good study I came across.
Click to expand...
A study on US STATES corporate taxation.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Yer both horribly confused, conflating what a person is with when/how a tax is paid. A corporate tax is not paid when a worker/consumer/shareholder purchases a good....beyond the fact that that you just claimed it was placed on revenue.

A study on US STATES corporate taxation.
Click to expand...

Oh Jeez. You apparently post the op ed earlier...and than you do not even get what it means.

Now try and keep up...the Op ed article states how the taxes are passed onto the workers and the shareholders?

So now those two groups have less money to spend as consumers since the corporation took wages/benefits from the workers and dividends from the shareholders.

And that is how the corporation passed the corporate tax onto the consumer (as well as direct price hikes).

DUH!!!

Jeez...it is PATHETICALLY simple.


I am not even going to bother reading your response. I know you. Even if someone proves you wrong...you will just argue on and on and on and on.

Plus - I have near-zero respect for you (because of the way you treat others besides me).


We are done here....bu bye now.
 
Last edited:
DA60 said:
Oh Jeez. You apparently post the op ed earlier...and than you do not even get what it means.

Now try and keep up...the Op ed article states how the taxes are passed onto the workers and the shareholders?

So now those two groups have less money to spend as consumers since the corporation took wages/benefits from the workers and dividends from the shareholders.And that is how the corporation passed the corporate tax onto the consumer.DUH!!!
Click to expand...
Yer once again trying to equate workers and shareholders to consumers, that does not fly on the basis that yes, they intersect, but they are not equal. Do you need a picture? Further, the point still is when is the tax paid...and again, it IS NOT PAID AT THE CONSUMER LEVEL....WHICH WOULD INCLUDE ALL CONSUMERS.



Jeez...it is PATHETICALLY simple.
Click to expand...
I know it is, it is simple and wrong, but there you are.


I am not even going to bother reading your response. I know you. Even if someone proves you wrong...you will just argue on and on and on and on.Plus - I have near-zero respect for you.We are done here....bu bye now.
Click to expand...
I remember the dayz when you said I was on ignore, apparently that isn't true.

Tah-tah
 
DA60 said:
Oh come on now....think please.

Every American company that makes what you make pays the same corporate tax (more or less). Plus, the tax is already in place, it is not rising...if anything, it is falling.

Ansd any tax raise would be felt equally amongst your domestic competitors - so they would all be raising prices the same.

As for foreign competition? Well, differences in taxation/regulation has long been a problem for corporations all over the world.

If you do not get it now - so be it.

WE are done here.


Good day.
Click to expand...


Well except for the fact that we don't pay the same corporate tax... either in actual percentage.. nor in actual money.

And no.. raising income taxes is not felt equally amongst domestic competitors.

Listen;.. you don't understand corporate income taxation. If you did.. it would go a long way to understanding it.

You are done until you decide to do a little research

Good day.
 
KLATTU said:
First of all-it's a she , not a he. And second of all she agrees with me. Well to be honest- I agree with her. Veronique de Rugy is the goddess of economics.

Myth 2: Corporations pay the corporate income tax.

Fact 2: First, corporations do not pay taxes, only individuals pay taxes. More importantly, economists have shown that a majority of the corporate income tax is borne by labor mainly in the form of lower wages rather than borne by shareholder[/B]s.
Click to expand...


First off, I was using guy in the generic sense. And I was speaking to the broader point that corporate taxes are not paid by corporations. From the paper:

The contribution of economic theory to this study has been
the recognition that while the statutory burden of the tax is on corporate income, the
economic burden could be shifted forward to consumers in the form of higher prices, to
shareholders in the form of lower returns or shifted backward to workers in the form of
lower wages. ii
Click to expand...

So while corporate taxes can be passed on in the form of lower wages, it can also be passed on as prices as well. Mainly i was challenging the blanket statement that ALL economist agree on something.
 
screen_shot_2016-09-15_at_10.17.47_am.png
KLATTU said:
Veronique de Rugy is the goddess of economics..
Click to expand...
Interesting taste.
 
jonny5 said:
Fir

So while corporate taxes can be passed on in the form of lower wages, it can also be passed on as prices as well. Mainly i was challenging the blanket statement that ALL economist agree on something.
Click to expand...

I guess they can be but they aren't. That's the whole point of the gazillion research studies.

Hey look, I thought that too untll a couple years ago when Veronique de Rugy set me straight,
 
KLATTU said:
It's the eternal struggle isn't it?
Veronique or hot , but clueless?...?
Click to expand...
FFS dood, you not only changed the topic, you changed the subject. But then again, what else is new...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom