Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Singapore has shown that you can attract business and become a thriving destination for such by having low tax rates. There are other places too. Countries with higher rates are starting to see business leaving.
You suppose Heritage would ever produce a chart using the "effective" tax rates? The chart would look dramatically different as many very profitable companies pay zero in taxes.
@PRESSmUP: I agree, but in my opinion both individual and corporate taxes are way too high. Warren Buffett is leaving his fortune to the Gates Foundation, feeling it would be better spent than giving it to the government to waste. Regards, Ted
Old_Joe: Maybe not zero, but here's an example of wasted tax dollars-Student Loans, the numbers are big, the default rates are high. Who said, everyone need to go to college. Regards, Ted
Interesting that a nation which is the main beneficiary of an educated workforce can no longer provide that education at a reasonable cost. I guess all those "zeros" don't work so good.
Oh, right, 'waste'. Every private firm should be as efficient and low in overhead as, oh, say, Medicare. Much of Heritage's work is notoriously shoddy even for fellow rightwingers.
Singapore has shown that you can attract business and become a thriving destination for such by having low tax rates. There are other places too. Countries with higher rates are starting to see business leaving.
Again, loving no Singapore withholding tax on dividends. If there were more things in Singapore where I was interested in investing AND could reinvest dividends, I would. The latter is the difficult part.
Surely Singapore and other small city-state special cases should not be compared to major countries when it comes to national expenses, and consequently, the tax base necessary to support those expenses.
if Singapore's tax structure works for them, more power to them. They've got a good thing going, and that's great. But let's not suggest that it's possible to scale up a Singapore to a nation the size of the United States, with the world-wide responsibilities attendant to that size. Apples-to apples, folks!
Perhaps not but the transformation of Singapore from a old port brackwater into a modern state with the largest port in the world cannot be discounted.
Glad to see that people did not criticize Buffet. It seems to me that inversion isa serious issue but I don't see Buffet being a hypocrite. This is Congresses problem and any politician who complains ought to submit a bill preferably bi-partisan so i might actiually pass correcting the problem
That's the bottom line Jerry. We have heard a lot of politicians talk about tax reform but the reform ends up more complicated than before. I had a talk with a Hong Kong expat who had to pay HK taxes. Two pages of paper and that's it. I have always liked the flat tax idea and it could be something that happens each paycheck without having to file each year for exemptions and such. Perhaps simplistic in thinking but that's the kind of ideas needed instead end if complicated exemptions and credits for various groups.
Glad to see that people did not criticize Buffet. It seems to me that inversion isa serious issue but I don't see Buffet being a hypocrite. This is Congresses problem and any politician who complains ought to submit a bill preferably bi-partisan so i might actiually pass correcting the problem
It's not even about being a hypocrite as much as I think it's just the reality of the economic environment. I've criticized some of Buffet's actions on occasion, but you invest in the world you're presented with and money goes where it's treated best (and that, it would seem, is increasingly elsewhere - wasn't there an announcement about Berkshire starting/investing in new options in Asia?)
Congress complains about this and doesn't accomplish anything themselves. I think what's absurd is that the politicians only solution to tax inversions is not to actually sit down and work something else but instead they try to shame companies by calling them unpatriotic. There's no ability by this government to look inward and fix issues, all they can do is point fingers and blame others.
As I've said elsewhere, people are going to walk into Burger King after this deal and go, "I think it's terrible what your company did!" (long pause) "While I'm here, can I get a Big Mac, large fries and Diet Coke?"
Haha, I missed that. A bit off the topic but I like BK burgers but hate their fries. When they switched to the batter coating it ruined them. In any case, there are no BK's in my neck if the woods but McDonalds is around and I like their fries. A few times a year I indulge.
I don't think there will be any loss if business due to this decision. People will eat what they want.
“I’m not saying they’re [Pfizer] doing anything illegal at all in following the rules on inversion,” Buffett told CNBC, according to a transcript on the business news station’s website. “I would personally change that part of the law."
Fair enough. If he can't "personally change that part of the law" then he might as well work with it as it now stands. Same with his personal income taxes. I see no inconsistency, much less hypocrisy.
@Ted I'm surprised to hear student loans characterized as a waste. I whole heartedly agree that not everyone needs to go to college and that far too many people go to college because "it's the thing to do" without any plan of why they even care. But I'd be interested if your linkster's nose can ferret out any articles about a correlation between defaulted student loans and whether the school attended was a for-profit or a not-for-profit?
How many students go to college just for the social experience? They build up loans and come out with nothing but a good time. Those same students then wonder why they cannot find a good job. Many end up in govt jobs it seems.
I wish there was more emphasis on trade schools. Electricians, hvac, welding etc. There is still some demand for these jobs though in some cases you might have to leave home to get work and that is another roadblock for some.
I have very particular views on what universities are for (producing research), and aren't for (general vocational training), but I don't really want to imagine a world where a young adult with the ability can't attend college simply because they can't afford it. Similarly, I don't want to imagine a world without enough college graduates to do that research because it benefits the nation as a whole.
Defaulting on a student loan is also a strange way to measure money loss. That borrower is still liable for repayment, the creditor now has options for collection, and it is next to impossible to write off student debt in bankruptcy.
Also, the amount of student aid given/interest paid isn't a big number at all as a portion of Federal spending.
As to Mr. Buffet, pointing out the absurdity of a fact doesn't mean he can will that fact out of existence. Is he supposed to just give the government more money in taxes because he feels someone else's bill is disproportionately large?
As an aside, these are the historical rates of U.S. personal income taxes, adjusted for inflation, since 1862. People complain about how high they are, but to my mind the problem is in how far the top rates have shrunk and brackets have constricted over the past 50 years (from a high of >90% through the early 1960s). And that is before you take into consideration how much money the super-rich receive through tax-preferred means. That has to shift the burden onto the upper-middle and middle classes.
Anyway you look at it, Buffet is worth ~ 13,500 times what someone with a $5,000,000.00 portfolio is. It's difficult, to say the least, to look at his tax consequences in the same way.
>> How many students go to college just for the social experience? They build up loans and come out with nothing but a good time. Those same students then wonder why they cannot find a good job. Many end up in govt jobs it seems.
I don't care much for Mr Buffett but his point of shunning taxes to the govt because it will be wasted is worth exploring. Sure we could have a 90% rate for the top earners but that just makes those people explore ways to avoid it. That takes time and money too.
This subject gets lots of attention because people are not satisfied with the results. The govt tries to do too much with the money they have. They need to get back to basics. This will be hard because cuts affect everyone and nobody wants their pet service cut.
Comments
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/05/3_biggest_lies_why_corporate_taxes_should_be_lowered_partner/
Interesting point about Canadian gov acting in national interest too:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/08/25/et-tu-burger-king-yet-another-inversion-but-this-time-one-with-a-big-lesson/
Regards,
Ted
http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/corporate-tax-rate
Regards,
Ted
Regards,
Ted
if Singapore's tax structure works for them, more power to them. They've got a good thing going, and that's great. But let's not suggest that it's possible to scale up a Singapore to a nation the size of the United States, with the world-wide responsibilities attendant to that size. Apples-to apples, folks!
It's not even about being a hypocrite as much as I think it's just the reality of the economic environment. I've criticized some of Buffet's actions on occasion, but you invest in the world you're presented with and money goes where it's treated best (and that, it would seem, is increasingly elsewhere - wasn't there an announcement about Berkshire starting/investing in new options in Asia?)http://seekingalpha.com/article/2444715-berkshire-hathaway-expands-in-asia-new-frontier-offers-further-growth-for-shareholders
Congress complains about this and doesn't accomplish anything themselves. I think what's absurd is that the politicians only solution to tax inversions is not to actually sit down and work something else but instead they try to shame companies by calling them unpatriotic. There's no ability by this government to look inward and fix issues, all they can do is point fingers and blame others.
As I've said elsewhere, people are going to walk into Burger King after this deal and go, "I think it's terrible what your company did!" (long pause) "While I'm here, can I get a Big Mac, large fries and Diet Coke?"
I don't think there will be any loss if business due to this decision. People will eat what they want.
Fair enough. If he can't "personally change that part of the law" then he might as well work with it as it now stands. Same with his personal income taxes. I see no inconsistency, much less hypocrisy.
I wish there was more emphasis on trade schools. Electricians, hvac, welding etc. There is still some demand for these jobs though in some cases you might have to leave home to get work and that is another roadblock for some.
I have very particular views on what universities are for (producing research), and aren't for (general vocational training), but I don't really want to imagine a world where a young adult with the ability can't attend college simply because they can't afford it. Similarly, I don't want to imagine a world without enough college graduates to do that research because it benefits the nation as a whole.
Defaulting on a student loan is also a strange way to measure money loss. That borrower is still liable for repayment, the creditor now has options for collection, and it is next to impossible to write off student debt in bankruptcy.
Also, the amount of student aid given/interest paid isn't a big number at all as a portion of Federal spending.
As to Mr. Buffet, pointing out the absurdity of a fact doesn't mean he can will that fact out of existence. Is he supposed to just give the government more money in taxes because he feels someone else's bill is disproportionately large?
Anyway you look at it, Buffet is worth ~ 13,500 times what someone with a $5,000,000.00 portfolio is. It's difficult, to say the least, to look at his tax consequences in the same way.
jesus.
This subject gets lots of attention because people are not satisfied with the results. The govt tries to do too much with the money they have. They need to get back to basics. This will be hard because cuts affect everyone and nobody wants their pet service cut.