Forum Groups

 

Forums / Politics / What the Republicans don't want released

What the Republicans don't want released

9 posts
  1. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    11/1/2012 3:11 PM
    I thought "Bipartisan" meant that both parties agree... on the research findings?

    The New York Times reported on Thursday that Senate Republicans applied pressure to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) in September, successfully persuading it to withdraw a report finding that lowering marginal tax rates for the wealthiest Americans had no effect on economic growth or job creation.

    "The pressure applied to the research service comes amid a broader Republican effort to raise questions about research and statistics that were once trusted as nonpartisan and apolitical," the Times reported. Democrats in Congress, however, have resurfaced the report and published it in full. It can be read below.

    Republicans told the Times they had issues with the tone, wording and scope of the report, but they clearly objected most strongly to its findings, which undermine the governing fiscal philosophy of the party, that tax cuts for the wealthy will spur growth and benefit everybody.
    The CRS concluded:


    "The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie.

    However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities."



  2. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    11/2/2012 11:11 AM
    http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Global/Local%20Assets/Documents/Tax/Taxation%20and%20Investment%20Guides/matrices/dttl_corporate_tax_rates_2012.pdf
    United States corporate tax compared to other countries.
    How do we compete with other countries in manufacturing with current tax rate. At current rate will this alone export jobs from the US and cause less revenue to be collected? Canada's rate alone would be a lot more appealing to US corporations.



  3. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    11/2/2012 11:11 AM
    Jon Gansen said: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Global/Local%20Assets/Documents/Tax/Taxation%20and%20Investment%20Guides/matrices/dttl_corporate_tax_rates_2012.pdf
    United States corporate tax compared to other countries.
    How do we compete with other countries in manufacturing with current tax rate. At current rate will this alone export jobs from the US and cause less revenue to be collected? Canada's rate alone would be a lot more appealing to US corporations.


    And you need to weigh the corporate tax rate with the security, infrastructure, work force, and geographical location of the country. Sure, the rate is 10% in Afghanistan, but I don't think Hewlitt Packard will be opening any plants there soon.



  4. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    11/2/2012 2:11 PM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said:
    Jon Gansen said: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Global/Local%20Assets/Documents/Tax/Taxation%20and%20Investment%20Guides/matrices/dttl_corporate_tax_rates_2012.pdf
    United States corporate tax compared to other countries.
    How do we compete with other countries in manufacturing with current tax rate. At current rate will this alone export jobs from the US and cause less revenue to be collected? Canada's rate alone would be a lot more appealing to US corporations.


    And you need to weigh the corporate tax rate with the security, infrastructure, work force, and geographical location of the country. Sure, the rate is 10% in Afghanistan, but I don't think Hewlitt Packard will be opening any plants there soon.


    Now I never mentioned Afghanistan. China, Canada, Mexico. If more companies and product manufactures were in this country how much more revenue could be generated to offset any reduction. (not to mention jobs created and taxes paid on incomes) It cant help that our corp. tax is one of the highest in the world even more than France. As far as security, infrastructure and location it hasn't kept them from locating in the countries I mentioned. Cheap labor yes.



  5. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    11/2/2012 2:11 PM
    Jon, a good corporate tax lawyer is all they need, look at GE. If congress and the president, (no matter which one) would sit down and get serious, maybe the tax rates could be lowered and deductions discontinued to offset the lowering of the rate. But there are businesses that fund the congress peoples re-election campaigns because if taxes were made easy, who would need a CPA or the like? Someone is not going to like their deductions eliminated so keep the tax rate up and allow businesses to deduct expenses to lower their tax burden. We need a lot of the revenue for infrastructure and public safety. There has to be some middle ground that everyone can agree on.

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  6. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    11/2/2012 8:11 PM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said:
    Jon Gansen said: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Global/Local%20Assets/Documents/Tax/Taxation%20and%20Investment%20Guides/matrices/dttl_corporate_tax_rates_2012.pdf
    United States corporate tax compared to other countries.
    How do we compete with other countries in manufacturing with current tax rate. At current rate will this alone export jobs from the US and cause less revenue to be collected? Canada's rate alone would be a lot more appealing to US corporations.


    And you need to weigh the corporate tax rate with the security, infrastructure, work force, and geographical location of the country. Sure, the rate is 10% in Afghanistan, but I don't think Hewlitt Packard will be opening any plants there soon.


    Thats because hewlett packard is a dying company, they probably won't be opening any factories anywhere



  7. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    11/2/2012 8:11 PM
    Jon Gansen said: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Global/Local%20Assets/Documents/Tax/Taxation%20and%20Investment%20Guides/matrices/dttl_corporate_tax_rates_2012.pdf
    United States corporate tax compared to other countries.
    How do we compete with other countries in manufacturing with current tax rate. At current rate will this alone export jobs from the US and cause less revenue to be collected? Canada's rate alone would be a lot more appealing to US corporations.


    Is this meant to be related to what Larry was saying? Because he wasn't talking about corporate taxation



  8. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    11/2/2012 11:11 PM
    James Schmid said:
    Jon Gansen said: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Global/Local%20Assets/Documents/Tax/Taxation%20and%20Investment%20Guides/matrices/dttl_corporate_tax_rates_2012.pdf
    United States corporate tax compared to other countries.
    How do we compete with other countries in manufacturing with current tax rate. At current rate will this alone export jobs from the US and cause less revenue to be collected? Canada's rate alone would be a lot more appealing to US corporations.


    Is this meant to be related to what Larry was saying? Because he wasn't talking about corporate taxation


    Just a point I made, domestic withholding tax we are up there as well. The two go hand in hand.
    Mel I do agree with you, and its what Romney said he will do (get rid of loop holes and deductions) One other thing, how can it be a bipartisan report when Thomas Hungerford gives to the DNC?



  9. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    11/3/2012 7:11 AM
    Jon Gansen said:
    James Schmid said:
    Jon Gansen said: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Global/Local%20Assets/Documents/Tax/Taxation%20and%20Investment%20Guides/matrices/dttl_corporate_tax_rates_2012.pdf
    United States corporate tax compared to other countries.
    How do we compete with other countries in manufacturing with current tax rate. At current rate will this alone export jobs from the US and cause less revenue to be collected? Canada's rate alone would be a lot more appealing to US corporations.


    Is this meant to be related to what Larry was saying? Because he wasn't talking about corporate taxation


    Just a point I made, domestic withholding tax we are up there as well. The two go hand in hand.
    Mel I do agree with you, and its what Romney said he will do (get rid of loop holes and deductions) One other thing, how can it be a bipartisan report when Thomas Hungerford gives to the DNC?

    I don't really know who gave to who. My question, I suppose was, If the report was researched and written by both sides, why would the republicans want it withheld unless for purely political reason



View or change your forums profile here.