"Since a tax is just on profits, it would be stupid for a company to leave one of the biggest economies in the world for not turning a larger profit than without the tax."
Jack21222
I agree. That shows that the Republicans did not want the tax loop hole to close, for less than patriotic reasons. Their loyalty is to the international companies, not the US.
The bill would have closed the loop hole that says that a corporation with its headquarters in a tax haven country does not have to pay taxes on profits made in the US. The money collected would be used to help the 911 heroes.I honestly do not know how to explain the bill more. Tho this info on the periphery may help.
---------------------
"Until the 1950s, tax havens were used to avoid personal taxation but since then jurisdictions have come to focus on attracting companies with low or no corporate tax. Centres which focus on providing financial services to corporations rather than private wealth management are more often knows as offshore financial centres.
This strategy generally relied on double taxation treaties between large jurisdictions and the tax haven, allowing corporations to structure group ownership through the smaller jurisdiction to reduce tax liability. Although some of these double tax treaties survive, in the 1970s, most major countries began repealing their double taxation treaties with micro-states to prevent corporate tax leakage in this manner."
from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_haven
The obvious question is," did the U.S.A repeal its double taxation treaties?" See site below!
http://www.finweb.com/taxes/the-double-taxation-treaty-of-america.html"
Therefore, many foreign corporations do not pay taxes on profits made from operating in the U.S.A."
------------
"Putting it through under rules that require a 2/3 majority let them give the GOP a black eye and paint them as uncaring. "
Vanadium 50
The Dems did not want the Republicans to add many many amendments that would have made the bill a farce. Perhaps you are right and the Dem's put a "poison pill" into the bill that they knew the Republicans would reject. However, the "poison pill" is the proviso that international corporations must pay taxes on profits they made from US. OK. It's like the Dems said , " we want the 911 heroes to be taken care of. However, we will add an amendment that says that murder should be illegal." * Now, one could say that the Dems were being cynical manipulators because they knew their opposition was against a proviso banning murder. They knew their opposition would never go for that. They knew their opposition was immoral and set them up for a political fall. I'll grant you that.
Yes, letting international corporations rip us off is not as bad as murder. However, my analogy still makes my point.
*
I admit that the analogy is not perfect. Closing the loop hole to fund the 911 heroes makes sense. Banning murder ( tho a good thing) is unrelated to the plight of the 911 heroes.
---------
If the Republicans had done the right thing they would have thought," I'm against murder and I want to help the 911 heroes. I will only look bad if I vote against either of those things. I will not play into the Dem's game."
Unfortunately, the Republicans do not want to prevent the international corporations from ripping us off.
It usually comes as a shock when a person realizes that many foreign ( and many domestic companies) pay no US tax at all! It should also come as a shock that the majority of Republicans believe that foreign companies should not pay taxes on profits made in the USA!
They are even willing to sacrifice the 911 heroes on the alter of no taxes on foreign corporations!
This is from FRDB and explains the situation succinctly.
