The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community

The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/index.php)
-   War, Religion and Politics Thread (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   Good News for Corporations but Bad News for Small Business (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=111579)

Pony Boy 07-31-2013 08:28 AM

Good News for Corporations but Bad News for Small Business
 
Obama says Top Tax Rate Should Be 28% for Corporations, 40% for Small Businesses

The New York Times reports that President Obama is reviving an old proposal to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 28 percent (and 25 percent for manufacturers). Obama's push to lower the corporate tax rate to 28 percent comes less than a year after he raised the top individual income tax rate, paid by many small businesses, to 39.6 percent.

In a speech delivered Tuesday afternoon, Obama did not explain why he thinks it's a sound economic idea to raise the top marginal tax rate on small businesses but lower it for corporations.

"Right now, our tax code is so riddled with wasteful loopholes that many companies doing the right thing and investing in America pay 35%, while the corporations with the best accountants stash their money abroad and pay little or nothing at all," Obama said, according to the text of his prepared remarks. "Iím willing to simplify our tax code in a way that closes those loopholes, ends incentives to ship jobs overseas, and lowers rates for businesses that create jobs right here in America."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ss_742312.html


Even at 28%, Obama's new tax rate would be higher than the 25% average paid by our main competitors.

So with one hand the president giveth, and with the other he taketh away. Worse, he seems intent on rewarding big companies with tax cuts while punishing small companies that account for 85% of all new jobs.

Most small businesses aren't corporations, so they won't pay the lower tax. Instead, they'll continue to pay a top rate on their income of close to 44%, thanks largely to Obama's tax hikes on entrepreneurs.

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editor...or-the-gop.htm

07-31-2013 09:44 AM

I hate the tax code. Go Flat tax, take the power to manipulate the entire nation away from Polticians.

Arkie 07-31-2013 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-Large (Post 3885337)
I hate the tax code. Go Flat tax, take the power to manipulate the entire nation away from Polticians.

We have to abolish the Federal Reserve too. :thumbs:

07-31-2013 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkie (Post 3885392)
We have to abolish the Federal Reserve too. :thumbs:

word...

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 11:55 AM

Obama suggests lowering taxes.

The right complains.

****ing hilarious! It really is true, no matter what Obama proposes, the right will fight it tooth and nail.

Also, the 39.6% tax rate is not a corporate tax rate and any silly claim that is is is nothing more than blatant dishonesty. It's the ****ing personal income tax rate on regular earnings above $400,000. No matter what size business you work for/own, if you take personal income in that bracket, you pay that rate. Even Tim Cook (not Apple) pays 39.6% on any regular income he makes above $400,000.

07-31-2013 11:59 AM

I guess you could argue that small business wil be getting tax credits from the ACA to help cover employees, large companies will not.

07-31-2013 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885453)
Obama suggests lowering taxes.

The right complains.

****ing hilarious! It really is true, no matter what Obama proposes, the right will fight it tooth and nail.

Also, the 39.6% tax rate is not a corporate tax rate and any silly claim that is is is nothing more than blatant dishonesty. It's the ****ing personal income tax rate on regular earnings above $400,000. No matter what size business you work for/own, if you take personal income in that bracket, you pay that rate. Even Tim Cook (not Apple) pays 39.6% on any regular income he makes above $400,000.

to be perfectly accurate, Mitch McConnell was unabashed when he said "our #1 goal is to make Barack Obama a one term President"... now that he already got a second term, the strategy didn't change. He could say he want to privatize Medicare and GOP'ers would cry he hates Old People. He could say we shoudl cut food stamps funding in half, and th GOP would pass a special resolution doubling the SNAP budget.

Its really quite comical in the second term. The question wil be do they have the stamina to obstruct for 11 more years after Hillary cleans their clocks?

07-31-2013 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885453)
Obama suggests lowering taxes.

The right complains.

****ing hilarious! It really is true, no matter what Obama proposes, the right will fight it tooth and nail.

Also, the 39.6% tax rate is not a corporate tax rate and any silly claim that is is is nothing more than blatant dishonesty. It's the ****ing personal income tax rate on regular earnings above $400,000. No matter what size business you work for/own, if you take personal income in that bracket, you pay that rate. Even Tim Cook (not Apple) pays 39.6% on any regular income he makes above $400,000.

It's funny that you take The Zero-Vote Budget President's fiscal proposals so seriously. I mean, since absolutely nobody else does.

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis (Post 3885480)
It's funny that you take The Zero-Vote Budget President's fiscal proposals so seriously. I mean, since absolutely nobody else does.

Poor attempt at a deflection.

07-31-2013 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B-Large (Post 3885466)
Its really quite comical in the second term. The question wil be do they have the stamina to obstruct for 11 more years after Hillary cleans their clocks?

Speaking of comical timing, and second terms... any guesses as to why the President waited until LameDuck:30 to finally approach the idea of lowering corporate tax rates? You know the kind of rates our normal Proggers insist aren't high enough? LOL

07-31-2013 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885482)
Poor attempt at a deflection.

Sometimes you guys need a nice deflection into reality.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...paign-politics

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis (Post 3885485)
Speaking of comical timing, and second terms... any guesses as to why the President waited until LameDuck:30 to finally approach the idea of lowering corporate tax rates? You know the kind of rates our normal Proggers insist aren't high enough? LOL

Who insists the marginal rate isn't high enough?

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis (Post 3885491)
Sometimes you guys need a nice deflection into reality.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...paign-politics

Bottom line is, Obama is saying "lets cut taxes", and the "cut taxes!!!!!!!!" party is having none of it. It's nothing more than obstruction for the sake of obstructionism.

07-31-2013 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885492)
Who insists the marginal rate isn't high enough?

Please, you kids complain about corporations' effective tax rates all the time.

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis (Post 3885503)
Please, you kids complain about corporations' effective tax rates all the time.

LMAO. Yep, and the marginal rate is NOT the same thing as the effective rate.

Moron!

07-31-2013 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885508)
LMAO. Yep, and the marginal rate is NOT the same thing as the effective rate.

Moron!

No ****. Which is why you so epically miss the point.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonyn...-old-proposal/

Read up. Repackaged tax and spend is all this is. In hindsight, the sum total of Obama's economic plan.

Pony Boy 07-31-2013 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885453)
Obama suggests lowering taxes.

The right complains.

****ing hilarious! It really is true, no matter what Obama proposes, the right will fight it tooth and nail.

Here's the thread title " Good News for Corporations but Bad News for Small Business".

So how do you get that I was complaining about lowering taxes for corporations?

Let me make this perfectly clear "I'm happy that BO realized that raising taxes on corporations would drive more business overseas". He doesn't want to lower it on small business because they don't have that option.

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pony Boy (Post 3885522)
Here's the thread title " Good News for Corporations but Bad News for Small Business".

So how do you get that I was complaining about lowering taxes for corporations?

Let me make this perfectly clear "I'm happy that BO realized that raising taxes on corporations would drive more business overseas". He doesn't want to lower it on small business because they don't have that option.

.. and you go on to quote an article complaining (dishonestly) about how it's punishing small businesses (which it's not). Not my fault you apparently didn't not read or understand what you you copying and pasting.

The entire point of lowering the marginal rate and cutting loopholes is to take a step toward leveling the playing field between big corporations and small businesses.

Rigs11 07-31-2013 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885508)
LMAO. Yep, and the marginal rate is NOT the same thing as the effective rate.

Moron!

Yep, and according to the same link that the blog references,the marginal tax rate was lowered from 39.6% by dubya to 38.6% in 2002..but with the condition that it would go back to 39.6% after 10 years. Basically it's the expiration of the bush tax cuts.very dishonest there righties.

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis (Post 3885514)
No ****. Which is why you so epically miss the point.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonyn...-old-proposal/

Read up. Repackaged tax and spend is all this is. In hindsight, the sum total of Obama's economic plan.

So, you decided to talk about that by confusing the concept of a marginal and an effective tax rate?

LMAO

07-31-2013 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885530)
So, you decided to talk about that by confusing the concept of a marginal and an effective tax rate?

LMAO

No I was highlighting the fact that you crazy kids who only used to care about effective rates now suddenly want to highlight published marginal tax rates in a scheme that ultimately taxes even more and spends even more.

Then you limp around with "I canna unastan why Rethugs don't support this!" LOL

What exactly should they like about it?

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis (Post 3885534)
No I was highlighting the fact that you crazy kids who only used to care about effective rates now suddenly want to highlight published marginal tax rates in a scheme that ultimately taxes even more and spends even more.

Then you limp around with "I canna unastan why Rethugs don't support this!" LOL

What exactly should they like about it?

Total BS.

The net effect of lowing the marginal rate and removing loopholes will be to make the tax code more fair to all. Anyone with a lick of sense should be able to get behind that.

07-31-2013 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885540)
Total BS.

The net effect of lowing the marginal rate and removing loopholes will be to make the tax code more fair to all. Anyone with a lick of sense should be able to get behind that.

From the article I linked below...

Quote:

Now, if youíre particularly sharp, you might have noticed an oddity in that opening sentence. Specifically, if corporate tax rates would go down, why would there be additional tax revenue available to spend on job creation?

Thatís because along with the promised tax rate reduction, President Obama would broaden the tax base by eliminating many of the deductions and preferences available under todayís law. The net effect of these two changes would result in an increase in total tax revenue collections; in other words, the reduction in rates would be more than offset by the lost deductions.

This is a bit of a departure from the Presidentís previous proposals for corporate reform, which have always been promised to be revenue neutral. In a revenue neutral plan, only enough deductions would be cut to generate the revenue necessary to ďpay forĒ the revenue lost to lower tax rates. No more, no less.
So essentially the President tacks left, calls it a "Grand Bargain" and you run to the closet to get out the pom poms and ticker tape.

Funny, and yet kinda sad at the same time.

Fedaykin 07-31-2013 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis (Post 3885545)
From the article I linked below...



So essentially the President tacks left, calls it a "Grand Bargain" and you run to the closet to get out the pom poms and ticker tape.

Funny, and yet kinda sad at the same time.

Nothing you quote actually disputes what I'm saying. Try again.

07-31-2013 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fedaykin (Post 3885550)
Nothing you quote actually disputes what I'm saying. Try again.

Republicans (while holding the power of the purse) are naturally going to oppose anything that expands the size and scope of (our record-sized) government. Which is exactly what Obama proposes to do. If the President really wanted flatter tax rates, he'd make his proposal at least revenue-neutral and leave the campaign-bundler pork out of it.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.