should we end tax breaks for business that ship job overseas, and give tax breaks for

[actsnoblemartin]

us companies that keep jobs here.

Why are all the jobs being shipped overseas

is there anything we can do to stop it?

[manu1959]

i always hear this.....which companies are these.....

[actsnoblemartin]

I dont honestly know, thats why i posted the question.

but havent we lost milions of manufacting jobs?

I know bill gates wants to import tons of legal indians to do computer jobs americans would do, and pay the indians much less then an american

bill gates is a cheap basterd

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=who+is+exporting+american+jobs&btnG=Google+Search

http://www.ask.com/web?q=who+is+exporting+american+jobs&search=search&qsrc=178&o=0&l=dir


i always hear this.....which companies are these.....

[manu1959]

american mfr's simply can not compete with foreign labour costs.....

[actsnoblemartin]

well that what do we :huddle: do to fix that?


american mfr's simply can not compete with foreign labour costs.....

[manu1959]

well that what do we :huddle: do to fix that?

i guess we could all choose not to buy anything made in a foreign country......and only buy things made in america by american citizens.....

not sure any of us could afford that much less find things only made in america....

[5stringJeff]

us companies that keep jobs here.

Why are all the jobs being shipped overseas

is there anything we can do to stop it?

No, we should not give tax breaks to companies just because their labor force in in America. Read up on free trade. Start here (http://www.mises.org/liberal/ch3sec7.asp).

[Psychoblues]

Tell me that you have not bought into that lie when we sell tennis shoes in this country for over $600 that cost less than a dollar to manufacture?



american mfr's simply can not compete with foreign labour costs.....

It's all about negotiation and Americans, being the kind and believing souls they are, are revolted by general negotiations.

[WRL]

Guy's this is a complicated issue. At heart is our trade agreement's with nations like China, most favored nation trade status, free trade which isn't fair trade. China has been practicing currency manipulation, forcing American labor standards to compete with Chinese child slave labor. We've put ourselves into deals where we have to uphold standards our trading partners either ignore, our at times outright flout. And all the while we're being bought out from the inside. China owns nearly a Trillion Dollars in T bills, the simple threat that they would collect on all of them would sink our currency, as we're already 9 trillion in debt. A Chinese company, as so I assume the Chinese Government, just bought a majority share of Citibank, the largest US home lender. Talk about predatory lending.

Should we end tax breaks to outsourcers, depends if those tax breaks are enough to keep them hiring here, if so, of course not, but if they get them, and continue to ship jobs overseas then no. Fact is until we address the root causes of this problem we can slap all the band aid solutions around we wish, but there will still be an underlying problem.

[JohnDoe]

Guy's this is a complicated issue. At heart is our trade agreement's with nations like China, most favored nation trade status, free trade which isn't fair trade. China has been practicing currency manipulation, forcing American labor standards to compete with Chinese child slave labor. We've put ourselves into deals where we have to uphold standards our trading partners either ignore, our at times outright flout. And all the while we're being bought out from the inside. China owns nearly a Trillion Dollars in T bills, the simple threat that they would collect on all of them would sink our currency, as we're already 9 trillion in debt. A Chinese company, as so I assume the Chinese Government, just bought a majority share of Citibank, the largest US home lender. Talk about predatory lending.

Should we end tax breaks to outsourcers, depends if those tax breaks are enough to keep them hiring here, if so, of course not, but if they get them, and continue to ship jobs overseas then no. Fact is until we address the root causes of this problem we can slap all the band aid solutions around we wish, but there will still be an underlying problem.

Hey WRL! Welcome to Debate Policy! :)

You know I have always agreed with you on this topic, though usually on opposite sides on most other things! :D

China IS the MAIN reason that our dollar isn't worth a poop, along with the cost of oil... imo.

jd

[actsnoblemartin]

I would agree, did you know they have slave labor camps where they pay people cents are our and purposefully munipulate the price of their currency

shameful

free trade?, more like fuck over american workers trade


Hey WRL! Welcome to Debate Policy! :)

You know I have always agreed with you on this topic, though usually on opposite sides on most other things! :D

China IS the MAIN reason that our dollar isn't worth a poop, along with the cost of oil... imo.

jd

[PostmodernProphet]

should we end tax breaks for business that ship job overseas

there are no tax breaks for businesses that ship jobs overseas, though there certainly can be tax savings for businesses that do.....the smartest thing to do is eliminate taxes on corporations and replace it with a tax on stock dividends.....

currently a shareholder who owns stock in a company that makes it's profits overseas pays less in taxes than a shareholder in an American company, because of corporate taxes.....so is a large shareholder going to vote to keep his companies factories in the US or ship them overseas?.......

[JohnDoe]

there are no tax breaks for businesses that ship jobs overseas, though there certainly can be tax savings for businesses that do.....the smartest thing to do is eliminate taxes on corporations and replace it with a tax on stock dividends.....

currently a shareholder who owns stock in a company that makes it's profits overseas pays less in taxes than a shareholder in an American company, because of corporate taxes.....so is a large shareholder going to vote to keep his companies factories in the US or ship them overseas?.......

FYI


Democrats consider rolling back overseas tax breaks for major U.S. corporations
U.S. rules on overseas profit at issue
By Ryan J. Donmoyer Bloomberg NewsPublished: February 13, 2007

WASHINGTON: For more than a decade, U.S. Democrats watched from the sidelines as a Republican Congress doled out tax breaks to General Electric, Hewlett-Packard, Eli Lilly and other big multinational corporations. Now, the new Democratic majority is considering rolling back those benefits.

Democrats in the House of Representatives met last week with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. to discuss changing rules that allow U.S. companies to postpone taxes on foreign profit, said Charles Rangel, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. The Democrats plan hearings on the breaks, which the Bush administration's budget proposal says may cost the government more than $89.5 billion in lost revenue over the next five years.

"Everything's on the agenda," Rangel said during an interview.

The breaks are among hundreds of so-called tax expenditures that cost the U.S. government $945 billion a year in foregone revenue. The Democrats may focus on them to help fulfill a vow to enact so-called pay-as-you-go budget rules requiring that any new expenditures be offset by new revenues.


jd

[PostmodernProphet]

for my information?....sorry JD, but being unable to tax income not earned in the US isn't a tax break, it's a simple fact of life.....if an international corporation earns a profit in Mexico and the money doesn't enter the US, the US has no right to tax it......it isn't a tax "postponed", it's a tax never incurred and no laws passed by Congress can change that.....you can't impose taxes on money that never enters the US......its one of the reasons that corporate taxation inhibits our balance of trade.....

[Classact]

No businesses should be taxed. To tax business is to tax the customer because the tax becomes a cost of business and is passed on to the customer.

The question should be should business taxes be removed and should states be allowed to offer business free electricity and or water to establish in their state.

[JohnDoe]

for my information?....sorry JD, but being unable to tax income not earned in the US isn't a tax break, it's a simple fact of life.....if an international corporation earns a profit in Mexico and the money doesn't enter the US, the US has no right to tax it......it isn't a tax "postponed", it's a tax never incurred and no laws passed by Congress can change that.....you can't impose taxes on money that never enters the US......its one of the reasons that corporate taxation inhibits our balance of trade.....
Hey, do a google on it! I am certain it will explain it much clearer than the two paragraphs i posted from an article over a year ago....

But as i have read and understood of it, you are wrong....maybe "right" in your logic regarding why they should not be taxed on what they make overseas, but that has not always been the case and they have been given an IRS TAX BREAK on their income earned over seas for a year, before they DO have to pay taxes on it AND this is costing us in tax dollars or giving them a "tax break" of $86 billion dollars over a 5 year period by giving them this break is the way i understand it pmp?

And that would encourage companies to put more of their business in overseas markets which ultimately means....outsourcing jobs overseas.

Anddddd

Good Morning! :)

jd

[PostmodernProphet]

but that has not always been the case

yes it has, and it always will be.....no matter what the Democrats say, they cannot tax a Mexican corporation on profits that it makes on the sale of product to Japan, even if that Mexican corporation is owned by an American corporation.....

the only possible way to tax it is when the Mexican corporation pays dividends to the stockholders if those stockholders are then in the US.....and if, instead of paying dividends to US stockholders, it instead builds a new plant in Mexico you will never be able to tax that income.....do you see now how our current corporate tax system guarantees that money from international business will never return to the US?......

[Dilloduck]

yes it has, and it always will be.....no matter what the Democrats say, they cannot tax a Mexican corporation on profits that it makes on the sale of product to Japan, even if that Mexican corporation is owned by an American corporation.....

the only possible way to tax it is when the Mexican corporation pays dividends to the stockholders if those stockholders are then in the US.....and if, instead of paying dividends to US stockholders, it instead builds a new plant in Mexico you will never be able to tax that income.....do you see now how our current corporate tax system guarantees that money from international business will never return to the US?......

hey--corporations give some alms to their favorite poor folks !! :laugh2:

[Classact]

Tax on an employer is simply stupid. People want jobs and jobs come from employers. Why not tax a farm for producing farm products?

If a state desires employers then create conditions that welcome employers. No taxes regardless of profit, free land, free water, free electricity if need be to encourage an employer to move to your state. The objective is that the citizens of your state be employed or not? The same holds true at federal level, if you want employers to move to your country then welcome them with no punishments for coming to your country.

Don't charge them health insurance, Social Security nor establish minimum wages or government fees, limit regulation only when it effects the environment. Turn free market capitalism free and supply and demand will create a good life for the employees, which are who government represent. If the employee has a problem with wage then the employee can gamble with the employer as to the best options for each.

If an employer makes large profit force it to sell stock to the employees on an open market and the employees will gain equal to the employer.

[JohnDoe]

yes it has, and it always will be.....no matter what the Democrats say, they cannot tax a Mexican corporation on profits that it makes on the sale of product to Japan, even if that Mexican corporation is owned by an American corporation.....

the only possible way to tax it is when the Mexican corporation pays dividends to the stockholders if those stockholders are then in the US.....and if, instead of paying dividends to US stockholders, it instead builds a new plant in Mexico you will never be able to tax that income.....do you see now how our current corporate tax system guarantees that money from international business will never return to the US?......You are one argumentative dude! Are you a Taurus? :)

WHO the heck is talking about taxing a Mexican Corporation Pmp?

jd

[Dilloduck]

You are one argumentative dude! Are you a Taurus? :)

WHO the heck is talking about taxing a Mexican Corporation Pmp?

jd


even if that Mexican corporation is owned by an American corporation

my highlighting--and a poor job at it too

[Mr. P]

You are one argumentative dude! Are you a Taurus? :)

WHO the heck is talking about taxing a Mexican Corporation Pmp?

jd

He's is correct, JD. We are the only country I know of that did tax foreign profit. This was a major reason many US corp have relocated, while foreign corps not taxed by their gov. are opening in the US. Repeal of this so called break will cause more relocation and more job lose.

The fair tax would solve the whole mess.

[JohnDoe]

my highlighting--and a poor job at it tooOhhhhhh, a mexican company that is owned by an American Corporation.... :)

-----------------------------------------------------

Well, right now, unless the American Corporation profits are brought back to the usa instead of reinvested abroad, the company profits are not taxed on their profits, is my understanding of it....?



http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2007/1027_corporate_taxes_furman.aspx
Case in point: The United States has the second highest corporate tax rate of the 30 countries in the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). But because the United States has so many generous special tax preferences for businesses, it collects the fourth lowest corporate tax revenues as a share of GDP among all OECD countries.


...

The centerpiece of the corporate tax reform is a reduction of the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 30.5 percent, hardly living up to columnist Robert Novak’s warning that Rangel would be unveiling “the most radical left-wing tax revision in half a century.” Without adding to the deficit burden, this rate reduction would be fully paid for by a series of measures to broaden the corporate tax base to ensure that different forms of investments are taxed at similar rates. The biggest of these steps is a repeal of a special deduction for manufacturing businesses that was enacted in 2004 over the nearly universal objection of tax experts who warned that the government should not be tilting the playing field in favor of certain types of businesses. (Note that at the new 30.5 percent corporate rate manufacturing companies would still be paying lower tax rates than they are today.)


Rangel also proposes a fix for the completely broken rules used to tax international investments. Currently, businesses that invest overseas can immediately deduct all the cost from their taxable income, just as they can with domestic investments. But unlike domestic investments, companies do not need to pay taxes on their overseas profits until they bring them back to the United States. And if these firms continually reinvest their profits overseas, they never have to pay any U.S. taxes. The result is, in effect, a tax subsidy for investing abroad – one that distorts investment decisions and costs at least $6 billion annually, according to Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation. The Rangel plan proposes one way to end this subsidy, though others could be considered as well.

....

[PostmodernProphet]

Well, right now, unless the American Corporation profits are brought back to the usa instead of reinvested abroad, the company profits are not taxed on their profits, is my understanding of it....?]

incorrect understanding....the American corporation earns no income unless the Mexican corporation pays a dividend.....if there is no income, obviously there is no income tax......the corporation isn't stupid enough to generate income for the US company until they need to bring it into the US....


The Rangel plan proposes one way to end this subsidy

lol, only a Democrat would call foreign earnings "subsidies".....

[JohnDoe]

incorrect understanding....the American corporation earns no income unless the Mexican corporation pays a dividend.....if there is no income, obviously there is no income tax......the corporation isn't stupid enough to generate income for the US company until they need to bring it into the US....



lol, only a Democrat would call foreign earnings "subsidies".....
What would you call it, a tax break? I'll accept either name....

noooooooo, leave it to you to bring up "partisanship" :D

These American corporations that have global reach verses corporations that do all of their business here and keep all of their assets here and their jobs here, PAY HIGHER OVERALL CORPORATE TAXES than the corporations that have spread their wings and left America with parts of their businesses to other countries....

That would be a tax break in my book for a few SELECT American corporations ....that does give an incentive to spread the corporation's wings overseas.... verses keeping their corporation soley in the USA with usa workers doing the producing....

So, Corporations that decide not to outsource, and keep their company assets here in our country, are penalized via HIGHER TAXES than those that outsource their business.... no other way to put it, other than our gvt is escentially PAYING or "Subsidizing" corporations to have Global reach....THAT'S how I see it PMP.

jd

[5stringJeff]

there are no tax breaks for businesses that ship jobs overseas, though there certainly can be tax savings for businesses that do.....the smartest thing to do is eliminate taxes on corporations and replace it with a tax on stock dividends.....

Dividends are already taxed twice: once, when a company earns income, and a second time, when those dividends are paid to equity (stock) holders of the company.

[manu1959]

What would you call it, a tax break? I'll accept either name....

noooooooo, leave it to you to bring up "partisanship" :D

These American corporations that have global reach verses corporations that do all of their business here and keep all of their assets here and their jobs here, PAY HIGHER OVERALL CORPORATE TAXES than the corporations that have spread their wings and left America with parts of their businesses to other countries....

That would be a tax break in my book for a few SELECT American corporations ....that does give an incentive to spread the corporation's wings overseas.... verses keeping their corporation soley in the USA with usa workers doing the producing....

So, Corporations that decide not to outsource, and keep their company assets here in our country, are penalized via HIGHER TAXES than those that outsource their business.... no other way to put it, other than our gvt is escentially PAYING or "Subsidizing" corporations to have Global reach....THAT'S how I see it PMP.

jd


as someone that owns part of a corporation......let me make this real clear....

corporations don't pay taxes.....the owner's of the coproations do....

much to my dismay the majority shareholders outsource some work to india.....

the is no tax break for doing so.....simply lower labour costs and thus more profit to the share holders who in turn end up paying taxes on the increase profits.....

[PostmodernProphet]

What would you call it, a tax break?

actually, I would call it "some other's country's tax base".........


So, Corporations that decide not to outsource, and keep their company assets here in our country, are penalized via HIGHER TAXES than those that outsource their business.... no other way to put it, other than our gvt is escentially PAYING or "Subsidizing" corporations to have Global reach....THAT'S how I see it PMP.

actually, there IS another way to put it.....and you already have a sense of it when you said "penalized via higher taxes".........the US already charges too much in taxes.......

[DragonStryk72]

there are no tax breaks for businesses that ship jobs overseas, though there certainly can be tax savings for businesses that do.....the smartest thing to do is eliminate taxes on corporations and replace it with a tax on stock dividends.....

currently a shareholder who owns stock in a company that makes it's profits overseas pays less in taxes than a shareholder in an American company, because of corporate taxes.....so is a large shareholder going to vote to keep his companies factories in the US or ship them overseas?.......

Someone got to the stocks before you did, actually. The Capital gains tax already taxes both saving, and investments, including stocks. we have the 2nd highest business taxes in the world. The current tax code is so burdensome to businesses now, that a business of any size has to employ entire divisions of tax accounts and lawyers just to stay competitive here, to make sure thy are filing their taxes properly, as well as to hold onto as much of that tax money as possible. 3M moved overseas because of the problem with out taxes, because they found out they could an extra $200 mil a year just by shifting elsewhere, where they wouldn't have to pay those kinds of taxes, or hire the people needed for those taxes.

Taxing stock dividends, as well, has the effect of punishing people for investing, and that can only add further damage to the whole situation.

[JohnDoe]

as someone that owns part of a corporation......let me make this real clear....

corporations don't pay taxes.....the owner's of the coproations do....

much to my dismay the majority shareholders outsource some work to india.....

the is no tax break for doing so.....simply lower labour costs and thus more profit to the share holders who in turn end up paying taxes on the increase profits.....That's true. I believe one has to set up a subsidiary of your corporation in the country that you would want to outsource your business...then reput back in to this company the profits made, and perhaps even some of the profits made in the usa patriated to these offshore susidiaries....this is what Enron was doing and many companies, to avoid paying any taxes at all....i believe the last 3 years enron was in business they paid no income taxes through these type legal loopholes and they made them even wider since then with legislation modifying this tax code even further in 2004 from what i have read....??? It is possible that i did not understand it and i will grant that!!!! lol

Anyway, this will not necessarily stop offshoring of people, like with your company as it implies in the article that i linked up above....it seems more of a tax loophole closure that will just really put more money in the gvts pocket and maybe slowdown opening offices and companies overseas by these American corps, but it would still be worth it for them financially to outsource their labor imo....

Someone mentioned that our corporate tax is the highest out of the developed world.....30 countries!

But i read today that in actuality, we are the 4th lowest in collections of corporate taxes compared to our gdp and then put against these other countries.... that all of the loopholes and tax write offs and other deductions and breaks etc given to them, when said and done, it ain't all that bad, we are lower in corporate taxes than most westernized countries in the world.....but all that savings is spent on accountants and tax lawyers to get to that point because of how complicated it is!!!!

Basically, the article recommended a lower corporate flat tax....or simplified greatly.



jd

[gabosaurus]

The tax breaks give companies that outsource a huge advantage. Foreign manufacturers have to pay import tariffs and duties on the goods they ship to the U.S. American companies don't have to pay those.

I believe U.S. companies that export jobs and use foreign labors should have to pay import tariffs. They should also have to label their goods as foreign manufactured. Which they don't have to do now.

[Classact]

The tax breaks give companies that outsource a huge advantage. Foreign manufacturers have to pay import tariffs and duties on the goods they ship to the U.S. American companies don't have to pay those.

I believe U.S. companies that export jobs and use foreign labors should have to pay import tariffs. They should also have to label their goods as foreign manufactured. Which they don't have to do now.If no companies paid tax then no companies could get a tax break. Then if some decided to export jobs it wouldn't be a big deal. The state where they are located should ask why they find it beneficial to export jobs and offer alternatives. Or, the state could invite another company to fill the workers needs and offer incentives.

Many times labor causes jobs to be exported, the US automotive workers, for example demanding bennies that other nations workers do not demand. If Toyota can build a factory where Ford exported work then the workers work for Toyota without the bennies because that is what the market will stand.

[DragonStryk72]

That's true. I believe one has to set up a subsidiary of your corporation in the country that you would want to outsource your business...then reput back in to this company the profits made, and perhaps even some of the profits made in the usa patriated to these offshore susidiaries....this is what Enron was doing and many companies, to avoid paying any taxes at all....i believe the last 3 years enron was in business they paid no income taxes through these type legal loopholes and they made them even wider since then with legislation modifying this tax code even further in 2004 from what i have read....??? It is possible that i did not understand it and i will grant that!!!! lol

Anyway, this will not necessarily stop offshoring of people, like with your company as it implies in the article that i linked up above....it seems more of a tax loophole closure that will just really put more money in the gvts pocket and maybe slowdown opening offices and companies overseas by these American corps, but it would still be worth it for them financially to outsource their labor imo....

Someone mentioned that our corporate tax is the highest out of the developed world.....30 countries!

But i read today that in actuality, we are the 4th lowest in collections of corporate taxes compared to our gdp and then put against these other countries.... that all of the loopholes and tax write offs and other deductions and breaks etc given to them, when said and done, it ain't all that bad, we are lower in corporate taxes than most westernized countries in the world.....but all that savings is spent on accountants and tax lawyers to get to that point because of how complicated it is!!!!

Basically, the article recommended a lower corporate flat tax....or simplified greatly.



jd

Don't forget the embedded cost of paying those who keep track of all those tax breaks, though. Say an accountant makes $50,000 a year, then if you have 20 on staff (not nearly as many as most corps), then that's one mil spent out right there. Companies end up spending millions a year trying to get their taxes down. in the end, Corporations pay more tax related expenses than they do for labor costs.

The tax I was referring to was the 2nd highest business tax, which means that corporations are able to take over on simple ability to get more tax breaks than any other form of business. corporations will always find loopholes, and tax breaks, so taxing them more, or creating new tax breaks won't really change anything. We need to change the tax system, not make more changes within the code.

[Classact]

Don't forget the embedded cost of paying those who keep track of all those tax breaks, though. Say an accountant makes $50,000 a year, then if you have 20 on staff (not nearly as many as most corps), then that's one mil spent out right there. Companies end up spending millions a year trying to get their taxes down. in the end, Corporations pay more tax related expenses than they do for labor costs.

The tax I was referring to was the 2nd highest business tax, which means that corporations are able to take over on simple ability to get more tax breaks than any other form of business. corporations will always find loopholes, and tax breaks, so taxing them more, or creating new tax breaks won't really change anything. We need to change the tax system, not make more changes within the code.If corporations paid no tax then they could hire employees at a market rate. Competition would allow employees to gain reasonable wages for the function they perform. I would suggest that all union companies outsource and then re hire the same employees under a new company to do the same job. Go bankrupt so you don't have to pay the benefit packages and open a new company and fill the employees through Kelly Girls temporary services... offer wages that will drive a large number of prospective employees to enrol at Kelly and then keep the best workers and send the dead weight packing. Increase wages based on profit and productivity of the employees and provide yearly stock bonuses for exceptional employees... after three or four years direct hire the top ten percent of workers from Kelly with a clear contract.