Biden Domestic Policy

[Archy1221]

48 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Might want to check out the other provisions in the bill that closes the ability for these companies to hire income.  
 

including those probably allows them to kit have to go back to the 35% before. 

I’m not understanding your post?  Possibly autocorrect typos?  What provisions closes all the loopholes.?  

[BigRedBuster]

4 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

I’m not understanding your post?  Possibly autocorrect typos?  What provisions closes all the loopholes.?  

Fixed it. 

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Fixed it. 

Ok thx.  However, if corporate rate is 21% and Amazon pays effectively zero (or whatever company one chooses to put in that place), what will raising the rate to 28% do if they don’t close all the loopholes?  Make the effective rate 9 or 10% at best.  That’s if they don’t find other loopholes to use.  And people will still moan about paying less tax than company X or company Y.  

[BigRedBuster]

59 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Ok thx.  However, if corporate rate is 21% and Amazon pays effectively zero (or whatever company one chooses to put in that place), what will raising the rate to 28% do if they don’t close all the loopholes?  Make the effective rate 9 or 10% at best.  That’s if they don’t find other loopholes to use.  And people will still moan about paying less tax than company X or company Y.  

You’re ignoring the other provisions in the bill. 

[Archy1221]

13 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

You’re ignoring the other provisions in the bill. 

Not ignoring them, I’m not understanding what in the bill guarantees them paying an effective 28% rate.  Would appreciate your help in pointing me in the right direction to understand this better instead telling me I’m ignoring something. 

[BigRedBuster]

19 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Not ignoring them, I’m not understanding what in the bill guarantees them paying an effective 28% rate.  Would appreciate your help in pointing me in the right direction to understand this better instead telling me I’m ignoring something. 

Companies like Nike are extremely creative in making sure their profits are not in the US, thus taxable. I don’t know exactly how Nike does it, but I know of companies that will own another entity in a tax haven country.  So, in their accounting, the foreign company makes the product for $5.  Then sells the product to the American company for $10. The American company sells the product to the public for $10. The company as a whole just made $5 but it’s all in a tax haven country hidden from US income tax.  
 

If you read in the article I linked, it lists global minimum tax and prohibiting inversions.  This is an attempt to eliminate what I described above. 
 

I’m not sure how Amazon does it, but I’m guessing the intangible assets provision is about companies like them.  
 

So, my point was that if they eliminate these issues, all companies as a whole don’t need to be increased to the 35% they were at before. 

[Archy1221]

19 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Companies like Nike are extremely creative in making sure their profits are not in the US, thus taxable. I don’t know exactly how Nike does it, but I know of companies that will own another entity in a tax haven country.  So, in their accounting, the foreign company makes the product for $5.  Then sells the product to the American company for $10. The American company sells the product to the public for $10. The company as a whole just made $5 but it’s all in a tax haven country hidden from US income tax.  
 

If you read in the article I linked, it lists global minimum tax and prohibiting inversions.  This is an attempt to eliminate what I described above. 
 

I’m not sure how Amazon does it, but I’m guessing the intangible assets provision is about companies like them.  
 

So, my point was that if they eliminate these issues, all companies as a whole don’t need to be increased to the 35% they were at before. 

Thx. 
 

one point on the inversions worth discussing and curious on your thoughts..

 

I’ve worked in an industry where this was prominent even with my own situation.  Once the Trump tax cut came into play, we haven’t seen as many corporate inversions (in my industry at least) because taxes were more in line and it didn’t make financial sense to do so anymore.  
 

I do get your point now about global money, because Google and FB are notorious for this. 

[BigRedBuster]

30 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Thx. 
 

one point on the inversions worth discussing and curious on your thoughts..

 

I’ve worked in an industry where this was prominent even with my own situation.  Once the Trump tax cut came into play, we haven’t seen as many corporate inversions (in my industry at least) because taxes were more in line and it didn’t make financial sense to do so anymore.  
 

I do get your point now about global money, because Google and FB are notorious for this. 

Yes, we need to be somewhere in the ball park of other industrialized countries.  However, we aren’t talking about going to 35% like before.  One thing though, we will NEVER be the cheapest taxes because there are countries like the Bahamas that will purposely make it beneficial to them.  We can however, control our own laws to make sure these companies are paying taxes here. 

Also, this is what makes the international tax negotiations interesting.  
 

 

[SECHusker]

 

On cancelling 50k of student loan debt.

[DevoHusker]

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/547340-biden-requests-753b-defense-budget

© Getty Images

President Biden is requesting a $753 billion defense budget for next fiscal year, with $715 billion of that going to the Pentagon.

[BigRedBuster]

26 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/547340-biden-requests-753b-defense-budget

© Getty Images

President Biden is requesting a $753 billion defense budget for next fiscal year, with $715 billion of that going to the Pentagon.

Doesn't all the defense budget go through the Pentagon?

 

I don't understand why we need such a huge defense budget.

[DevoHusker]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

Doesn't all the defense budget go through the Pentagon?

 

I don't understand why we need such a huge defense budget.

 

This is a slight, 3-4% increase over last year, much like other budgets. 

 

I am not sure at what level of reduction it becomes untenable. There would have to be a lot of policy considerations before we ever see that budget reduced. 

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

This is a slight, 3-4% increase over last year, much like other budgets. 

 

I am not sure at what level of reduction it becomes untenable. There would have to be a lot of policy considerations before we ever see that budget reduced. 

Yes, it's not that much of an increase.  Almost just an increase to keep up with inflation.  

I would just love to see a complete reorganization with the military.  Downsize the active military and make sure they are very well prepared and equipped.  

[RedDenver]

[Moiraine]

On 4/5/2021 at 4:05 PM, SECHusker said:

 

On cancelling 50k of student loan debt.

 

 

The headline is a bit misleading. I suppose considering could be the right word but it sounds to me like he just hasn't 100% ruled it out. I kinda doubt he is seriously considering $50,000. And I would prefer something like increasing pell grants. And if you want to forgive loan debt make it equal to what the new pell grant amount would've given people. That's logically speaking. Selfishly speaking, I'd prefer having $50,000 forgiven.