slug.com slug.com

2 0

The Trump Tax Cuts For Corporations

The impact of the 2017 tax cut law that the republican congress passed in December of 2017 and President Trump signed is working as planned for corporations. Wealth is trickling up very nicely.

An analysis says this: At least 60 companies reported that their 2018 federal tax rates amounted to effectively zero, or even less than zero, on income earned on U.S. operations, according to an analysis released today by the Washington, D.C.-based think tank, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. The number is more than twice as many as ITEP found roughly, per year, on average in an earlier, multi-year analysis before the new tax law went into effect.

Among them are household names like technology giant Amazon.com Inc. and entertainment streaming service Netflix Inc., in addition to global oil giant Chevron Corp., pharmaceutical manufacturer Eli Lilly & Co., and farming and commercial equipment manufacturer Deere & Co.

The following is a list of the country’s largest publicly-held profitable corporations that paid no federal income taxes in 2018 on billions in U.S. income, according to ITEP analysis of 560 companies. ITEP reports U.S. income before federal taxes, and takes into consideration paid state and local taxes, which could reduce or increase U.S. income. The report does not look at total tax provision, a number that could include foreign taxes and deferred taxes. [publicintegrity.org]

Germaine 6 Apr 21
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Are individual tax rates increasing or following a similar trend?

0

These corporations can do two things with their money. Give it back to employees in the form of wages, which is then taxed as income tax. Or, they reinvest to grow the company. How can either of these things be bad? I don't understand why corporations are taxed at all.

@Daryl

Paying it to shareholders and executives is still a form of income, so that goes into the first category.

Let's see, we have sales tax (which corporations pay when they buy supplies), property tax (which corporations pay when they purchase properties), and income tax(which corporations supply by paying their employees). These taxes are what pay for all the things you mentioned. That's why states will give huge tax breaks to corporations that move to their states, because more business means more property tax, more sales tax, and more income tax.

@Daryl

The wealthy pay a higher income tax rate. Increase of value is not income until it's sold and is the result of #2 which is growing the corporation.

Wealth is not a limited commodity to be distributed. It is created. And it's not based solely on how much money one has in a bank account. It's also based on assets like property and corporate ownership and increasing that value through good business practices, which I would argue make up the majority of wealth.

A few people own the majority of wealth. So what? What is the issue here? I fail to see what point you are trying to make.

@Daryl

I've explained why tax cuts to corporations is beneficial to all, but clearly you only want to see what you want. Taxing is not distribution of wealth be it more or less. It's the government giving itself money and wasting it because they suck at managing money. Not to mention the corruption.

"Americans want".....most Americans want what, the Gov to take money from the rich and give it to the poor? How is that "fair". You still offer no solutions, mainly because you are inventing the problem.

@Daryl

"I still believe corporations should pay some taxes because they will not pay employees any more than they they have to. Wealth does not trickle down, "

Your explanation, which makes no sense because higher taxes won't get those employees any more trickle, less more likely. Of coarse everyone wants the Gov to be fair, rational, and reasonable. A realist knows that won't happen, your best bet is to limit them and their influence. Your pragmatist approach looks a lot like the lefties approach.

@Daryl

OK, you are now talking about a different subject then tax cuts. Taxes don't change policy and they don't force trickle down. Can we at least agree on that?

What you are now talking about is policy in the form of controlling the influence of special interests?

@Judah80 "A few people own the majority of wealth. So what? What is the issue here? I fail to see what point you are trying to make."

The point is that the maldistribution is worse than it's ever been since the 1920's, and it's mostly happened since Reagan and crew dropped the top marginal tax rates from 70% to present 37%.

So a few people own even more wealth than previously, and are now absorbing all the increase in productivity. The top 1% salary has doubled since Reagan, while middle and lower class incomes are stagnant.

Everybody has a hand in the increased productivity since 1980 (personally I worked really hard) and everybody ought to get a piece of it. They haven't. Instead, the world is shittier. Medical care costs 3 times more, but isn't 3 times better. Housing costs 3 times as much but it's the same house. Your real income hasn't changed much. Save for the amazing consumer electronics (your pocket cell phone and computers and TV binge-watching), your standard of living has been falling. Why is that, when the country is making more than ever? Because you got screwed and didn't get your share, is why. Hope Game of Thrones on your iPhone is worth it.

I don't say everybody should get the same salary. I'm saying the slicing of the pie we had in the 1960's and 1970's was better.

It's not looking good. My father bought the house and yard I grew up in, for less than 2 years of a starting assistant prof's salary in 1963. I couldn't buy that same house for 4 years of my present salary (quite a bit more in real dollars) in 2019. Something is wrong.

The pretty fields west of the town I grew up in, are overgrown now with condos full of people who cannot afford a house and lot. If the American dream ever had a picket fence and yard, that's gone. And again, productivity has gone up in a very straight line since 1950. That's NOT the problem. Where the money WENT is the problem.

Externalities. The extra CO2 in the air that is causing those bad hurricanes and the dead coral reefs? Your problem. The factory that makes pollution? Your tax dollars clean it up. The food industry which puts fructose in everything until your belly bulges and your coronaries are clogged? Hey, you have private health insurance, right? Well, don't you? And I hope it's good, cause you're going to need a lot of it.

@Babou

Great, so raise the tax back to 70% cause that will fix everything, right? See what your hard work will get you then when the price of everything goes up.

Nice how you cherry pick statistics, but you missed a big one. Population growth. Production has gone up because more people are producing. And while the population rises the top 20% population doesn't rise the same. So that share from the increase in productivity you claim for yourself is actually being distributed to more people.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:32866
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.