Yes. That isn't a tax issue, however. It is in large part a free trade/fair trade issue. Let's see if I can get all of the zeros in place for our 2005 trade deficit with China.
$185,326,500,000.00
That isn't tax policy at work. That's slave labor. That's manipulated exchange rates. That's an open economy trading with a closed economy. (Source of stats: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html#2005
Since you all want an economic policy that benefits foreign trade, are you all really saying that you want to impose Communist Chinese economic and tax structures on the US?
Here's the top 10 list for trade deficits for 2005.
China (about equal to 2, 3, and 4 combined)
Japan
Canada
Germany
Mexico
Venezuela
Nigeria
Malaysia
S. Korea
UK
Top surplus appears to be with the Netherlands. So much for superior EU tax policies driving trade.
"Top surplus appears to be with the Netherlands. So much for superior EU tax policies driving trade."
Man, these SQL debate tactics are getting old. You set up a straw man argument which implies that one of two states of nature exist:
1. either tax policies are the only determinant of trade imbalances, or
2. tax policies are not a factor in trade
Then you prove that other factors may be influential and this means that #1 cannot be true; therefore, you have proven #2. The problem is that I never said that tax policies are the ONLY factor contributing to our trade deficit. Any reasonably intelligent person can see your desperation in characterizing my position in such a way and then knocking your own strawman down.
But it certainly is contributed to by not being able to have border-adjustable taxation under the present system - and don't think the WTO doesn't take advantage.