Tax Salvos (NYT opposes some Obama business tax hikes)

New York Times ^ | May 5, 2009

[reaganaut1]

...

One of the most controversial [Obama business tax increase] proposals would delay deductions against overseas profits until those profits are brought back to the United States. In theory, that makes perfect sense, because matching deductions and income in the same year is a fundamental principle of United States tax law.

In practice, applying the matching principle to overseas operations could put American companies at a competitive disadvantage to foreign companies that do not face United States tax laws. It could even impede job creation in the United States — exactly the opposite of what the Obama administration intends. That’s because some of the expenses incurred in generating foreign profits are for support jobs in the United States, like human resources and accounting positions. If companies cannot write off those employment expenses in the year they are incurred, they may move the jobs overseas.

The administration has also proposed to make it harder to abuse the foreign tax credit, a provision that allows companies to claim a credit on their American taxes for taxes paid to another country. No one objects to curbing abuse. Unfortunately, the extent of the alleged abuse is unclear.

...

The Obama administration deserves credit for putting some of the problems of the corporate tax system on the table, but we hope it is only a warm-up act. Once the economy begins to recover, comprehensive reform of the tax system will be needed to raise enough money in a way that spreads the burden as widely as possible. Done properly, that would inevitably require new tax sources, like a value-added tax or energy taxes — or both. Enacting those would be a monumental challenge that would make enacting the current package of corporate proposals look puny by comparison.

[reaganaut1]

The Times admits that corporate income taxes push jobs overseas and that Obama's spending will require big new taxes (value-added and/or energy) that affect everyone.

[Loyal Buckeye]

Once the economy begins to recover, comprehensive reform of the tax system will be needed to raise enough money in a way that spreads the burden as widely as possible. Done properly, that would inevitably require new tax sources, like a value-added tax or energy taxes — or both.

Am I to understand that THEE new york times thinks these taxes are good and will not have the same impact on the economy as the 'corporate overseas' tax? Interesting.

[PogySailor]

It could even impede job creation in the United States — exactly the opposite of what the Obama administration intends.

Ha! Who says that's what the Obama admin intends? What actions have they taken that would actually support that idea?

[libstripper]

Gues what's coming from the Usurper, FTA:

Once the economy begins to recover, comprehensive reform of the tax system will be needed to raise enough money in a way that spreads the burden as widely as possible. Done properly, that would inevitably require new tax sources, like a value-added tax or energy taxes — or both. Enacting those would be a monumental challenge that would make enacting the current package of corporate proposals look puny by comparison.

[dirtboy]

It could even impede job creation in the United States — exactly the opposite of what the Obama administration intends.

Really.

So tell us how increasing capital gains taxes, increasing marginal tax rates, cap and trade, government health care and printing money WON'T impede job creation, let alone retention, and tell us that the Obama Admin really gives a fig about job creation in the private sector.

[Piquaboy]

Those people had better pay their taxes or the Godfather will send out some thugs to break some legs. When in hell does that black POS gangbanger get off with threatening those who disagree with what he tells them to do?