Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: sky high corporate taxes

Posted 6 years ago on April 18, 2012, 9:33 p.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Yogi Berra once said: "You can see a lot by just looking." This is what you see if you look at corporate income tax revenue, as a percentage of GNP, since World War II:
Corporate Income Tax Rates Have Fallen Over Time
I came up with this chart myself (hold your applause, please), after downloading the data from the White House's website, here. Corporate income tax revenue has dropped all the way down from 7.2% of GNP at the end of World War II to only 1.2% last year.
Go to a different government website, do a little arithmetic, and you'll find that corporate profits are now 12.7% of GNP. Some division then tells you that corporations are paying less than 10% of their income in taxes.
Wow. That's a tax rate that might make even Mitt Romney blush.
Under the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, corporations are people. Well, it appears that they are people who pay little or nothing in taxes.

Ben Franklin said: "In this world, nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes." For corporations, though, neither is true.

There is something of a consensus among Washington, D.C. policymakers that corporate income taxes ought to be cut. That seems to be why the Obama Administration, unbidden by the Republicans, stuck in $100 billion in corporate tax breaks ("accelerated depreciation") into the so-called "compromise" bill that extended the Bush tax breaks for the rich through this year. (A bill that I voted against, by the way.)

That consensus is wrong. Based on this data, the notion of more corporate tax giveaways is laughable. If you care anything about the federal deficit, then corporate income tax revenues need to be higher, not lower.

If we simply returned corporate income tax revenue, as a percentage of GNP, to where it was six years ago in 2006 (2.7% of GNP), then we would reduce the federal deficit by over $200 billion a year. That is roughly fifty times the amount by which the "Buffett Rule" would reduce the deficit.

Fifty times as much.

Why isn't this all over the newspapers, radio and TV? Why aren't our so-called leaders saying something about this? As Casey Stengel, Yogi Berra's manager during most of his playing days with the Yankees, once asked, "Can't anybody here play this game?"



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by Skippy2 (485) 6 years ago

"(A bill I voted against by the way)" Are you a Federal Legislator? Or possibly a Wizard?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

no - not now, I just want your vote
do you agree with the post?

[-] -2 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

The United States has the HIGHEST corporate tax rate in the developed world (OECD figures). We're already having trouble COMPETING with other countries and we're being outsourced to lower taxed countries. You want to take us further in that direction?


Do you have any knowledge of economics? Get real!

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

The author knows more than anyone you know
He was there
And GE paid what amount of tax in 2010 on profits of $
If there was a simple no-loophole 20% corporate AMT tax,
................................................they would have paid $2,800.000.000.00
And GE paid what amount of tax in 2010 on profits of $

[-] 1 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

I don't care about GE. GE paid taxes to another country in a competitive global economy. One by one, everyone is moving out of the U.S.

We're uncompetitive because our tax structure is so onerous compared to other countries. They're leaving en masse. If you think you can use the iron fist of government to control everyone, you're wrong. They just leave and everyone left is holding the bag. It's a global economy. You better learn to compete on it's playing field or die. Do you get it?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

I don't get it but GE does - and they know how to use it

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 6 years ago

Tep doesn't get it. His cart is before his horse.

[-] 1 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

Starting seeing the world as it is, not as you want it to be, or the rest of your life is going to be very difficult for you.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

So you believe IS ?
not COULD BE ?
what a sad dead end !

[-] -1 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

I believe the more you demand the iron fist of government to rule everyone, the worse things will get and the more people will flee the country. Tax receipts are down because of this mentality. Just look at states like Kalifornya, where everyone and their brother are leaving it because of it's onerous tax climate and the tax base collapses.

You somehow think you can rule with an iron fist. People and business eventually say F U and leave. What does that accomplish?


[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

simple solution - go back to the successful tax rates under Clinton
or maybe you prefer Ike's tax rates

[-] 1 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

That solution won't work unless we go back to the spending under Clinton also.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

military cutbacks

[-] -2 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

We need entitlement cutbacks. Too much has been promised and those promises cannot be kept.

You could cut the military budget to 0 and entitlements would still bankrupt us.

Get to know the numbers: http://www.usdebtclock.org

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

what's an entitlement?

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 6 years ago

Yeah, like the entitlements of corporate CEO's that make 400 times as much as the average worker. That's what's making us non-competitive.

Oh, and to the comment below . . . earnings? For what, getting in the hot with call girs? Taking long expense paid vacations on corporate jets? Yeah, and those coal miners who want a raise are asking for entitlements, that's why you have to destroy their unions.

You guys crack me up.

[-] 0 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

Those aren't entitlements. Those are EARNINGS. Big difference.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

entitlements like oil company entitlements

[-] -1 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

Entitlements like social security, medicare and medicaid.

Stop being an imbecile, or is that an impossibility?

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 6 years ago

California is still the most populous state in the country, and businesses flock there every day. You pick some obscure right-wing website that quotes a guy from Orange County, a radical right-wing county in SoCal in an attempt to prove California has somehow gone wrong. If so, why are nut-job states like Arizona in as bad of financial state per capita?

California has one of the largest economies in the world, while Utah has the Great Salt Lake, Mormons and a total population less than the size of the city of Los Angeles. No wonder some rube politicians are willing to talk to the guy.

[-] 1 points by tep22 (1) 6 years ago

There was a time buddy. That time is long gone. Recheck your facts on California. They're about to go tits up.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 6 years ago

Florida, Nevada, Arizona, and a host of other states are in as bad or worse fiscal shape than California.

If you think California is hurting so badly, check real-estate prices in all the urban areas. The down payment on most California houses would buy you a house lot, stock, and barrel in most other states.


[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33475) from Coon Rapids, MN 6 years ago

Nice post. This is what we need to communicate because no one else is. This is something I would include sending to elected officials to let them know that we are aware and are spreading the word and that this is one of the issues they need to address along with the wealthy individual tax rate disparity.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8733) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

The CEOs must be paid to keep taxes low, that's about all they do, here's a link to more.



[-] 0 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 6 years ago

Duh Ralph.

And another new study shows that MSM has a conservative bias.http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4514

[-] 0 points by TheMisfit (48) 6 years ago

We could actually lower the corporate tax rates and still bring in more money if the deductions were removed. Interest is not taxed which encourages corporations to take on more debt to lower their taxable earnings creating more risk and volatility in the market. By eliminating the deductions, corporations would take on less debt and help to stabilize the market while paying more in taxes while taking in just as large a profit margin. Don't lay all of the blame on corporations that are simply working within the rules the government set forth. The government is at the heart of the problem and until the members of Congress and the Oval Office change completely, I don't see anything changing for us.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

Yes - exactly - you don't blame the python for eating the puppy.
It is OUR fault for leaving the puppy near the python
even if the python promised to trickle down on us and promised that one day, we would be able to eat puppies.

To paraphrase a line from the movie Terminator :
“Listen, and understand. That corporation is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely - will not stop - ever.” It was made to make profits and making profits is what it does.

[-] 1 points by Phanya2011 (908) from Tucson, AZ 6 years ago

Unfortunately, it's been the puppy trickling down on us..

[-] -2 points by Zombiefighter (-16) from Ione, CA 6 years ago

Would 90% tax on corporations make you happy?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

Why do you ask something so stupid?

[-] -2 points by Zombiefighter (-16) from Ione, CA 6 years ago

Okay. So what percentage should those horrible corporations pay to satisfy your childish sense of social justice?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 6 years ago

Such an honest sincere question -
here's my honest sincere answer - AMT = 20% on net corporate profits over $500,000 per year

[-] 0 points by Zombiefighter (-16) from Ione, CA 6 years ago

That's all? Why not more? That's not even a quarter of their profits.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

How much less will they have to pay before you notice it's social injustice?