Why a Corporate Tax Rate at All?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Today, President Obama unveiled his latest plan to reform the corporate tax structure. I'm not too curious about the community's thoughts on this overall since I'm fairly sure we all know where we all sit on Obama making good/bad choices here, but I do have a more general question:

Why have a corporate tax rate at all?

I'd like to think we all agree on these basic points:

a) The corporate tax rate is not really paid by the corporation or business in question. Taxes are simply another cost that is levied on a company, a cost recouped through fewer services, lower wages/employment, higher prices, or some combination therein. It's not an issue of "fair share," really, since we're all paying it.

b) Our corporate tax rate is comparatively high when stacked up against other nations. We're #1 in the OECD at 35%. Canada, directly to our north, is at 15%. And that's without factoring in the corporate tax rates of individual states. Whether you think this matters much is up to you.

c) We only tax profits, and that's proper: If a company doesn't make a profit, it's not paying that tax rate. It's one reason why many corporations don't end up having a tax obligation.

d) We offer a lot of tax credits and opportunities to lower the effective rate: From green energy tax credits to employment credits, even profitable companies are able to reduce their effective rate to zero - or lower.

e) Corporate taxes account for a fairly small amount of overall receipts: Well under $250b in 2010.

So the question I pose is this - if you're in favor of a corporate tax at all, why? Is it worth it given what we all know and agree on? Is the value of getting $220b in revenue from the corporations worth it?

Comments

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Corporations pass all of their costs on to us. So I guess they don't pay for data centers, fuel or office space. Neat-o!

[kayjayuu.livejournal.com]

The problem I have is the assumption/insinuation that corporate taxes are paid for by "someone else" and not me the consumer. It is seen as money due the government because a business takes in more than it needs.

Or something.

It's not from the magic money garden out back. It comes from me, bottom line. I -- one of the 99% -- am paying that corporate tax, through that corporation. Not Mr. Incorporated.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

You're also paying for Mr. Incorporated's computers, office space and payroll. So what?

[politikitty.livejournal.com]

Yeah. That would be the difference between economics and finance. Money is a representation of wealth created that facilitates trade, and corporations simplify the million transactions necessary to create a functioning market.

If this is too complicated, then you simply can't understand the issues of tax incidence and indirect taxation. It's cool. I'll just put you on mute.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

No, it's not too complicated. Of course, you could always try actually defending the assertion rationally -- rather than simply engaging in ad verecundiam, ad hominem, and other logical fallacies.

But if that's too challenging, it's cool. I'll just put you on mute.