Deficit-Commission Chairmen Recommend Lower Corporate Taxes

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Hmm... Lower taxes to reduce the deficit. How about that?

Deficit-Commission Chairmen Recommend Lower Corporate Taxes

By COREY BOLES

WASHINGTON—The deficit commission set up by the White House has recommended cutting corporate taxes to a single rate between 23% and 29%, replacing the current band of rates that peaks at 35%.

In its final report released Wednesday, the commission said that without an overhaul of the U.S. corporate-tax system, the country's competitive position globally would suffer.

In exchange for lowering the corporate rate, the panel's report recommended eliminating all other industry-specific subsidies. Doing so would both help pay for the lower corporate rate and would end the current system in which the government in effect picks winners and losers through subsidies, the report said.

For individuals, the report recommends simplifying the complicated bracket system to three: bands of 12%, 22% and 28%.

It would tax capital gains and dividends at the same rates rather than maintaining a separate system.

The panel was established by the White House to come up with recommendations to bring the burgeoning U.S. debt under control.

Its specific mandate was to issue a report that could lower the federal budget deficit to 3% of gross domestic product by 2015.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704594804575648602717434296.html?KEYWORDS=tax+business

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

over 90 min and no reply from steven? must be dinner time for him.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

over 90 min and no reply from steven? must be dinner time for him.

What can he say? This is Obama's own Deficit Commission. Who would have thought they would recommend lower taxes as a way to increase tax revenue. I also like the idea of eliminating all subsidies to prevent the government from "picking winners and losers".

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

Hmm... Lower taxes to reduce the deficit. How about that?

Deficit-Commission Chairmen Recommend Lower Corporate Taxes

By COREY BOLES

WASHINGTON—The deficit commission set up by the White House has recommended cutting corporate taxes to a single rate between 23% and 29%, replacing the current band of rates that peaks at 35%.

In its final report released Wednesday, the commission said that without an overhaul of the U.S. corporate-tax system, the country's competitive position globally would suffer.

In exchange for lowering the corporate rate, the panel's report recommended eliminating all other industry-specific subsidies. Doing so would both help pay for the lower corporate rate and would end the current system in which the government in effect picks winners and losers through subsidies, the report said.

For individuals, the report recommends simplifying the complicated bracket system to three: bands of 12%, 22% and 28%.

It would tax capital gains and dividends at the same rates rather than maintaining a separate system.

The panel was established by the White House to come up with recommendations to bring the burgeoning U.S. debt under control.

Its specific mandate was to issue a report that could lower the federal budget deficit to 3% of gross domestic product by 2015.

http://online.wsj.co...DS=tax+business

Are they going to eliminate percentage depletion and the current deduction of Intangible drilling costs? If these two items are considered industry-specific subsidies then the Oil & Gas industry will not be happy. If the Oil & Gas industry doesn't like it then these recommendations will not pass.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Hmm... Lower taxes to reduce the deficit. How about that?

In exchange for lowering the corporate rate, the panel's report recommended eliminating all other industry-specific subsidies. Doing so would both help pay for the lower corporate rate and would end the current system in which the government in effect picks winners and losers through subsidies, the report said.

Almost, JS, almost. See, you need to read past the headline to get the idea. This proposal is, at the very least, revenue neutral and more than likely will generate more revenues since there's more lost on subsidies and loopholes than what is gained by the extra few points on the rate. It's worth reading past the headline, really.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Are they going to eliminate percentage depletion and the current deduction of Intangible drilling costs? If these two items are considered industry-specific subsidies then the Oil & Gas industry will not be happy. If the Oil & Gas industry doesn't like it then these recommendations will not pass.

They will also run into defiance from the accounting industry. Any suggestions at simplifying personal income tax immediately draws their ire and lobbyists.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

over 90 min and no reply from steven? must be dinner time for him.

I was going to say something, but I first had to pull that hook of yours out of my mouth, master baiter.

[luckytxn 2,264]

I like the idea of getting rid of all subsidies even though it would never happen. That is the cash cow of pork and been around a long time. The idea of lower taxes to increase revenue is an old one too and can work if done right. Make it appealing to corporations and they will more than likely produce more here than somewhere where the taxes are lower and they get lower transportation to boot. We do need to pay individual taxes and everyone if we want the social programs. The main thing is we have to reduce the Fed spending a lot. and that is a no brainer. As we all know though they will spend more if revenue increases. The only way to ever get the debt under control is to vote in a lot of Pols that will go along with it and the two major parties are not the ones that will do it.

[Pooky 3,784]

They will also run into defiance from the accounting industry.

There are 3 types of accountants ...

Those that can count and those that can't.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Almost, JS, almost. See, you need to read past the headline to get the idea. This proposal is, at the very least, revenue neutral and more than likely will generate more revenues since there's more lost on subsidies and loopholes than what is gained by the extra few points on the rate. It's worth reading past the headline, really.

I saw that mister obvious. I would also like to see all subsidies cut. But the savings in subsidies isn't the main thrust of this. Cutting taxes stimulates growth accross the board while only a few business get subsidies. You really need to wrap your head around this. Higher taxes chokes off growth, lower taxes stimulats growth.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I saw that mister obvious. I would also like to see all subsidies cut. But the savings in subsidies isn't the main thrust of this. Cutting taxes stimulates growth accross the board while only a few business get subsidies. You really need to wrap your head around this. Higher taxes chokes off growth, lower taxes stimulats growth.

Let's take a look. At 35%, GE paid $0.00 on it's 10.8 billion dollar earnings last year. Now what would that tax bill be if the only change was to set the rate to, say, 25%? Yup, it would still be $0.00. If, of course, the rate was changed to 25% and, at the same time, the loopholes that allow GE (and other corporations) to legally claim a loss of half a billion dollars before the IRS while actually reporting earnings of over $10 billion to it's shareholders, then you'd see an increase in actual tax revenue despite that lower rate.

I am all for simplifying the tax code. Lower the marginal rates and get rid of deductions and loopholes at the same time. There are some good recommendations in the work the commission has done. I think it's a good starting point to discuss the fiscal future of the nation.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Yes the point of 'lowering' the taxes per this plan is to actually collect the full tax at the only theoretically 'lower' rate. Kind of silly to pretend this is akin to support for the 'lower taxes stimulate growth' theory.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Yes the point of 'lowering' the taxes per this plan is to actually collect the full tax at the only theoretically 'lower' rate. Kind of silly to pretend this is akin to support for the 'lower taxes stimulate growth' theory.

Bingo, it's about closing the existing gap between the marginal and effective tax rates.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Let's take a look. At 35%, GE paid $0.00 on it's 10.8 billion dollar earnings last year. Now what would that tax bill be if the only change was to set the rate to, say, 25%? Yup, it would still be $0.00. If, of course, the rate was changed to 25% and, at the same time, the loopholes that allow GE (and other corporations) to legally claim a loss of half a billion dollars before the IRS while actually reporting earnings of over $10 billion to it's shareholders, then you'd see an increase in actual tax revenue despite that lower rate.

I am all for simplifying the tax code. Lower the marginal rates and get rid of deductions and loopholes at the same time. There are some good recommendations in the work the commission has done. I think it's a good starting point to discuss the fiscal future of the nation.

There is one huge hole in your idea here. Not all, in fact very few companies get subsidies. The amount of the savings in not giving the subsidies does not equal the cut in taxes for all companies. The deficit commission has endorsed the fact that lower taxes give us higher revinues. But of course you are going to spout the DNC talking points once again and try and spin this a different way. I would expect nothing less from you.

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

I was going to say something, but I first had to pull that hook of yours out of my mouth, master baiter.

quit flopping around, i'm trying to scale you.