The proposed 2012 budget...

[tater]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Which would be bad for business, "loopholes" are there for a reason, you need to stop abuse of "loopholes" not close them.
Passing a low corporate rate will achieve very little, there is always somewhere which will offer a lower rate.

So you know what that means don't you...more government and more regulation
The very things they say they need less of.

No loopholes.

Loopholes are there as payback. The US tax code is so large no one understands it. Lawyers specialize in segments of it (I know a few tax attorneys). They also exist because the rates are too high. The base US rate is very high because they know there are a million loopholes and no one pays the base rate.

That's why you pick a low rate, then stick to it. Loopholes are not "abused," they are used as intended. Eliminate loopholes entirely, but set a rate that is fair.

Total corporate profits are what, around 1.5 trillion dollars? That means that 15% would generate 225 billion. Corp income taxes during the Bush admin (collected) were higher than right now, at over 300 billion. Assuming our 1.5 trillion profit (~10% of GDP), this means that maybe the corporate rate should be a little higher than 15% (I just picked a number). At 20%, flat, we'd be looking at ~300T$.

There is no good reason for tax loopholes, IMO. Better to design a good tax to start with, and avoid the unfairness that comes from one business getting a break while another does not.

That means LESS regulation, and fewer tax collectors since no one has to determine who falls into the special class of payers that get a subsidy. The same applies to a flat income tax.

Note also that this creates a more predictable business environment. You can easily tell what your tax liability should be.