ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

A strong step forward

This 14-point corporate tax cut really is a big deal and a massive win for the God-Emperor:
Telecom giant AT&T was quick to respond to news of U.S. tax reform, announcing it would give some employees bonuses once the legislation is signed into law.

AT&T said in a press release Wednesday that it would give more than 200,000 of its U.S. workers who are union members a special bonus of $1,000. The company also increased its capital expenditures budget by $1 billion in the U.S.

"Congress, working closely with the President, took a monumental step to bring taxes paid by U.S. businesses in line with the rest of the industrialized world," CEO Randall Stephenson said in a statement. "This tax reform will drive economic growth and create good-paying jobs. In fact, we will increase our U.S. investment and pay a special bonus to our U.S. employees."

AT&T had previously said that it would invest $1 billion in the U.S. if "competitive" tax reform legislation was passed, and has said that the tax reform framework could increase demand for AT&T's services.

The House of Representatives on Wednesday sent tax reform legislation to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it soon. Trump lauded the bill, calling it "an extraordinary victory for American families, workers, and businesses."

The new tax law will drop the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from the current 35 percent and includes other measures that Republicans say will spur businesses to invest domestically. AT&T's effective tax rate was 32.7 percent in 2016, according to its annual report.
High corporate taxes are brutal because they cost so many people beyond the intended targets; it's like eating the seed corn. It would be nice to see the God-Emperor follow this up by offering a carrot-and-stick solution to corporations holding Eurodollars overseas, then getting rid of the ludicrous and unconstitutional FATCA.

Labels: ,

114 Comments:

Blogger Miguel December 20, 2017 6:40 PM  

Tired yet? Hope not.

Blogger seeingsights December 20, 2017 6:43 PM  

This also shows that AT&T is on board with MAGA.

Blogger Lazarus December 20, 2017 6:53 PM  

ZH headline:

Why A Scathing Wall Street Is Furious At The Trump Tax Plan

Ergo, it must be a good plan, yes?

Blogger Wayne December 20, 2017 6:54 PM  

And...three companies are raising their minimum wage to $15 an hour without being forced to do so. Let the Democrat praises for Trump begin...NOT.

Anonymous Tsalal December 20, 2017 6:57 PM  

Used to be Takin' A Look

High taxes for the rich/wealthy are not the same as taxes for corporations.

Anonymous Tsalal December 20, 2017 6:59 PM  

Now if only we can revoke personhood, heck, take it all the way back to public companies...

Blogger James Dixon December 20, 2017 6:59 PM  

> AT&T's effective tax rate was 32.7 percent in 2016, according to its annual report.

Which means AT&T will see an immediate 11.2% gain in profits. A gain which will be passed on to company investment, stockholders, employees, customers, and vendors. It really is a win/win for everyone. Well, except the Dem's,

Blogger James Dixon December 20, 2017 7:02 PM  

> It would be nice to see the God-Emperor follow this up by offering a carrot-and-stick solution to corporations holding Eurodollars overseas

I thought there was a one time, relatively small, tax on overseas holdings in this bill for specifically that purpose.

> Now if only we can revoke personhood, heck, take it all the way back to public companies...

If they would do that I would support eliminating the corporate tax entirely.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd December 20, 2017 7:04 PM  

It's all deck chairs on the Titanic if we don't stop immigration now.

Still, if we are to sink, let us by all means sink with the optimal deck chair fung shui.

Anonymous Anonymous December 20, 2017 7:05 PM  

Funny how this snuck in: "Alimony deduction. Alimony paid to an ex-spouse will no longer be deductible by the payor." Not only will you have to pay alimony, you also have to pay all the taxes instead of being able to deduct the payments.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 20, 2017 7:08 PM  

This is definitely interesting. I was expecting a massive, planned downturn in the auto industry in March or so, possibly culminating in demand for another bailout, with Fiat threatening to sell Chrysler to a Chinese conglomerate. This would have been profitable and looked really bad for Trump. Now...?

Blogger Josh (the sexiest thing here) December 20, 2017 7:13 PM  

Vox, what is your preferred tax system?

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 20, 2017 7:15 PM  

I just saw there's a new book cover for An Equation of Almost Infinite Complexity. Perfect symbolism, massive props to whoever produced that.

Blogger Jourdan December 20, 2017 7:17 PM  

I've been around awhile. I am not a genius, but I can tell you that if Wells Fargo, AT&T and Comcast are celebrating, it's not good news for the American middle class no matter how it's being spun.

Blogger Ingot9455 December 20, 2017 7:20 PM  

So now, the libs are going to be complaining about revenue. (In the real world, revenue is going to shoot up from all the increased investment, churn, and employment of every decently-sized company looking to do all the things they've had to put off doing for how many years, but.)

Okay, hear me out. We need taxes to raise revenue as per PAYGO.

A tax on Fake News.

We have a never-ending supply! It can't run out! And as ObamaCare showed us, you can tax anything, even not making a purchase!

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky December 20, 2017 7:21 PM  

Btw, the death of net neutrality probably had no small role in that $1 billion in new capital spending, too. These companies pay big, big money to set up, to extend, and to maintain high speed networks. Who is excited about doing that when the SJWs over at the FCC are just going to wrest control of it away from you and tailor it towards their ends?

The truth imho is that the death of net neutrality is a good thing, and will achieve the opposite of what the SJWs claim. Because first, they always lie. And second, they always project. Who is the biggest threat to curtailing your Internet presence? Your ISP or the merry band of SJWs with the banhammers over at Google, Twitter, etc?

Anonymous Tsalal December 20, 2017 7:22 PM  

@Anonymous

Damn.... That's going to get a LOT of upper-class Men beating and killing Women who want "frivorce" because.... "unhaaaaaappy". We'll be able to sort out the genuine divorces for REAL reasons (hint, they will ask for child-support at most).

Blogger James Parliament December 20, 2017 7:28 PM  

I was thinking, glad they’re my provider.

They responded quickly to the Planned Parenthood thing if I remember correctly.

Anonymous Rfvujm December 20, 2017 7:30 PM  

OT: another Delingpole article on Breitbart that has a positive mention of our Supreme Dark Lord and the SJWA series. This time the iPod is how SJWs are ruining Magic: The Gathering

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/12/20/delingpole-magicgate-the-ugly-story-of-how-social-justice-warriors-ruined-an-innocent-collectible-card-game/

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener December 20, 2017 7:30 PM  

"...then getting rid of the ludicrous and unconstitutional FATCA."

Not to mention stunningly hypocritical. Little known to most Americans is the fact that the United States is a major money laundering haven. As long as you're not a citizen and you're wealthy, this is a great place to park your money.

Blogger marco moltisanti December 20, 2017 7:40 PM  

But, but it might benefit Trump too so it's BAD!

The MSM told me so.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash December 20, 2017 7:43 PM  

Ominous Cowherd wrote:It's all deck chairs on the Titanic if we don't stop immigration now.
Your monomania is trying.
Part of fixing immigration is getting political capital. The single most critical piece of accumulating political capital is improving the economy. A major part of fixing the economy is this tax reform package.
It's another step in the correct direction.

Blogger pyrrhus December 20, 2017 7:46 PM  

Very good news on the corporate tax system...But I certainly hope the special and very embarrassing 15% rate for hedge fund managers did not survive...

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd December 20, 2017 7:55 PM  

From Bloomberg: ``Republicans in Congress handed the industry a long-sought victory on Tuesday, approving exploration in the vast Arctic preserve as part of their tax overhaul. The legislation, which Trump is expected to sign into law, would lift an almost 40-year old ban on prospecting for oil and natural gas in the refuge’s coastal plain...''

It's all deck chairs, but that's a big, important deck chair for me.

Blogger Koanic December 20, 2017 7:58 PM  

The longer the Empire's finances hold, the more it can dilute its native stock. Death to the USA.

Blogger eclecticme December 20, 2017 7:59 PM  

@22 pyrrhus
Last I heard the carried interest provision for hedge fund managers was watered down a little but still lives
https://www.propublica.org/article/carried-interest-reform-is-a-sham

Anonymous Tsalal December 20, 2017 8:00 PM  

@Jourdan

You are a major black-piller, here and at MPC.

Here is a hint... These corporations are going to be broken up.

Blogger Josh (the sexiest thing here) December 20, 2017 8:02 PM  

But I certainly hope the special and very embarrassing 15% rate for hedge fund managers did not survive...

It did

Blogger S1AL December 20, 2017 8:03 PM  

Are people here actually using the "corporations shouldn't be people" talking point?

Go look up the definition, both present and historical, of a "corporation".

Hint: it's not what you think it is.

Blogger Josh (the sexiest thing here) December 20, 2017 8:05 PM  

Corporations are people my friend

Blogger Lazarus December 20, 2017 8:14 PM  

Josh (the sexiest thing here) December 20, 2017 8:05 PM
Corporations are people my friend


Unlike womb-children

Blogger Thucydides December 20, 2017 8:14 PM  

The second half of the equation, government spending, can be addressed directly buy the God Emperor through executive orders. Consider this article: https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/12/pentagon-could-easily-save-125-billion.html.

If the Pentagon could save $125 billion over 5 years through bureaucratic streamlining without losing a single soldier, sailor, airman or Marine, then imagine if every Federal department and agency were forced to apply the same methodology. The savings would probably amount to $300 billion over that 5 year period (Pentagon + everyone else).

And aggressive closure of duplicate programs could save tens of billions every year, and of course illegal aliens cost the US taxpayer something like $138 billion every year. Spending reductions on this order would also goose the us economy, and some of the extra revenues generated by the tax cuts can be used to pay down the debt and start fixing unfunded liabilities, although given the scale and scope of these, we are really talking about getting some more breathing space before Vox's predicted 2030 era economic collapse. Pushing things out to the 2040's *may* allow for more innovative solutions to be implemented.

One can only hope.

Anonymous Nathan December 20, 2017 8:17 PM  

"If the Pentagon could save $125 billion over 5 years through bureaucratic streamlining without losing a single soldier, sailor, airman or Marine, then imagine if every Federal department and agency were forced to apply the same methodology. The savings would probably amount to $300 billion over that 5 year period (Pentagon + everyone else)."

That's a big if. Every reduction I've seen so far has been troops, maybe contractors, but never the government civilians attached to the services.

Blogger WynnLloyd December 20, 2017 8:18 PM  

What is "MPC?" I've seen that referenced quite a bit.

Blogger eclecticme December 20, 2017 8:26 PM  

The state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap will hit states like NY and CA harder, especially NYC and SF etc. Next time they won't vote for Trump. No wait, they always vote Democrat! Bwhaaa!

Blogger roughcoat December 20, 2017 8:30 PM  

WynnLloyd wrote:What is "MPC?" I've seen that referenced quite a bit.

The forum, I assume. Link

Blogger Lovekraft December 20, 2017 8:34 PM  

Over at Breitbart, James Delingpole mentions Vox Day and his convergence principle in the matter of Magicgate (a female cosplayer being the pretext to ban an anti-SJW from Magic The Gathering).

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/12/20/delingpole-magicgate-the-ugly-story-of-how-social-justice-warriors-ruined-an-innocent-collectible-card-game/

Blogger maniacprovost December 20, 2017 8:36 PM  

The logical solution is to eliminate corporate taxes entirely, and make up for it by taxing:
*Capital gains as income
*Dividends as income
*Cash leaving the country via tariff
and eliminate income tax deductions or raise top rates as necessary to compensate.

Tax revenue should be neutral and spending cuts should go toward reducing the deficit.

The point of this is to encourage investment in the US and eliminate the massive inefficiency of corporate taxation.

Anonymous Just another commenter December 20, 2017 8:37 PM  

That's a lot of blue-collar union workers that will take another look at Trump come next election. The ANWR drilling will be good for jobs, domestic energy production, and the Alaskan economy, as well as another nail in the OPEC coffin. Not perfect, and not everything, but generally pretty darn good; certainly anything better than Captain Zero passed. If we can sustain 3.5% or greater growth through the next election, it'll be a fine time to invest in popcorn futures.

Blogger Lance E December 20, 2017 8:38 PM  

S1AL wrote:Are people here actually using the "corporations shouldn't be people" talking point?

Go look up the definition, both present and historical, of a "corporation".

Hint: it's not what you think it is.


I think you underestimate the populist right. We know the difference between a legal person and an actual flesh-and-bones person.

Corporate "personhood", regardless of the vocabulary, was the first step away from real capitalism and toward corporatism. A legal fiction, granted and enforced by the state, preventing real "people" from holding the corporate "person" accountable for any major misdeeds. This is why big business loves big government.

Progressives have convinced themselves that corporations are moral agents, and neocons have convinced themselves that corporations always act rationally in response to economic incentives. Both claims have proven preposterously idealistic and incorrect. Corporate personhood is a reflection of those utopian beliefs, and while it's probably here to say, it really was (is) a terrible idea.

Blogger Robert Browning December 20, 2017 8:46 PM  

They got a merger pending. Is this public relations??

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd December 20, 2017 8:48 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:Your monomania is trying.

Good tax policy is a good thing, and a foundational thing. I realize that Trump has to build the foundation as well as the Big, Beautiful Wall.

I predict that with this victory for the Right, the usual cuckservative suspects are going to be looking for something - anything - to surrender, to make amends to their Leftist masters. It doesn't hurt to remind the cucks that ending immigration isn't just an important thing, in the long run it's the only thing.

Insisting on that here isn't really necessary. It is probably better left for the dim-bulb forums I like to troll. I'll be banging that drum tomorrow, but not here.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan December 20, 2017 8:48 PM  

And DiFi tweeting that nice California social progressives are people to and deserve a tax cut because Trump hates them

That is gold

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky December 20, 2017 8:51 PM  

Alaska is as big as Spain, France and Germany combined. ANWAR is as big 1/6 of DULLES AIRPORT.

So, I do not expect miracles from opening up ANWAR.

But, it is indeed a miracle that this ABSOLUTE FARCE that has been perpetrated on us for 30+ years is finally over.

DRAIN THE SWAMP.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash December 20, 2017 8:53 PM  

I'm fine with corporate personhood. What we really need is to declare bankers, hedge-fund managers and anyone who buys or sells derivatives a non-person.

Anonymous Dorkus Malorcus December 20, 2017 8:56 PM  

It was exactly what I thought it was, actually. I was confident it would be.

If you have a point, make it.

Blogger S1AL December 20, 2017 8:59 PM  

"Corporate "personhood", regardless of the vocabulary, was the first step away from real capitalism and toward corporatism. A legal fiction, granted and enforced by the state, preventing real "people" from holding the corporate "person" accountable for any major misdeeds. This is why big business loves big government."

No.

Try again.

Anonymous Dorkus Malorcus December 20, 2017 9:03 PM  

In all seriousness, unironically, are you doing all right? You usually don't write like a passiveagressive chick.

Blogger Sterling Pilgrim December 20, 2017 9:13 PM  

OT... I just watched Lethal Weapon (1987)... Buddy Cop movie ... one main character is white and the other is black and married to a black family with "Free South Africa End Apartheid" sticker on fridge.
Head over to Netflix where "Bright" trailer auto-plays... Buddy Cop movie... one main character is Black and the other... an Orc. Also, Black main character (Will Smith) is married to a white woman (eat that all you sista's at Jezebel).
We've got to make our Pop Culture Great Again.

Anonymous Ages December 20, 2017 9:22 PM  

I work for one of those EVIL CORPORATIONS that will benefit from this. (It only has 9 employees, but it's a CORPORATION!!!!)

Praise the God Emperor!

Anonymous paradox December 20, 2017 9:27 PM  

That’s all nice and stuff. However, call me when the price of their goods and services come down for the consumer.

Blogger emx1 December 20, 2017 9:31 PM  

That's correct. 15.5% for liquid assets, and 8% for illiquid. Also, the tax bill can be spread over 8 years. It's exactly what Vox wanted above.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab December 20, 2017 9:42 PM  

Anwar is huge. 19 mil acres worth.

Blogger Matthew December 20, 2017 10:01 PM  

Jourdan, this is also part of the Great Realignment.

Anonymous George Mitchell December 20, 2017 10:02 PM  

What does Steve Keen have to say about this tax legislation?

Blogger Matthew December 20, 2017 10:02 PM  

paradox wrote:That’s all nice and stuff. However, call me when the price of their goods and services come down for the consumer.

Would you pay more for a can-opener made in America than one made in China?

Blogger John Bradley December 20, 2017 10:07 PM  

The truth imho is that the death of net neutrality is a good thing, and will achieve the opposite of what the SJWs claim. Because first, they always lie. And second, they always project. Who is the biggest threat to curtailing your Internet presence? Your ISP or the merry band of SJWs with the banhammers over at Google, Twitter, etc?

Indeed. Not once has Comcast ever threatened to terminate my account or even put me in 'timeout', and I'm sure Ramzpaul, Milo, Ricky Vaughn, and Jared Taylor can say much the same.

Granted, it might have something to do with being paying customers rather than users of a 'free' service, but still, I know which giant corporations I trust (moreso) to maintain a semblance of content agnosticism.

Blogger Ingot9455 December 20, 2017 10:15 PM  

ANWAR is huge. The place where they want to dig is small. They'll need to set up a small set of buildings and roads to the location. Then, eventually, a pipeline out to somewhere useful.

All in all, a tiny proportion of space.

Blogger Josh (the sexiest thing here) December 20, 2017 10:21 PM  

The logical solution is to eliminate corporate taxes entirely, and make up for it by taxing:
*Capital gains as income
*Dividends as income
*Cash leaving the country via tariff
and eliminate income tax deductions or raise top rates as necessary to compensate.


This is essentially the Mike Lee tax plan

Anonymous SL1A December 20, 2017 10:26 PM  

Corporations are people, my friend.

Blogger Lazarus December 20, 2017 10:29 PM  

The logical solution is to eliminate corporate taxes entirely, and make up for it by taxing:

Would that make the Corps and Gops support the GE more than this plan, or not? If not, what is the use of it?

Anonymous RLS coffee runner December 20, 2017 10:29 PM  

AT&T employee here.

Even through the shocking news of the DOJ suit, leadership has been fully on the Trump train. Internally, John Donovan has openly stated disapproval with Trump. John Stankey has been muted but skeptical. However in terms of anything considered releasable to the public, nothing has come close to being critical. Hell, Ryan and Mnuchin sat down with the CEO recently to talk about how great tax cuts are.

I've been at the company for a while. Would have never expected this kind if reaction. I know the TW suit factors in pretty heavily here, but this is pretty extreme.

Blogger Michael Kingswood December 20, 2017 10:48 PM  

@32

"That's a big if. Every reduction I've seen so far has been troops, maybe contractors, but never the government civilians attached to the services."

Word.

After serving my time in hell - sorry, the Pentagon - I was actually pretty psyched when Sequestration happened. If there's one thing my time in the puzzle palace convinced me of, it's that the DOD budget needs to be cut by at least a third, in not one-half. Done right, we'd see an increase in combat capability.

Done right.

I sooooo hoped we'd handle sequestration the right way, and trim the fat.

Nope. It all went to reductions in flight hours, maintenance, and training.

*mutter*

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky December 20, 2017 10:59 PM  

Okay, AT&T announced $1 billion in capital investments. Comcast just announced $50 Billion in capital investments.

I'll say it again: THANK GOD NET NEUTRALITY IS DEAD.

This is a MAJOR player in the decision of these network providers to spend out.

Blogger Matamoros December 20, 2017 10:59 PM  

Trump also said that this effectively repealed Obamacare because it removed the mandate requirement.

Anonymous Post Alley Crackpot December 20, 2017 11:13 PM  

"... the ludicrous and unconstitutional FATCA ..."

The Eurocrats need to get rid of the entire OECD.

They've pushed for "Global FATCA" in the form of something called the "Common Reporting Standard" which is fairly much just as bad.

Even with "hard Brexit" the UK won't be rid of the Eurocrats.

Blogger Koanic December 20, 2017 11:51 PM  

Wake me when it's time to cut the tax collectors.

Blogger ((( bob kek mando ))) - ( the Original Militant Apathist ) December 21, 2017 12:04 AM  

28. S1AL December 20, 2017 8:03 PM
Go look up the definition, both present and historical, of a "corporation".
Hint: it's not what you think it is.



"So there are of two kinds of legal entities, human and non-human: natural persons (also called physical persons) and juridical persons (also called juridic, juristic, artificial, legal, or fictitious persons, Latin: persona ficta), which are other entities (such as corporations) that are treated in law as if they were persons."

business Corporations are, and always have been, 'persons' created by Legal Fiction.

that's how the infringement of Free Speech "Rights" of Corporations can even be a Legal question.


33. WynnLloyd December 20, 2017 8:18 PM
What is "MPC?" I've seen that referenced quite a bit


https://mpcdot.com/forums/

they are aggressively Right Wing shitpoasters, but they spend a bit too much time preening about how they are the only True Right Wing Shitpoasters for my taste.


43. a deplorable rubberducky December 20, 2017 8:51 PM
ANWAR [sic] is as big 1/6 of DULLES AIRPORT.


Dulles Airport == 13,000 acres
ANWR == +19,000,000 acres

"The controversy surrounds drilling for oil in a 1,500,000 acres (6,100 km2) subsection on the coastal plain, known as the "1002 area"."

Anonymous Bell Worthington December 21, 2017 12:42 AM  

The Republicans have had forever over the past 25 years to drastically lower corporate taxes. It's one thing to constantly "fail to conserve anything," but quite another to not deliver on something that their think tanks and corporate donors alike have been incessantly pleading for year after year whilst China was booming and the EU was establishing a common currency/market. I find it hard to believe that only Trump's wisdom and will were needed to bring about this change if the Republicans wanted it so badly for all these years to begin with. Unless they didn't want it?

Blogger Revelation Means Hope December 21, 2017 12:47 AM  

When I worked in management at a major biotech drug company, we got a presentation on the reasons for deciding to build one of our facilities in SIngapore.
SIngapore workers are paid almost the same as here in Biotech Bay.
So, overhead was about the same for supplies, utilities, building costs were actually a little higher, and so on.

The biggest selling point? on 1 drug alone, about $250 Million in taxes in 10 years over building the facility and making the drug here and selling it abroad and then paying taxes on those sales in the American tax system.

The payoff to Singapore was that they had ZERO biotech industry, so we trained their best and brightest over here in America and hired them over there. They usually stuck around for 18-24 months before leaving for another Singaporean startup biotech company.

Think about how incredibly stupid the US tax policy is that drove that amount of wages and earnings permanently out of the US. And enabled a highly capable competition for one of our best industries.

I'm wondering what the ROI would have been under this new law, I bet the facility would have been built here and kept all those construction and manufacturing and research jobs here too.

Stupid progressive democrats.

OpenID d31b21b0-3c34-11e6-8c2f-bb614f7b9f50 December 21, 2017 1:05 AM  

#43 Even just section 1001 of ANWR is more than 10x as big as Dulles. ANWR as a whole is over 1300x the size of Dulles Airport.

Anonymous Pitchfork Rebel December 21, 2017 1:44 AM  

The entire purpose of high marginal taxes is to increase the returns to supplicants seeking deductions, credits and preferences and thereby increase the incentive to curry favor with politicians.

As an aside, every student of finance learns that the net after tax cost of any deductible item is (1 - marginal tax rate) times the cost. Under the current corporate rate, Fortune 500 companies but everything from pencils to PC's at 65 cents on the dollar. Lowering the corporate tax rate lowers your disadvantage as a bidder for goods and services.

Of course the only true fix to the tax code is abolition. Let the states tax individuals and the feds tax states. Greedy states would lose population and all would be better positioned to restrain the metastatic cancer of federal spending.

Blogger LES December 21, 2017 1:53 AM  

If the income tax was completely abolished the Liberals would complain that it would unfairly benefit the rich. Still, the federal debt and deficit are not being addressed.

Anonymous Bellator Mortalis December 21, 2017 1:55 AM  

So. Double standard deduction, more deductions for children.
For those who complain may companies will do stock buybacks or pay more dividends then - do you have a 401K or mutual funds?
Yes: you profit.
No: what is your bitch? It's not costing you anything.
For those who complain "the rich" get more. Well, they pay more taxes. Now they can buy stuff -- which means you have a job. So shut it.

Anonymous cremes December 21, 2017 2:10 AM  

Trump gets his tax cuts, Karl Denninger hardest hit.

Blogger Dire Badger December 21, 2017 2:24 AM  

Nathan wrote:"If the Pentagon could save $125 billion over 5 years through bureaucratic streamlining without losing a single soldier, sailor, airman or Marine, then imagine if every Federal department and agency were forced to apply the same methodology. The savings would probably amount to $300 billion over that 5 year period (Pentagon + everyone else)."

That's a big if. Every reduction I've seen so far has been troops, maybe contractors, but never the government civilians attached to the services.


Imagine our savings if the 'three strikes' rule for felonies meant a helicopter ride...

I mean, sure, it would cost more in helicopter fuel, but we could eventually 'streamline' that to two-stroke fuel for the woodchipper. Even More savings.

Blogger Dire Badger December 21, 2017 2:30 AM  

S1AL wrote:"Corporate "personhood", regardless of the vocabulary, was the first step away from real capitalism and toward corporatism. A legal fiction, granted and enforced by the state, preventing real "people" from holding the corporate "person" accountable for any major misdeeds. This is why big business loves big government."

No.

Try again.


Blanket statement, no foundation or logic to disagreement.

Explain, please.

Anonymous map December 21, 2017 2:39 AM  

OT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=-PFXBJGvE28

Voter fraud in Alabama

OpenID franklinfreek December 21, 2017 2:41 AM  

A tax on Fake News.

If we can tax people for not buying insurance, surely we can tax media for lying.

The IRS is actually pretty good at finding liars.

OpenID franklinfreek December 21, 2017 2:43 AM  

I love this weapon of using corporations to shill for Trump's policies by bribing their employees.

The Democrats have had their funding by public sector unions scam for generations now. It's about time that got countered.

And if you think this is bad, you really don't want to win the war, do you.

Blogger Dire Badger December 21, 2017 2:48 AM  

We could institute a simplified method for Libel, slander, and Fraud lawsuits.
Someone like Trump could sue the Media for slander in the potential BILLIONS.

Anonymous Cantostop December 21, 2017 4:31 AM  

Wish there was more discussion here on FATCA.

Question for anyone who knows, if FATCA is repealed, effectively will US citizens abroad no longer have to worry about paying US taxes? Or would they still technically have to but itd be unenforceable?

Because the number of people renouncing citizenship goes up every year and this is a big factor.

Anonymous Looking Glass December 21, 2017 4:34 AM  

FATCA existed to allow the US Financial Institutions to take control of much of the world's finance. The law is functionally an act of Imperialism.

As for the tax changes, to call this massive is actually an understatement. This is a much, much bigger deal for small to medium sized businesses that can't send an army of lawyers at the problem. This is a 40% effective tax drop or a 21% after-tax profit increase. But, wait, there's more! With the Obamacare Mandate gone, you no longer have to fund health insurance that does nothing but ruin your income and barely provides anything.

Though maybe the best part of this requires thinking back to the "Red Dinner" of the campaign. (Al Smith Dinner) Trump has pretty much screwed nearly ever person in that room so far. Trump has taken the lead in the Culture War and he's put the first real damage into the other side, in a while. The Hedge Fund set is going to be pretty furious for a while. (At least until they figure out how to drop their own tax rates.)

Somehow the "Liberal, New York Playboy" is the most Right-wing President since Calvin Coolidge. He really is the second coming of Andrew Jackson. Let's hope he also finds a way to repeat dealing with the 2nd Bank of the USA.

Blogger James Dixon December 21, 2017 5:26 AM  

> Corporations are people, my friend.

Wake me when GE is thrown in jail the next time they break the law.

> The entire purpose of high marginal taxes is to increase the returns to supplicants seeking deductions, credits and preferences and thereby increase the incentive to curry favor with politicians.

Bingo.

Blogger Michael Neal December 21, 2017 6:24 AM  

The liberals aren't being stupid with their tax policies, it's a deliberate strategy to tear down America

Anonymous Looking Glass December 21, 2017 6:34 AM  

One interesting rub to think about. The major sources of money for Democrats are Unions, Lawyers and Finance. Silicon Valley has picked up, but it's still functionally Finance.

Trump can work the Unions because their members will be pro-Trump. Financial centers just took a big hit with these changes. Lawyers probably get smacked in something as well.

Blogger Shimshon December 21, 2017 7:18 AM  

@81 Cantostop, the obligation for US citizens abroad to file US tax returns predates FATCA and its repeal would not change that. The US has a "foreign earned income exclusion" along with dual taxation treaties with numerous countries. So most expatriots don't pay tax, but they still have to file (and if they have kids, they can get the child tax credit).

It was a most odd and uneasy experience filling out US tax forms at my bank a few years (the alternative was to have my account closed). At least in Israel, the banks still service Americans. There are simply too many here in Israel to not do so. But many banks in other countries decided to wash their hands of the compliance nightmare.

Blogger S1AL December 21, 2017 7:30 AM  

"Blanket statement, no foundation or logic to disagreement.

Explain, please."

Bob kek mando, betrayer of capitalization and molester of the English language, noted it above: "Corporations are, and *always have been*, persons". Ergo, any fault you try to lay at the feet of corporate personhood ignores the fact that they have been that way, long preceding any crime invoked. In point of fact, personhood is intrinsic to the definition, as a corporation is merely a legally-recognized group of persons. Best of luck trying to explain how corporations can legally do anything if they aren't defined as persons. Hell, try applying law to them at all.

Moreover, and this is the part that confuses the plebs, all legally-recognized organizations of people are corporations. That's why land that isn't part of a city is called "unincorporated territory". It's the same idiocy from back when people were saying "churches shouldn't be corporations". Churches must, by definition, be corporations.

And contra James Dixon, it doesn't get easier to hold business corporations liable if you claim they aren't persons. It becomes much, much harder.

Blogger James Dixon December 21, 2017 8:08 AM  

> ... as a corporation is merely a legally-recognized group of persons.

A group is not an individual. A forest is not a tree.

> And contra James Dixon, it doesn't get easier to hold business corporations liable if you claim they aren't persons. It becomes much, much harder.

BS. A legal entity does not have to accorded either the same rights or the same responsibilities as a person. In fact, it can't be.

Blogger James Dixon December 21, 2017 8:11 AM  

I'm sure there are a number of things not to like in this bill (at over 1000 pages the last I heard, there would have to be), but the positives just keep getting better and better: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/tax-reform-smacks-down-excessive-nonprofit-executive-pay-commentary.html

Blogger S1AL December 21, 2017 8:19 AM  

"BS. A legal entity does not have to accorded either the same rights or the same responsibilities as a person. In fact, it can't be."

Again, best of luck with a functional system of laws if you don't treat corporations as persons. If corporations aren't people, they aren't liable to civil cases. Do you know how most corporate cases are treated and settled?

The problem is that you want corporations to be treated as persons only in the negative. That not only defeats the entire purpose of corporations, it renders the entirety of modern civilization non-functional.

Blogger lannes December 21, 2017 8:22 AM  

Your nickname for Trump "God-Emperor" has become shopworn.

Blogger Johnny December 21, 2017 8:37 AM  

James Dixon wrote:I'm sure there are a number of things not to like in this bill (at over 1000 pages the last I heard, there would have to be), but the positives just keep getting better and better: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/tax-reform-smacks-down-excessive-nonprofit-executive-pay-commentary.html

I have never seen figures on it but I suspect nonprofits, charitable deductions and charitable tax advantaged trusts; taken together, are a major tax avoidance scam.

Blogger James Dixon December 21, 2017 8:39 AM  

> If corporations aren't people, they aren't liable to civil cases

They are *if the law defines them as so being*. That doesn't make them people.

> The problem is that you want corporations to be treated as persons only in the negative.

I want them to be treated as what they are. A created legal entity with rights and responsibilities different from those of people.

> Your nickname for Trump "God-Emperor" has become shopworn.

Your concern is noted. We don't care.

Blogger Johnny December 21, 2017 9:11 AM  

Coopreations as a an accepted legal fiction are treated as persons. It seldom comes up, but when a person dies and the assets go into probate, the estate takes on a lot of the features of a person also. And partnerships have that same feature. It is necessary because otherwise these entities could function. Thus also non legal persons can not go into business. Your dog can't start a dry goods store and you can not sue the stone that hit you in the head.

Some projects require such a huge amount of money that they can only be funded by governments or a large number of private sources. If I got it right, this was one of the original reasons for tolerating the corporate structure. Hey, banks in many places, laying railroad lines in England, and the Erie Canal here in the US. Lacking legal protection, limited liability, investors are hard to find for major projects because anybody who puts any money in would otherwise have their entire wealth at risk, and few investors are willing to do that unless they are directly in charge, as say Ford Motors. Thus liability is limited only to the money you put in.

Blogger S1AL December 21, 2017 9:46 AM  


"I want them to be treated as what they are. A created legal entity with rights and responsibilities different from those of people."

What does this look like in your mind?

Blogger Snidely Whiplash December 21, 2017 9:48 AM  

The law distinguishes between "natural persons" and "legal persons", you moron. You just dislike the use of a particular word, because it offends you or something equally stupid.

Blogger wreckage December 21, 2017 10:00 AM  

"Limited liability" also offends him, and again, it's because he doesn't know what it means.

Anonymous BBGKB December 21, 2017 10:04 AM  

When you realize your own people are toxic and should never have been made citizens

5.3 Million Puerto Ricans Will Take Revenge on Trump over tax plan, Governor Says
https://www.yahoo.com/news/5-3-million-puerto-ricans-235757485.html

"struck down tax and manufacturing rules that allowed Puerto Rico to have both foreign and domestic status" Made in PR might as well be Made in 85 IQistan!!

Blogger Revelation Means Hope December 21, 2017 10:23 AM  

FATCA is there for the express purpose of getting the tentacles of the US state deeper into every single financial transaction, worldwide.

Got to get ready for the warning in Revelation 13:7, that only those with the Mark of the Beast will be able to buy or sell. How else do you think a system like that could be made worldwide? Not happening next year, or even the year after that, but it is coming.

Anonymous Random #57 December 21, 2017 10:36 AM  

@68 Bell Worthington

"The Republicans have had forever over the past 25 years to drastically lower corporate taxes. It's one thing to constantly "fail to conserve anything," but quite another to not deliver on something that their think tanks and corporate donors alike have been incessantly pleading for year after year whilst China was booming and the EU was establishing a common currency/market. I find it hard to believe that only Trump's wisdom and will were needed to bring about this change if the Republicans wanted it so badly for all these years to begin with. Unless they didn't want it?"

@71 Pitchfork Rebel has it correctly, these things go in cycles so the Congress can threaten to impose higher rates after a cut, or offer targeted relief, it's a protection racket.

So why didn't they restart the cycle before this year? They weren't in power in the Congress from 2007-15, and then they had "you didn't build that" Obama who would have vetoed it. Plus they're cowards.

Before that? Blame George W. Bush? It wasn't going to happen under Clinton, who raised it a point in his first year as President, when the Congress was still Democratic. Bush's father was President too soon after the previous end of the Reagan Administration years cut, plus he of course wanted to and did raise taxes, breaking his "No new taxes" pledge and his Presidency.

Blogger James Dixon December 21, 2017 10:53 AM  

OK, one last try.

Sigh, another Google conflict error.

> What does this look like in your mind?

Quite a bit different than now, but there really isn't time or space to get into it here. Nor is it appropriate for this thread.

> The law distinguishes between "natural persons" and "legal persons", you moron.

Not well enough.

> "Limited liability" also offends him, and again, it's because he doesn't know what it means.

I have no idea what you even think you're talking about.

Blogger Dire Badger December 21, 2017 11:55 AM  

blogger is screwing up

Blogger Dire Badger December 21, 2017 11:58 AM  

S1AL wrote:"Blanket statement, no foundation or logic to disagreement.

Explain, please."

Bob kek mando, betrayer of capitalization and molester of the English language, noted it above: "Corporations are, and *always have been*, persons". Ergo, any fault you try to lay at the feet of corporate personhood ignores the fact that they have been that way, long preceding any crime invoked. In point of fact, personhood is intrinsic to the definition, as a corporation is merely a legally-recognized group of persons. Best of luck trying to explain how corporations can legally do anything if they aren't defined as persons. Hell, try applying law to them at all.

Moreover, and this is the part that confuses the plebs, all legally-recognized organizations of people are corporations. That's why land that isn't part of a city is called "unincorporated territory". It's the same idiocy from back when people were saying "churches shouldn't be corporations". Churches must, by definition, be corporations.

And contra James Dixon, it doesn't get easier to hold business corporations liable if you claim they aren't persons. It becomes much, much harder.



You see, that's the real thing.

"Corporations' were created, first and foremost, by government fiat as a way to create large investments in infrastructure that were impossible for individuals or the government itself to fund. The huge profit was the direct result of government and private interests working hand-in-hand to maximize profit.

Incorporation was intended to be a TEMPORARY solution to an immediate problem, not a standard operating procedure.

The fact is that corporate personhood is just one small symptom of a larger problem- Limited liability corporate existence. The corporate personhood exists exclusively as a shield to prop up The reality that corporations have been redesigned... not to create infrastructure, but to protect the wealthy from cooperation in a CRIMINAL enterprise.

Let's make this clear. Corporation exists in order to commit crimes that individuals would be, and could be, prosecuted for committing. In every way corporate law has been structured to permit criminal activities if the 'profit' from such activities exceeds the financial penalty and punishment for such activities. This is called 'making good business sense'.

The concept of 'the free market' and 'voting with your wallet' also does not exist for corporate structures, ESPECIALLY for multinationals. Obviously corporations do not wish to be 'caught' committing crimes, but success in large corporations revolves directly around how many ways you can create revenue, by legal or illegal means, and maximize profit. Criminal behavior is only consequential by how much it lowers your profit margin.

Corporations cannot 'die' or be stopped for breaking laws, only if their eventual profit drops below a certain threshold. Corporate 'persons' have no morality, no ethics, no conscience, no fear of consequences, and no goals other than greed.

Destruction is profitable.

The way this country will succeed is by eventually rejecting the legal process of incorporation and limited liability, and holding individuals accountable for their own actions. LLC's are a leftist political abortion who's day has passed, and is more destructive than any other short-term solution the Government in cahoots with moneyed interests has ever allowed to exist beyond it's useful lifespan.

Blogger S1AL December 21, 2017 12:13 PM  

Corporations have existed in approximately the same legal form since at least the Roman Empire. In other parts of the world they have existed in other forms. Feudalism is essentially corporate, far more so than what we have today. Guilds. The Old Briton clan system has many of the same elements.

Incorporation was not invented in the 1800's, the 1600's, or at any point Anno Domini. The fundamental legal notions have existed for as long as mankind has had writing.

Blogger Dire Badger December 21, 2017 12:30 PM  

"Corporations have existed in approximately the same legal form since at least the Roman Empire."
Yes, and Cooking is approximately the exact same today as it was in the Roman Empire.

Not factually completely false, there are some similarities, but damned ingenuous and a ridiculous parallel.

Homosexuality, Slavery, Cannibalism, and other reprehensible Human customs have also existed in some form throughout all of recorded history. Historical precedent does not make a behavior valuable.

Blogger Lance E December 21, 2017 12:31 PM  

@S1AL "The Roman Empire had corporations!" - the Roman empire also had imperial war, mass immigration, mass debt, slavery, welfare, etc. Should we preserve those ancient institutions?

I think we're all well aware of the fact that incorporation has existed for a long time in various forms. Capitalism was inherently a rejection of previous systems that depended so heavily on state power. Just because something is old, doesn't mean it's good. It doesn't mean it's bad, either; we're supposed to rely on empirical truths to make decisions about the future.

You even quoted this bit: "In point of fact, personhood is intrinsic to the definition, as a corporation is merely a legally-recognized group of persons." That's a literal acceptance of corporations being intrinsically tied to the state. It's the precise opposite of capitalism. If you don't like capitalism, fine, but then let's drop the pretense.

Blogger S1AL December 21, 2017 12:41 PM  

If you don't even understand what capitalism is, don't attempt to explain to me how corporations apply.

Blogger James Dixon December 21, 2017 1:51 PM  

> Corporations cannot 'die' or be stopped for breaking laws

Sure they can. The state can revoke or suspend their incorporation. The reasons this isn't done when corporations break the law is left as an exercise for the reader.

Blogger Dire Badger December 21, 2017 7:21 PM  

James Dixon wrote:> Corporations cannot 'die' or be stopped for breaking laws

Sure they can. The state can revoke or suspend their incorporation. The reasons this isn't done when corporations break the law is left as an exercise for the reader.


Valid Point. I literally cannot think of a counterargument.

Blogger maniacprovost December 21, 2017 7:30 PM  

The logical solution is to eliminate corporate taxes entirely, and make up for it by taxing:

Would that make the Corps and Gops support the GE more than this plan, or not? If not, what is the use of it?


If the only benefits of Trump's policies are more voters for Trump, then we don't need them.

But eliminating corporate taxes will help MAGA politically on several levels.
1) More, smaller corporations due to the romoval of inefficiency in inter-corporation trade.
---ergo, less lobbyists
2) More independent contractors
---more distributed wealth, and more right-leaning entrepreneurs
3) No more tax deductions for corporate donations to leftist front groups
4) Financial parasites, particularly traders/investment bankers/trust fund kids, will be hardest hit due to reclassification of income into higher tax brackets
5) More economic growth and investment in the US

Blogger maniacprovost December 21, 2017 7:31 PM  

The logical solution is to eliminate corporate taxes entirely, and make up for it by taxing:

Would that make the Corps and Gops support the GE more than this plan, or not? If not, what is the use of it?


If the only benefits of Trump's policies are more voters for Trump, then we don't need them.

But eliminating corporate taxes will help MAGA politically on several levels.
1) More, smaller corporations due to the romoval of inefficiency in inter-corporation trade.
---ergo, less lobbyists
2) More independent contractors
---more distributed wealth, and more right-leaning entrepreneurs
3) No more tax deductions for corporate donations to leftist front groups
4) Financial parasites, particularly traders/investment bankers/trust fund kids, will be hardest hit due to reclassification of income into higher tax brackets
5) More economic growth and investment in the US

Blogger James Dixon December 21, 2017 8:29 PM  

Google error. Let's try again.

> I literally cannot think of a counterargument.

Hypothetically, it's a valid recourse, or I wouldn't have mentioned it. But to my knowledge (which is admittedly not complete) there is not one single modern example of it having been done. The closest examples I know of are the various anti-trust breakups and bankruptcies (like Enron, WorldCom, and Arthur Andersen) due to fraud.

You'd also have to bar the board members and executives from holding equivalent positions at other companies for it to be effective.

Anonymous John Mitchell December 23, 2017 3:46 PM  

Again, I ask, what does Steve Keen say about this new tax law?

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts