Every company that practices illegal/unethical tax avoidance should be taken to the woodshed. Whether said company supports political party A or political party B is irrelevant.

 

Define illegal or unethical in the context of this thread.

I recall the very first thing my tax law professor told us in 1977 was that it was the duty of every individual and entity to practice tax avoidance and that it was the accountant's responsibility to maximize the avoidance. Kind of hung me up until he explained that he meant legal methods of minimizing taxes vs tax evasion which was accomplished by not following tax laws. If Apple followed the regs I'm fine with them avoiding taxes. As stated above, it's the lawmaker's responsibility to close tax loopholes, and there are many in both corporate and individual tax laws that I would support being closed.

 

Agreed. It boggles my mind that so many people have such an issue with corporations and individuals simply following the tax laws. Me thinks a lot of it has to do with envy or jealousy that they aren't able to do the same.

Agreed. It boggles my mind that so many people have such an issue with corporations and individuals simply following the tax laws. Me thinks a lot of it has to do with envy or jealousy that they aren't able to do the same.

 

The only issue I have with it is if (like the CEO of GE) they are outspoken proponents of Obama and his policies. I've said it before ANYONE, regardless of income, who backs raising taxes on anyone and then does ANYTHING (even legal and ethical things) to reduce their tax obligation is hypocritical.

Every company that practices illegal/unethical tax avoidance should be taken to the woodshed. Whether said company supports political party A or political party B is irrelevant.

 

Illegal I agree but it doesn't seem to apply here, at least not from what I've read. Unethical legal tax avoidance? No such thing, particularly when it comes to corporations. If they left legal taxes on the table THAT would be unethical.

Illegal I agree but it doesn't seem to apply here, at least not from what I've read. Unethical legal tax avoidance? No such thing, particularly when it comes to corporations. If they left legal taxes on the table THAT would be unethical.

There's a difference between taking a tax deduction on your 1040 and parking billions of dollars at a postal box in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes to Uncle Sam.

 

What we ought to do with some of these "U.S." companies is load up their file cabinets and office furniture onto a garbage barge, then push said barge in the general direction of the Cayman Islands or Bermuda or wherever.

There's a difference between taking a tax deduction on your 1040 and parking billions of dollars at a postal box in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes to Uncle Sam.

 

What we ought to do with some of these "U.S." companies is load up their file cabinets and office furniture onto a garbage barge, then push said barge in the general direction of the Cayman Islands or Bermuda or wherever.

 

So your issue is with the IRS, and not the individual companies...And no, there is no difference between a 1040 deduction and a corporation taking advantage of legal tax avoidance strategies.

There's a difference between taking a tax deduction on your 1040 and parking billions of dollars at a postal box in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes to Uncle Sam.

 

What we ought to do with some of these "U.S." companies is load up their file cabinets and office furniture onto a garbage barge, then push said barge in the general direction of the Cayman Islands or Bermuda or wherever.

 

No, there isn't. It's everyone's responsibility to minimize their taxes legally. You don't like it, contact your representatives to urge that tax laws be changed.

Question for ya twotoplace: You're CEO of a huge corporation, you make roughly $100M a year. Are you going to take tax deductions on your personal income tax return or are you going to just file without claiming any deductions?

There's a difference between taking a tax deduction on your 1040 and parking billions of dollars at a postal box in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes to Uncle Sam.

 

What we ought to do with some of these "U.S." companies is load up their file cabinets and office furniture onto a garbage barge, then push said barge in the general direction of the Cayman Islands or Bermuda or wherever.

 

You're doing a disservice to whatever point it is you're making if you aren't going to address why a company would voluntarily put themselves at a comparative disadvantage by paying more than they are legally obligated to.

 

There's an argument to be made for a more sensible tax policy and a strong component of this is that no entity is going to pay more than it's required to. It would be asinine if we each volunteered our own rate.

 

The US has one of the higher published corporate tax rates but one of the lower amounts of revenue from it, largely due to its convoluted nature. It would make sense to simplify it, make it less susceptible to run-arounds, and lower the rate to a more competitive level.

No, there isn't. It's everyone's responsibility to minimize their taxes legally. You don't like it, contact your representatives to urge that tax laws be changed.

Unfortunately, we're talking about more than U.S. tax law here. In Apple's case, a central issue is the tax law, or lack of it, in Ireland.

 

Apple Senate Hearing Reveals Company Paid Just 2 Percent Tax On $74 Billion In Income

 

So go ahead and keep defending this tactic.

You're doing a disservice to whatever point it is you're making if you aren't going to address why a company would voluntarily put themselves at a comparative disadvantage by paying more than they are legally obligated to.

 

There's an argument to be made for a more sensible tax policy and a strong component of this is that no entity is going to pay more than it's required to. It would be asinine if we each volunteered our own rate.

 

The US has one of the higher published corporate tax rates but one of the lower amounts of revenue from it, largely due to its convoluted nature. It would make sense to simplify it, make it less susceptible to run-arounds, and lower the rate to a more competitive level.

Again, this is a multinational issue and can't be solved simply by changing the U.S. tax code.

Again, this is a multinational issue and can't be solved simply by changing the U.S. tax code.

 

There's a component of that, but I disagree. What solution is it that you're proposing?

Question for ya twotoplace: You're CEO of a huge corporation, you make roughly $100M a year. Are you going to take tax deductions on your personal income tax return or are you going to just file without claiming any deductions?

Since the U.S. Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, has declared that corporations are people, maybe we should start charging these unpatriotic corporations with treason.

There's a component of that, but I disagree. What solution is it that you're proposing?

Any solution would have to be multinational. Not impossible.

Any solution would have to be multinational. Not impossible.

 

Like what?