Mitt: I Have Been In Business 25 years, and have no idea what Obama is talking about

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Badmutha, Oct 5, 2012.

  1. Badmutha

    Badmutha New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    5,463
    Likes Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So said the successful Businessman/CEO to the Community Organizer who never ran so much as a lemonade stand.....
    I have been in Business for about 20 years now.....but unlike Mitt, I know exactly what the economic (D)unce in the Whitehouse was talking about......

    Obama is talking about the complete lie and utter fraud that is Liberalism....specifically the decades old Democrat LIE that US Businesses receive some sort of special Tax Break in return for shipping jobs overseas. When the truth is the "Shipping Jobs Overseas Tax Cut" only exists in Democrat Imaginationland.......

    .....if anyone believes otherwise, feel free to cite the tax code........http://www.irs.gov/Tax-Professionals/Tax-Code,-Regulations-and-Official-Guidance

    Let this Willfull Liberal Ignorance be healed........
    .
    .
    .
     
  2. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When you offshore a business, through creating a foreign subsidiary, that business is free from being taxed by the IRS.


    Now I am, not sure what Obama said, but certainly there is no tax "deduction" to moving a division out of the country, but there are tax advantages.
     
  3. iJoeTime

    iJoeTime Banned

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    3,277
    Likes Received:
    71
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mitt Translation: When I shipped all those Jobs overseas, I didn't get any tax breaks.
     
  4. sec

    sec Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    31,639
    Likes Received:
    7,735
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have offshore offices. If you want money repatriated then make it attractive to do that. Instead of whining about keeping offshore business off shore, which is what most places do, change the corporate tax laws to encourage repatriating money. Why should I ship to Brazil from the USA when I can import directly into Brazil and run a Brazilian office? What is my enticement to run up costs and make myself less competitive?
     
  5. Badmutha

    Badmutha New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    5,463
    Likes Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Kind of like anyone and everyone that leaves the US......

    If there is a tax advantage.....its only a testament to the anti business climate Democrats have created here.....
    .
    .
     
  6. Windigo

    Windigo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    15,026
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is only an advantage because our tax code is punitive. It isn't 1946 we are no longer the only game in town free to have whatever tax code we feel like and still get economic investment. We compete for economic investment in a global market place. Our tax code has to be competitive with other nations.
     
  7. exotix

    exotix New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Messages:
    14,859
    Likes Received:
    101
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I thought Willard left Bain in 1999 ?
     
  8. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Okay. I am not sure when I said otherwise.
     
  9. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Indeed. Things no longer take months to ship overseas. Communication is instant. I think today's world is very, very different than the one where we first constructed our corporate taxes.
     
  10. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In all fairness, companies have been offshoring as long as I can remember, through administrations and legislative bodies of both major parties.
     
  11. Serfin' USA

    Serfin' USA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    24,183
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By the same token, trying to attract businesses that move offshore is kind of futile unless you plan on dramatically reducing goverment spending first.

    If a business is best run offshore, lowering the tax burden here isn't likely to attract it here unless taxation is zero or close to it.

    Both parties seem to want to chase offshore businesses for one reason or another, but it's a lot like people who complain about jobs that get outsourced.

    Tax havens and developing countries have comparative advantages that we don't. Dramatically reducing taxation comes at a cost to public amenities and infrastructure.

    So, instead of trying to bring back businesses that are low skill or can easily be operated outside of the country, it makes more sense to build up our human capital by better educating our workforce. We already have the comparative advantage for high skill labor, so we should play to our strengths rather than trying to shore up disadvantages in areas we'll never be able to compete on.

    It's as if both parties forget how capitalism actually works.
     
  12. JoeSixpack

    JoeSixpack New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2012
    Messages:
    10,940
    Likes Received:
    72
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Technically you are correct, there isn't a specific tax break for sending jobs over seas, just like there isn't one for creating jobs here. Both were being disingenuous with their comments, as they both eluded the reality of the situation. What there is are tax breaks specifically in place for the express reasoning that they will help create jobs, so if a company is making use of these tax incentives, but not following through with their intended purpose, they are getting/benefiting from tax breaks even if they are shipping jobs over seas, and/or creating jobs in the wrong place.

    It's this non-specific language in the tax code that creates the majority of these loopholes which allow certain individuals or corporations (especially mega corporations who have the funding to pay off law makers to give them favorable treatment, through lobbying and blatant bribery tactics, yet I repeat myself) to get around the tax laws and therefore their actual tax obligation, while everybody else is required to fill the void for the 'gifts' these specific individuals/industries benefit from. It's all in the wording in most cases to make the law sound less draconian than it actually is, but it is an example of cronyism at it's best, and corporate entities that butter the right palms to obtain such unethical bonuses, have the advantages, a lessor connected individual and/or smaller companies do not.

    Of course this discussion wasn't intended to discuss reality so carry on with the partisan bickering that allows this nonsense to continue at the expense of the nations economic stability.
     
  13. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What you are talking about isn't offshoring. It's foreign partnership.
     
  14. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,883
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It would seem companies do get tax breaks for moving companies abroad and Republicans killed the bill which would also give tax breaks to companies who brought jobs back. I sure don't want to see Obama reelected, mostly because of his immigration plans. I think that will truly hurt this country. But this isn't right.



    Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked the No.1 item on the president's congressional "to-do-list," refusing to allow a vote on a bill that would give tax breaks for companies that "insource" jobs to the U.S. from overseas while eliminating tax deductions for companies that move jobs abroad.

    In voting against the bill, Republicans raised both substantive and procedural problems with the measure.

    The bill fell four votes short of the 60 needed to bring it to debate, with 42 voting against it. Four GOP senators -- Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine and Dean Heller of Nevada -- voted in favor of the bill.


    The Bring Jobs Home Act would provide a 20% tax break for the costs of moving jobs back to the United States and would rescind business expense deductions available to companies that are associated with the cost of moving operations overseas.

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, had warned Democrats before the vote that his party would want to amend the bill -- possibly with hot-button issues like repealing the health care reform law or extending the Bush-era tax cuts for all income levels.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, responded that those amendments were not germane to the bill and he would not allow votes on them.


    http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/politics/senate-bring-jobs-home-bill-blocked/index.html
     
  15. Badmutha

    Badmutha New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    5,463
    Likes Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Glad to see were all in agreement.......
    .
    .
     
  16. The Mello Guy

    The Mello Guy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    109,653
    Likes Received:
    37,410
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mitts interested in learning more about these tAx breaks...
     
  17. sec

    sec Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    31,639
    Likes Received:
    7,735
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would love to move support back into the USA but I would need to repatriate money earned in foreign nations in order to pay people here and those wages are higher. But, and I'm going to tick off some here but no country, and I mean no country supports their customers as well as Americans do. My support people are professionals and professional Americans do not need a fire lit underneath them while i must constantly light the flame in our foreign offices.

    Fortunately, the customer service expectation bar is much lower outside of the USA so having to be one tier above the rest is not too difficult vs here in the USA.

    But, given my druthers, and costs being equal or only 5% more, I'd run as much as possible from here and that would include importing my manufactured goods so we could re-inspect here and verify functionality and then export back out. ( QA is a foreign language in the rest of the world..............there I go ticking off others again) But, the costs to do that are too high because I would then need to realize that as income in the USA despite the product destined elsewhere.
     
  18. freakonature

    freakonature Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    10,885
    Likes Received:
    1,408
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Corporate HQs are high skill employers. More competitive tax codes are incentives to relocate corporate HQs here. Not tax breaks for special companies causing more clutter and central planning, but a nice even low flat rate across the board so that the chips naturally will fall to where they are most efficiently utilized.
     
  19. GraspingforPeace

    GraspingforPeace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Messages:
    14,162
    Likes Received:
    1,403
    Trophy Points:
    113
  20. sec

    sec Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    31,639
    Likes Received:
    7,735
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you could say that however if there were reduced EPA regs, licensing fees, inspections, OSHA an the list goes on then we could build here. I'm not saying that it's OK to dump waste into a river but it's has become too costly and complicated and thus manufacturing has left the USA.

    let's examine quickly how one simple silliness drives up costs for consumers

    if you have a phone line at your home it costs X. If you have that same 1 phone line in an office it costs 3X. It does not cost the telco any more money to provision or maintain the line as it's the same exact thing. But, the state P.U.C allows tariffs to be higher for business.

    So, businesses begin using cell phones or VOIP and telcos see a drop in revenue. So, they do things like drop unlimited data on mobile phones and come up with silly "share everything" plans etc which result in higher bills to the consumer.

    We want competition in the cable tv industry but regulations require that any competitor must carry the local tv stations or they don't get a license to operate. So, those local tv stations extort the competition because they know that the competitor is mandated to carry their channels or they get no license.

    There are many regulations that most of you are unaware of (and me too) which do nothing but drive up costs and hurt the consumer/economy. Restaurants have them, even the guy painting your car has an arms length list of regs.
     
  21. BroncoBilly

    BroncoBilly Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2004
    Messages:
    29,824
    Likes Received:
    355
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yeah and when I moved out of Kalifornia I must be cheating them out of taxes also. Some people will believe anything
     
  22. Windigo

    Windigo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    15,026
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And I read the same story and see that it is technically incorrect. That is why the idea of fact chekcers is absurd.
     
  23. JoeSixpack

    JoeSixpack New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2012
    Messages:
    10,940
    Likes Received:
    72
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not absurd just a little more complicated, since to be effective it would have to provide the democrat "facts", the republican "facts", and then the actual truth.
     
  24. Serfin' USA

    Serfin' USA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    24,183
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I understand what you're saying, but it sounds like American wages and taxes are worth the increase in quality.
     
  25. Serfin' USA

    Serfin' USA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2011
    Messages:
    24,183
    Likes Received:
    551
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd be in favor of that after first reducing spending.

    Right now, we're in too big of a debt hole to reduce taxation much.
     

Share This Page