Skip to comments.Congress Targets Tax Havens (Republicans Betray Their Principles - again)
Posted on 07/31/2002 7:38:31 PM PDT by Action-AmericaEdited on 07/31/2002 7:47:36 PM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
With major corporate responsibility legislation passed, elected officials are turning to a new target -- business tax evaders -- in a scramble to convince voters they are cracking down on corporate wrongdoing.
Senate hearings today will touch on the topic, but House members got a head start last week. First, they overwhelmingly approved a corporate responsibility bill drafted largely by Senate Democrats. Then, while debating a less-noticed provision in the president's homeland security proposal, 110 Republican members defied their party's leaders to confront another brand of questionable corporate behavior: companies locating overseas to escape U.S. taxes.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
It's tax AVOIDANCE; you know, what every taxpayer and business legally does.
Suggestion to Whitewashed Postings owners to avoid the appearance of hypocricy: call your corporate auditors and tell them you'd like to stop avoiding taxes, claim no business expenses, and pay the maximum taxes possible. With luck, you morons will be out of business in a year.
I hope it has some real teeth to it.
Odds are good that many of these scams are also involved in laundering of illegal drug money.
For all the money that's involved, there really hasn't been any BIG exposé of corrupt money laundering, bribery, etc. etc.
You know it's gotta be there, but they only fry the little fish.
And how do they plan to ENFORCE what they pass?
You have hit upon the real problem with this legislation. If they try to enforce this and other wealth punitive legislation, these wealthy corporations will be forced to take the bulk of their operation offshore, including jobs. Then how will the responsibility dodging Republicans that vote for this tripe respond? I can hear them now, "I really didn't want to trash the US economy, but I feared for my reelection more than the economy." Selfish b@$+@#d$.
Minimizing one's tax liability using legal means isn't "tax evasion". It's common sense.
The colonies rebelled over less than a 4% tax rate on stamps. Don't you think that what we pay nowadays (over 40%) is a little unreasonable? If not, then you can take your socialist wasteland and keep it.
Note to William- minimizing tax using legal means does not make a "scam".
Why do you assume than "many" entities which choose to minimize their tax liabilility using legal means are involved in money laundering and drugs?
Hell I don't know one person who doesn't minimize their taxes. I'm damn sure "many" of them aren't drug lords!!!
This, mlibertarianj, bears repeating:
...the congress is pushing economic Jonestown Kool-Aid!
GOP pollster Glen Bolger said it made sense that lawmakers would dodge a tough vote when given the opportunity.
In fact, that seems to be all that most elected Republicans do any more - just dodge tough votes. Apparently, many House Republicans have been attending the DUH-bya School of Political Dodging, in that they:
This article demonstrates that it's time that we start electing new Republicans, because the ones in power today (including DUH-bya) d@#n sure aren't doing the job.
Good. The corporate Taliban who have renounced their U.S. citizenship because they're tax deadbeats can seek refuge in Pakistan for all I care.
We can raise our tariffs and lower our domestic corporate income tax and bestow the blessings of our Constitutional free market to those who are proud to be American.
Because they consistanly relocate to the "tax havens" utilized by the money launderers because the banking laws are lax.
Birds of a feather, flock together.
YES! I think so! I would be interested in knowing what you feel is a reasonable tax. 40%? 35%? what?
Why are they avoiding paying any taxes here in the US?
They aren't avoiding all taxes, they're minimizing what they pay in tax. Why in the world would a business pay 15 times as much for office supplies if it could get the same product for far less? It seems rather odd that you would not understand this.
And they expect a tax rebate?
No, they don't. The rebate was for individuals, not business. Further, the amount of that rebate was trivial to the businesses in this context.
Tax havens are an anathema to every citizen who pays taxes!
I would like to know why you think this.
If you had a choice of living on one side of a street that had $1500 monthly property tax bills or across the street with exact same amenities with a $100 tax bill, which would you choose? How is this any different that the situation in the article?