Why isn't there an alternative minimum tax for corporations that prevents them from paying little or no tax?
Adam Gering and Aaron Brown have provided great answers, I won't restate what they covered.Is the base assumption that u201cthe Government just needs more moneyu201d and so we are trying to find every last nickel of value in the world to give to the Government to squander?If so, then yes a gross receipts tax would take a few more dollars from the few businesses that remained in the country. While almost every business that could, would move to another country to survive, and take all of the jobs with them. This would have an additional effect, that is, the loss of most all of the jobs in the country and the tax base the goes with them.Result: massive reduction in tax revenue, massive increase in welfare need.The technical term for that is u201cStupidu201d.If you just want the government to support everyone, then a 100% personal tax would be better, because then at least some taxpayers would still have jobs to contribute to the government.Or were you hoping to shift the burden of paying taxes to corporations and away from individuals?Right now many business are paying more in tax than they retain for themselves in free and clear profit (see Adam Gerings post), others pay taxes while not making any profit at all, a few might make more than they pay the government in taxes. Why is that wrong?Corporations contribute about 10% of the gross government revenue. Personal income taxes and payroll taxes contribute about 86u201388 of the federal governments revenue.If you doubled the tax rates for corporations, effectively taking away every small profit any business might hope to keep, you might get 20% of the Federal Governments gluttonous appetite, the first year. When those business quit (why risk everything you have, commit all of your time, resources and effort, if all you can hope for is u201cNOTHING TO SHOW FOR ITu201d). The second year will be less business taxes, less personal taxes (because of the lost jobs). Are you still tracking this? I'm going slow so you can keep up.Result: massive reduction in tax revenue, massive increase in welfare need.The technical term for this remains the same: u201cStupidu201d.The US Gross Domestic Product is 18 trillion. Federal taxes are over 3 Trillion. That doesn't include state taxes, sales taxes, local taxes, property taxes, or all the other taxes that get paid out of every dollar that we work for.Why should the federal government take over 1/6th of everything that the citizens work to produce?What do they do with it? Since the start of the massive growth of government, they promised to end poverty, but now they simply want to keep everyone AT Poverty. We have more people at or below the poverty line today than we did 40 years ago. They promised to end energy dependence, are we less dependent on foreign energy sources than 30 years ago? No.I doubt you could name a single problem the government has u201cpromised to solveu201d that they have solved.War on drugs? NoFree and useful education? NoHave they created better opportunity for the pursuit of happiness? NoHow about general prosperity for the citizens? Not by any measure.Thy canu2019t do it with 3.3 trillion dollars of new tax revenue, and with an additional 3 trillion dollars of new debt, JUST THIS YEAR. The numbers were about the same last year, and the year before. That is just the Federal spending, State and Local spending are about equal to the Federal.Do you believe that if they had just 1 billion dollars more, thy could accomplish all, some, or at least one of those goals?If you do, and you think that business should pay it then go start a business, pay your taxes and kick in that extra amount you were hoping that someone else was going to.Come on, Person Up!! Be part of the solution instead of just complaining about the problem.Government is hashing this out, because they know they have already maximized their leach opportunity. They have sucked every last drop of value from Commerce that exists, there is no unturned stone, no last little bit of fat left on the bones of Commerce. If they add just one more straw, one more tax, one more administrative fee, they will break the back of the economy, and then it is a long dry desert walk with no pack animal to ride.The problem before Congress in not how to take a greater portion theyu2019ve already done all of that can be done. If they did any more, that result would again be u201cStupidu201d.They are trying to find a way to allow for business to increase (raising the economy) without giving up even a small part of the tax money they are now receiving.This next part may be foreign to you, and if it is, I am sorry, I apologize that our educational system is so designed as to keep you from seeing eternal truths.Business is the backbone of Commerce, and Commerce is the economy, and a growing economy increases prosperity for all. A stagnant economy stratifies wealth, and a depleting economy creates economic free fall. This country could right all the economic problems that exist, of the economy was free to grow and flourish naturally. Free markets, unrestrained trade, and no barriers to entry into commerce.Obviously, Government has an eating problem, and even more obvious, it is powerless to control itself. Our Government is suffering from Prader-Willi Syndrome, doesnu2019t have the self control to stop it and is tearing the economy apart.It has eaten all cookies, devoured the, yet to be baked, cookie dough, and is now licking ever last little smudge of dough from the bowl and the beaters.What if we shifted the focus, instead of u201chow to feed the beastu201d, we look at u201chow to control the problemu201d?Do you want a bigger more robust economy, where more people can be gainfully employed? Feel a sense of accomplishment and self worth? Is paid for the efforts, and has discretionary income? Where everyone gains? Where universal prosperity could exist?Give taxpayers, including businesses 10% more net spendable, across the board tax cuts, and far less government spending.What if the Government didnu2019t spend billions on college grants, for things like finding out how a beer can coozie works (YEah, its real) or millions for parties. like the one in Vegas for bureaucrats from the GSA. That would instead be used by tax payers to buy goods and services, boosting the economy and getting some value for yourselves while doing it. Who would prthe services? The people, you and me, some that canu2019t now get a job because the taxes are too high to employ them. What goods? the goods that can be made by willing hands that arenu2019t afraid to start producing for fear of losing their safety net of welfare.If taxes were lower on business, the cost of business goods would be lower, meaning you could afford to buy more of them. If you bought more of them, the business could afford to produce more, or innovate more. Even an idiot can see the reason Apple can create a new and better Iphone every year is because they get paid really well to do it (profit is a righteous motivator). You donu2019t hear so much about Intel these days, they are laying off employees and reducing production, because demand is down, which reduces the potential for innovation. Do we really think that business profit is bad?What is the trade off for the the Government?Less need to subsidize businesses since more buyers will support value. that reduces Government spending.Less cost for welfare since more people will be able to support themselves.Government could reduce their staff, allowing good smart government workers to become employed in the private sector, again creating value and growth in the economy instead of just sponging off if it. If Government cut 10% of their payroll because a robust economy was crying out for good hard working people to work then the cost of government would be reduced, drastically.What is to lose? Control.Government by its very definition is all about control (To govern, to limit).A free and open economy might not be a well trimmed, English topiary garden, it mgith not look like row after row of the same crop planted for as far as the eye can see. It would look a lot more like . . . Nature. Diverse, uncontrolled, unplanned, unregulated, and uneven, maybe with a few weeds, maybe an ugly bunch of vines, but far more healthy and sustainable, and infinitely more interesting and valuable.
