Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

Recommended Photo Store
 
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
 
 
 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Tax Policy Killing Our Manufacturing Base

    Posted by Carl from Chicago on October 25th, 2010 (All posts by )

    Business Week is a venerable magazine that I was only minutes away from canceling because their content was the typical irrelevant journalistic crap when recently they were taken over by Bloomberg.  All the sudden I would say now that Bloomberg / BusinessWeek is the single most useful magazine I subscribe to, more valuable than Forbes, Fortune, or Barron’s.

    Their articles are in-depth and hard hitting.  Rather than assume that you are a “lay” or “casual” reader, Bloomberg does actual research and writes for sophisticated readers wanting to learn more about a topic that they have some familiarity with.  Also rarely do they use the journalistic old-hat trick of trying to link every story to some sort of “man on the street”.

    Bloomberg wrote an excellent article titled “Google 2.4% Rate Shows How $60 billion Lost to Tax Loopholes“.  While the US corporate income tax rate is the highest in the developed world at 35% (we are neck-in-neck with Japan, but they have proposals to reduce their rate) certain industries in particular can use loopholes to avoid paying virtually any tax at all.

    Google uses a strategy known as “Double Dutch” which moves income through a number of subsidiaries in Ireland, the Netherlands, and Bermuda to avoid paying US taxes.  Theoretically they are “deferring” taxes to some future period, but they can defer them forever by never bringing the cash back into the United States.

    This sort of activity is most suited to those types of companies with intellectual property, and if possible, some sort of world wide presence (although this is not really required).  It is not a co-incidence that the US fields some of the most competitive companies in this space including pharmaceuticals, technology and finance.

    What isn’t discussed here nor typically understood is the same forces that provide a competitive advantage through low (effective) taxation to the above types of companies provide a disadvantage to those types of companies unable to reduce taxes due to the same types of arrangements and must pay the punishing US corporate tax rate.  Any wonder why heavy manufacturing sets up elsewhere around the world than in the US; it is much more difficult to do these sorts of tax arrangements if you have a physically intensive type of operation such as manufacturing, so they have fewer opportunities to reduce the tax burden.

    Remember that good tax policy has 2 key elements:
    – it collects the planned revenue amount
    – it does not significantly distort economic behavior

    Through the use of transfer pricing and other loopholes involving multiple countries our tax policy is effectively collecting nothing for Google, and little for many other similar companies such as pharmaceuticals.  Thus the policy is failing on that front.

    And the burden of corporate tax collections fall on other companies, making them less effective, and impacting corporate decision making on the margins to not invest further in the USA in many cases, thus distorting economic activity.

    Hats off to Bloomberg BusinessWeek for such a well written article, putting into understandable terms the use of loopholes that enables Google to pay virtually nothing while many other US companies are hammered with the highest rates in the developed world.

    Cross posted at LITGM

     

    4 Responses to “Tax Policy Killing Our Manufacturing Base”

    1. Michael Kennedy Says:

      Carly Fiorina has tried to explain this to the California electorate with the success that would be expected. I don’t know if she tried to explain it in Spanish, as well.

    2. Robert Schwartz Says:

      I thought good tax policy redistributed income to the poor.

    3. Dan from Madison Says:

      Robert Schwartz – lol.

    4. Phil Says:

      No, actually, this one redistributes jobs away from the poor. Then they get to experience Funemployment!

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.