Duties are easy. Brokerage is the pain. A fifty dollar part, or a two thousand dollar part have similar brokerage costs. Duty is a percentage of value.
Duties are easy. Brokerage is the pain. A fifty dollar part, or a two thousand dollar part have similar brokerage costs. Duty is a percentage of value.
loosecannon said:Ok, but guys-who is right, my wife or me? LOL
Doesn't matter the question, your wife is always right.
loosecannon said:Ralph Nader (remember him?) advocates an "ethical tax" and how it works is that there is an import tax on everything built outside the USA and the tax % is on a sliding scale based on how close your countries manufacturers' standards are to American manufacturing standards. If you pay your workers nothing, have poor safety standards or use processes banned in the USA, your products are taxed heavily. If you have similar standards (such as Canada) than you are taxed much lower. This encourages the world to raise their standard of living for their workers (if they want to sell to the US) and discourages a country (cough,China) from dumping their crap in America.
This is the first I've heard of this but I've always loved this idea. Worker's pay isn't as important for me because fair wages vary per country but the safety/environmental standards would level the playing feel.
If your country has a economic advantage, be it cheaper labor, higher standards, more specialization.....let's trade alll day! But you shouldn't be able to kill jobs/ funnel money out of the US because you're turning your country into a wasteland / killing your people.
In reply to Enyar :
We buy a lot of stuff from countries that have higher standards than America. Finland for example has a much higher literacy level than America much lower infant mortality rate, higher standard of living and better health care. Yet most American made car/ truck airbags are made there. Oh, and they are taller than Americans
Same with Germany. And a very high percentage of seatbelts in American made cars/trucks are made there. Oh and they are taller than Americans.
SVreX said:I really doubt you could charge a Federal sales tax on component materials and labor used for manufacturing for resale.
Businesses Don't pay tax, or charge it. They collect it.
So, a 2 % sales tax on the purchases they made to manufacture their product would equal a 2 % hike in prices to the consumer. But wait...
That assumes a manufacturer takes a raw material and converts it directly into a saleable product. They don't.
There are multiple layers in the manufacturing process. The materials may pass through many different component manufacturers before they reach their final destination. If the 2% was added at every step in the process, it could easily mean 10%, or even 20% price increase by the time the product got to the end line user (who would get to pay 2% AGAIN!). It would create price wars with manufacturers rushing to purchase their component materials from overseas countries that don't charge sales tax.
It would also be a nightmare to implement with services companies that are not set up to collect sales tax. Imagine your plumber, or your cleaning lady, or your lawn boy trying to collect sales tax then figure out how to remit it to the government. Small businesses would be slaughtered.
Now your are starting to see the benefit of a national sales tax. Let’s say the airbag you buy for your Ford is made in Finland and costs $100 plus shipping to the factory in America$10. Import duty$ $13 plus the 2% national sales tax. $2.46 Ford will pay $125.46 for each sir bag.
But if Ford built their own factory here in America they could buy the materials for $$27.92 a 2% sales tax would put the cost of that airbag at $28.48 leaving $96.98 for the cost of a state of the art factory and profit.
I have no idea if those numbers are even close. But about 50% of any car made in America is foreign made. Labor really isn’t a factor anymore because most jobs will be done by robots. Who’s operating costs are about the same any place in the world.
GameboyRMH said:Robbie said:I'm reading a book currently called 'sapiens'. Its an interesting look at humans in their history on the planet.
One point made in the book is that current political battle in the world is mostly based on the logical disconnect between freedom and equality. If we're all free we are absolutely not equal, and if we are all equal we are absolutely not free. So where/how is the line drawn between the two? You can probably pick a spot on the scale for all in this thread (and I actually think you would find us all to be quite similar all said).
Interesting to consider.
Very true. You could also look at it as a balance between theoretical freedom (freedom as discussed in your book) and practical freedom (equality). There is a tradeoff between the two. The improve practical freedom, or maximize the "agency" (as Marx would call it) of the average person, you must impose artificial rules and limit theoretical freedom. If you maximize theoretical freedom, equality will be minimized. If you asked people to pick a spot though, they'd be all over the map. I'm very much on the practical freedom/equality side and Nick Comstock, I don't think he'd disagree, is very much on the theoretical freedom side. Then you have communists and fascists who've gone so far that they've wrapped around into a nether-zone where both are very low.
Practical freedom/equality is good for everyone or at the very least, the vast majority. What is theoretical freedom good for? What's the point or practical benefit of having a very free market? Should our economy work for the benefit of as much of humanity as possible, or should it be set up to allow for an elite cadre of super-winners to reap most of the rewards for being maybe a little better and certainly a whole lot luckier than most of humanity?
It's been a few days, does anyone think they may have an answer to this?
TL;DR
I think in general rich PEOPLE pay taxes. Big corporations don't. In fact, many large corporations receive money from the government.
2015 numbers from the treasury website indicate that $1.22T was given back in taxes which is bigger than the entire discretionary US budget for 2015 ($1.11T).
Its all legal and kosher with loopholes created by campaign contributions to buy the legislators, but if those big corps like WalMart, Apple, Kaiser Permanente, ExxonMobil, BP, and other corporations actually paid taxes like other "rich" people, we could have paid for everyone to get a 4-year degree, pay off all student loan debt, replace Flint's water infrastructure, AND have enough surplus to build Trump's mexi-phobia wall.
Our priorities are kinda whacked.
Curtis said:TL;DR
I think in general rich PEOPLE pay taxes. Big corporations don't. In fact, many large corporations receive money from the government.
2015 numbers from the treasury website indicate that $1.22T was given back in taxes which is bigger than the entire discretionary US budget for 2015 ($1.11T).
Its all legal and kosher with loopholes created by campaign contributions to buy the legislators, but if those big corps like WalMart, Apple, Kaiser Permanente, ExxonMobil, BP, and other corporations actually paid taxes like other "rich" people, we could have paid for everyone to get a 4-year degree, pay off all student loan debt, replace Flint's water infrastructure, AND have enough surplus to build Trump's mexi-phobia wall.
Our priorities are kinda whacked.
The corporations would still not "pay" tax. WE would pay it through the form of higher prices.
The corporations are not going to give up their profit margins.
I don't know why this concept doesn't seem to be understood by a big chunk of the population.
In reply to z31maniac :
Mega Corporations don’t have to make Giant profits every year. In fact some don’t look at Sears for an example.
In reply to frenchyd :
Sears is circling the drain and had been for years. Not the best example to bring up.
frenchyd said:In reply to Enyar :
We buy a lot of stuff from countries that have higher standards than America. Finland for example has a much higher literacy level than America much lower infant mortality rate, higher standard of living and better health care. Yet most American made car/ truck airbags are made there. Oh, and they are taller than Americans
Same with Germany. And a very high percentage of seatbelts in American made cars/trucks are made there. Oh and they are taller than Americans.
Ok? What are you getting at? These countries would not be penalized with a higher import tariff.
frenchyd said:SVreX said:I really doubt you could charge a Federal sales tax on component materials and labor used for manufacturing for resale.
Businesses Don't pay tax, or charge it. They collect it.
So, a 2 % sales tax on the purchases they made to manufacture their product would equal a 2 % hike in prices to the consumer. But wait...
That assumes a manufacturer takes a raw material and converts it directly into a saleable product. They don't.
There are multiple layers in the manufacturing process. The materials may pass through many different component manufacturers before they reach their final destination. If the 2% was added at every step in the process, it could easily mean 10%, or even 20% price increase by the time the product got to the end line user (who would get to pay 2% AGAIN!). It would create price wars with manufacturers rushing to purchase their component materials from overseas countries that don't charge sales tax.
It would also be a nightmare to implement with services companies that are not set up to collect sales tax. Imagine your plumber, or your cleaning lady, or your lawn boy trying to collect sales tax then figure out how to remit it to the government. Small businesses would be slaughtered.
Now your are starting to see the benefit of a national sales tax. Let’s say the airbag you buy for your Ford is made in Finland and costs $100 plus shipping to the factory in America$10. Import duty$ $13 plus the 2% national sales tax. $2.46 Ford will pay $125.46 for each sir bag.
But if Ford built their own factory here in America they could buy the materials for $$27.92 a 2% sales tax would put the cost of that airbag at $28.48 leaving $96.98 for the cost of a state of the art factory and profit.
I have no idea if those numbers are even close. But about 50% of any car made in America is foreign made. Labor really isn’t a factor anymore because most jobs will be done by robots. Who’s operating costs are about the same any place in the world.
Sorry Frenchy, I hesitate to call you a troll because your threads are highly entertaining but this makes no sense. Where are you pulling these numbers from and why are they builing in Finland if it's cheaper to build in the US? What does this have to do anything?
What happened to Buffett's secret to not paying taxes? Did I miss that post?
GameboyRMH said:GameboyRMH said:Robbie said:I'm reading a book currently called 'sapiens'. Its an interesting look at humans in their history on the planet.
One point made in the book is that current political battle in the world is mostly based on the logical disconnect between freedom and equality. If we're all free we are absolutely not equal, and if we are all equal we are absolutely not free. So where/how is the line drawn between the two? You can probably pick a spot on the scale for all in this thread (and I actually think you would find us all to be quite similar all said).
Interesting to consider.
Very true. You could also look at it as a balance between theoretical freedom (freedom as discussed in your book) and practical freedom (equality). There is a tradeoff between the two. The improve practical freedom, or maximize the "agency" (as Marx would call it) of the average person, you must impose artificial rules and limit theoretical freedom. If you maximize theoretical freedom, equality will be minimized. If you asked people to pick a spot though, they'd be all over the map. I'm very much on the practical freedom/equality side and Nick Comstock, I don't think he'd disagree, is very much on the theoretical freedom side. Then you have communists and fascists who've gone so far that they've wrapped around into a nether-zone where both are very low.
Practical freedom/equality is good for everyone or at the very least, the vast majority. What is theoretical freedom good for? What's the point or practical benefit of having a very free market? Should our economy work for the benefit of as much of humanity as possible, or should it be set up to allow for an elite cadre of super-winners to reap most of the rewards for being maybe a little better and certainly a whole lot luckier than most of humanity?
It's been a few days, does anyone think they may have an answer to this?
I'm not sure I understand the question but the reason to maximize theoretical freedom/ a free market is because you can't regulate it much without corporations/individuals finding loopholes or moving overseas. Tax corporations and individuals heavily and there are too many options for them outside of the US for them to comply.
In reply to frenchyd :
You are assuming Ford wants to be in the airbag manufacturing business. Very bad assumption.
Ford WANTS a healthy supply chain. They have no need to take Takata sized liability issues in house.
They would not build an airbag plant to save a few dollars. They would simply up the cost to consumers.
Curtis said:TL;DR
I think in general rich PEOPLE pay taxes. Big corporations don't. In fact, many large corporations receive money from the government.
2015 numbers from the treasury website indicate that $1.22T was given back in taxes which is bigger than the entire discretionary US budget for 2015 ($1.11T).
Its all legal and kosher with loopholes created by campaign contributions to buy the legislators, but if those big corps like WalMart, Apple, Kaiser Permanente, ExxonMobil, BP, and other corporations actually paid taxes like other "rich" people, we could have paid for everyone to get a 4-year degree, pay off all student loan debt, replace Flint's water infrastructure, AND have enough surplus to build Trump's mexi-phobia wall.
Our priorities are kinda whacked.
Why tax corporations at all? Tax the individuals that profit from these corporations.
Enyar said:I'm not sure I understand the question but the reason to maximize theoretical freedom/ a free market is because you can't regulate it much without corporations/individuals finding loopholes or moving overseas. Tax corporations and individuals heavily and there are too many options for them outside of the US for them to comply.
I think you're correct in principle but wrong in scale - you underestimate how difficult, inconvenient, and potentially disadvantageous it is for a company to move just for tax/regulatory reasons...they won't move that easily, and the USA's taxes and regulations are very much on the lighter side. Heck, Canada has Taxes and Regulations, and every company hasn't fled over the border yet. And most American (as in Estadounidense) companies haven't fled over the border to Mexico either despite there being a similarly large apparent advantage. I think the US could afford plenty more taxes and regulations before they'd trigger any meaningful industrial exodus.
wait....'we' should put up with and have to navigate an overly complex tax code that is ripe with corruption so that tax accountants can keep their job? How silly is that? Our society/economy is constantly evolving....either you keep up and find a new skill/job or lose everything. This has been happening since forever.
how about just cut spending....Less money spent means less money needed from the workers. Taxes will be lowered for every single person. I think that is fair.
GameboyRMH said:Enyar said:I'm not sure I understand the question but the reason to maximize theoretical freedom/ a free market is because you can't regulate it much without corporations/individuals finding loopholes or moving overseas. Tax corporations and individuals heavily and there are too many options for them outside of the US for them to comply.
I think you're correct in principle but wrong in scale - you underestimate how difficult, inconvenient, and potentially disadvantageous it is for a company to move just for tax/regulatory reasons...they won't move that easily, and the USA's taxes and regulations are very much on the lighter side. Heck, Canada has Taxes and Regulations, and every company hasn't fled over the border yet. And most American (as in Estadounidense) companies haven't fled over the border to Mexico either despite there being a similarly large apparent advantage. I think the US could afford plenty more taxes and regulations before they'd trigger any meaningful industrial exodus.
It really depends on the company but you would be surprised how easy it is. Intercompany loans, transfer pricing, royalties, are all ways of shifting profits. I do these things on a monthly basis.
Nick Comstock said:In reply to frenchyd :
Sears is circling the drain and had been for years. Not the best example to bring up.
at one point Sears was the Amazon of the day. Part of the DOW.
My point is even big companies like GM can be mismanaged to the point where they disappear
In reply to frenchyd :
Such as Sears is doing, however you used it as an example of a mega Corp that isn't making big profits every year. True, but that is because they are losing money hand over fist barely surviving. It's been a long time since they were Amazon.
Frenchy, the company you're looking for is Tesla.
onemanarmy said:wait....'we' should put up with and have to navigate an overly complex tax code that is ripe with corruption so that tax accountants can keep their job? How silly is that? Our society/economy is constantly evolving....either you keep up and find a new skill/job or lose everything. This has been happening since forever.
how about just cut spending....Less money spent means less money needed from the workers. Taxes will be lowered for every single person. I think that is fair.
Note: I did not say we should, I said we will, because no one will write or vote for a job killing bill.
I'm all for significantly simplifying tax law.
frenchyd said:In reply to z31maniac :
Mega Corporations don’t have to make Giant profits every year. In fact some don’t look at Sears for an example.
And? How is that germane to the discussion?
What does a slowly dying business have to do with the fact that corporations don't pay tax? They merely collect it from the consumer to pass on to the gov't.
A see a lot of people saying that corporations don't pay taxes but merely pass them on to consumers. That's only true when there is perfectly inelastic demand for what they're selling:
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~ref/econ101e.html
onemanarmy said:wait....'we' should put up with and have to navigate an overly complex tax code that is ripe with corruption so that tax accountants can keep their job? How silly is that? Our society/economy is constantly evolving....either you keep up and find a new skill/job or lose everything. This has been happening since forever.
how about just cut spending....Less money spent means less money needed from the workers. Taxes will be lowered for every single person. I think that is fair.
Just cut spending? On what? Military defense? Useless military spending on obsolete weapons. Corporation welfare like the banking rescue?
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
