The whole idea of a “fair share” tax on overseas profits makes no sense. If a subsidiary of a U.S. based company does business in Europe and pays European taxes why should they also pay U.S. taxes on that income? Using the senator fauxcohantas logic, companies have a fair share to pay because they use infrastructure provided by the taxpayers. But they’re not using U.S. infrastructure for their European business. Maybe more inversions will lead to real tax reform and a general improvement in the business environment.
The idea is that any profits that end up in the US are taxed at the rates for the US. So, if you bring back any of the profits from overseas, which you do if the majority of your investors are also in the US, they get taxed at the ruinous corporate rate.
When the company "inverts," the investors suddenly do not have an investment in a US company - they have one in a foreign company. So overseas profits technically "stay" in the other country, and are only taxed at that country's rate. (US investors pay the same taxes still on dividends or capital gains - but those dividends or gains will be higher because the US doesn't take such a huge bite out up front.)
Inversions are happening more these days because the previous way to avoid the huge US tax bite was to establish subsidiaries in other countries - a "loophole" that has been mostly closed now. (Also, though, because the difference has become so much greater, with other countries figuring out that its better to attract MORE gold-laying geese, rather than butcher the one you have.)
 June 17, 2014 at 4:47pm
Islam has been at war with the non-islamic world for 1,300 years. Sometimes they’re winning and sometimes they’re losing but the war never ends. To think you can somehow negotiate an end to all of this really does border on insanity.
January 6, 2014 at 1:41pm
So now King joins my list of most despised Republicans, along with McCain, Graham, Ryan & Christie.
April 24, 2013 at 9:02pm
Every Republican who voted for this bill should be primaried. If they’re going to vote like democrats we probably would be better off without them.
Every one from both parties have to be kicked out on their asses.
Are they intentionally doing this to cause a revolt. When is the next mission to mars? Put everyone of them on it.
Name one thing that these Klingons don't tax.
Forget that, we know they are reading this and than they will tax it.
Actually....moot point, they already tax everything, now it's time to raise the rate.
November 6, 2012 at 5:47pm
Romney is the indispensable man. He’s got the competence, energy and ambition to fix so much of what’s broken. I hope he carries through on it.
August 19, 2012 at 4:31pm
Control of the Senate could come down to one seat and this idiot just threw it away.
It's not over yet. He has till 5pm tomorrow to pull out of the race. He's trained as an engineer.... why did he make stuff up? What report said women wouldn't get pregnant if raped. He was trying to defend the unborn. Trying to say that abortions due to rape are rare since raped women seldom get pregnant. Where did he get this info? We have to win in 2012. God, please guide us and heal our land.
August 15, 2012 at 4:26pm
Ammunition for the Death Panels? Obama’s way to fix the entitlement problem.
July 27, 2012 at 12:52am
We’d need 67 Mike Lee’s in the U.S. Senate to get a balance budget amendment (with teeth) passed. The only way to get it done is to craft an amendment and send it to the states, which can then call for a Constitutional Convention if this amendment isn’t passed by the Senate. Prior to reaching the magic number of 38 states approving the convention the self serving politicans in the Senate will pass the amendment to forestall the convention. I’d like to see the amendment specifiy that all federal mandates on the states are paid for by the federal government and subject to the spending cap.
I am not a big fan of the balanced budget amendment and here is why. We already have the mechanism for a balanced budget - Article 1 Section 8. The amendment idea reminds me of the leftist who screams for more gun laws to try to reign in criminals and their actions.
Since we cannot trust the government to live within the laws and constraints already in place, how can we trust them to be constrained by another law?
Why would we give them license to spend 18% of GDP (or some other #) when we know from past experience (think debt ceiling votes) a limit never means anything?
Why would we give them license to spend x% of GDP when the better thinking would be to see how close to 0% of GDP we can get (At the federal level).
If spending is constrained to those things in Article 1 Section 8, why do they need to spend 18% of GDP and why would we tell they could spend that much right off the bat?
Just like the term limit argument. We have a method for term limits - it is called an election.
The issue with either notion is that they both are ways for us not to have to do the hard work of keeping an eye on the government and will give many that same false sense of trusting the laws to keep them in line.
The only restraint that will ever work is a tireless population intent on keeping the gov't within the bounds of the Constitution - regardless of any new amendment.
We would be better served to repeal the 16th and 17th - they mark the starting line for the rac
May 10, 2012 at 9:16pm
Funniest comment so far. Thanks.
April 8, 2012 at 2:10pm
Ms. Schultz is actually a walking, talking campaign ad for the Republican party. In comparison to her any other point of view will be considered sane.
November 18, 2011 at 4:51pm
38 states would have to call for a constitutional convention for one to convene. Prior to reaching that number Congress would pass a balanced budget amendment to head off the convention. That’s probably the only way this is going to get done.
September 25, 2011 at 5:06pm
George Will is a RINO who likes to use $20 words. The last thing he wants is a real, conservative Republican in the White House. If I remember correctly, he was an early supporter of the dear leader.
September 24, 2011 at 3:50pm
This clown seems unaware that Lincoln freed the slaves, Wilson segregated the military, FDR put Japanese Americans in concentration camps and a higher percentage of Republican Representative and Senators voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Dems.
Yes, but maybe Republicans have done a poor job of educating the public about these facts ! I mean, we know the Left has captured the education so Republicans need to figure a way to overcome this lack of knowledge.
September 21, 2011 at 9:37pm
“You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory”
The maurauding bands are known as the I.R.S.
“and hire someone to protect against this”
Yes, we do. They’re called accountants and tax lawyers.
September 11, 2011 at 1:46pm
If this thug wasn’t so slow on the uptake we could have been out of there years ago.
September 6, 2011 at 8:24pm
Romney (and the rest) should keep it simple. If we want jobs to stay or be created here, businesses need to find lower costs of production here than in India, China and other 3rd world hotspots. Since we’re not willing to work for 3rd world wages we need to level the playing field by lower other costs. Eliminate unnecessary regulations and drive the corporate tax rate for U.S. manufacturing to zero. That would offset our higher labor costs and reduce the likelihood of further outsourcing (Ford just announced the new plant in India) and would bring some of the jobs home. Let the rate for services and foreign manufacturing stay at 35%. The only candidate I’ve heard speak about this is Santorum but he’s just not getting any traction.
What you are describing is protectionism and will lead to a global trade war... I LOVE IT! America is well positioned for a massive and sustained recovery should we defeat Obama. Similar to the Reagan years of massive growth and prosperity after the Carter fiasco. Home prices are down to realistic values that can be afforded by lower wage earners should jobs return. There are trillions of dollars just waiting to become capital when the economic environment improves. The wars will be winding down hopefully. Great times are ahead! First we must win and get rid of Obama.
Aloha Nui Loa! (Waikoloa Beach)
Romney's plan is more complex.....or more items........because he has a deeper understanding of the business world. BHO has worked in a number of things since in office that take more than a couple of steps to "undo".
I like Santorum, too, but it's not going to happen this time for him. I would love to see him serve our country somewhere again!!