Sanders: 'Your $8.99 Netflix subscription is more than the company paid in federal income taxes

Dec 2018
4,894
1,340
New England
They can pay taxes like all other U.S. companies do!
It's like arguing with members of the Flat Earth Society.

The companies earning the money are often not "U.S. Companies" and those who run the tax jurisdictions where these legal entities are domiciled have no interest in letter you in on their action.
 
Dec 2015
18,944
18,451
Arizona
And this is the usually what Clara has to say when her argument runs dry.
Nope. I say that about people who just like to argue....any time, any place, any circumstance.

You're not much of a mystery, Nat. You would fit into my family perfectly. You like to argue. You enjoy it. You look forward to it. Agreement just isn't a good fit for you although you are willing to acquiesce on occasion.
You have a keen sense of humor but somehow you see yourself as smarter than the average bear and capable of better solutions. That's part of the charm--it's part and parcel of being a Conservative. You've always got a better mousetrap than the opposing party. You've perfected the art of baiting and reeling.
AND BTW, Clara's arguments rarely run dry. In fact, I've just informed my family and friends that this year, instead of giving Christmas gifts, I'm going to give my opinions. Get excited!
 
Dec 2018
2,605
1,595
Unionville Indiana
You're not understanding me. I'm not saying corporations don't lobby. I'm saying that they do is immaterial to this issue. Try as you might, you cannot tax money earned outside of the US. Multi-nationals will find a way to have their money earned in favorable tax jurisdictions, and there isn't a damned thing you, Bernie, or LIz can do about it.
Sure, there's something we can do about tax deferral, but most Republicans falsely insist there is no alternative to an antiquated 100 year old tax policy.

From (oh, the horror, Sen. Ron Wyden) a Democrat:

Here is how it works. U.S. companies with operations overseas don’t have to pay taxes on profits they earn from, say, selling soft drinks or software outside the U.S. as long as those profits stay overseas. This was intended to help these companies compete around the world almost a century ago. However, today that system creates a perverse incentive to keep corporate profits overseas instead of investing here at home.

What’s even worse is companies can also take advantage of current gaps in the tax rules on intangible items such as software to shift what are really U.S. profits abroad where they are subject to much less or, too often, no tax at all. These profits, generated by American innovation, stay in countries such as Ireland or the U.K., and U.S. companies have the luxury of deciding when or even whether to pay U.S. taxes. Today they have exercised that option not to pay taxes to the tune of $2.2 trillion!

Few even try to argue that tax deferral is good policy. Dating back to 1918 and President Woodrow Wilson, deferral is yet another example of how Washington policy has not kept up with the economic realities of today’s world. In the face of globalization over the last 98 years, with countries abroad dropping their tax rates to attract investment, deferral has become nothing more than an incentive to invest in Indonesia rather than Indiana and a drain on the U.S. economy. Like many other aspects of our antiquated tax system, it screams out for a massive overhaul.

As I have long called for, ending deferral is a necessary step in making sure taxpayers get a fair deal and the U.S. maintains its position as the best place to do business. Combined with a new competitive corporate tax rate that reflects global tax realities and a structure that prevents shifting income to avoid taxes, it will encourage companies -- both domestic and multinational -- to build and grow their businesses in the U.S., creating red-white-and-blue-jobs here at home. ...

 
Dec 2018
4,894
1,340
New England
Sure, there's something we can do about tax deferral, but most Republicans falsely insist there is no alternative to an antiquated 100 year old tax policy.
Again, we're not talking about tax deferral. Why is that so hard to understand? The organization's non-US entities earn the profit; those profits are then taxed by the non-US jurisdiction. How do you think you're going to tax those dollars again?
 
Dec 2018
2,605
1,595
Unionville Indiana
Again, we're not talking about tax deferral. Why is that so hard to understand? The organization's non-US entities earn the profit; those profits are then taxed by the non-US jurisdiction. How do you think you're going to tax those dollars again?
What NON-US entities are you referring to? Please be specific.
 
Dec 2018
4,894
1,340
New England
Nope. I say that about people who just like to argue....any time, any place, any circumstance.

You're not much of a mystery, Nat. You would fit into my family perfectly. You like to argue. You enjoy it. You look forward to it. Agreement just isn't a good fit for you although you are willing to acquiesce on occasion.
You have a keen sense of humor but somehow you see yourself as smarter than the average bear and capable of better solutions. That's part of the charm--it's part and parcel of being a Conservative. You've always got a better mousetrap than the opposing party. You've perfected the art of baiting and reeling.
AND BTW, Clara's arguments rarely run dry. In fact, I've just informed my family and friends that this year, instead of giving Christmas gifts, I'm going to give my opinions. Get excited!
Clara, people who don't like to argue issues of the day tend not to spend their internet time on sites like DTT; they're glued to Instagram watching cat videos or ass models. I am no more or less argumentative than that average DTT forum participant. What I am, relative to the collection of folks here, is someone who tends to hold a minority view. Being a fiscal conservative and a social moderate tends to put me at odds with just about everyone here sooner or later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clara007