- Days left

To Close Corporate Tax Loopholes, Obama Would Open New Ones

×
Obama tax planWASHINGTON -- Cutting corporate tax rates and deleting loopholes is just what most economists prescribe for the tangled U.S. tax code.

So why isn't everyone cheering the plan President Barack Obama unveiled Tuesday to slash the top corporate tax rate and end breaks that let some companies pay little or nothing in taxes?

Economists note that Obama's plan would upturn the very playing field the administration says it wants to level. It would give manufacturers preferential treatment: Tax breaks would effectively cap their rate at 25%. Other companies would pay up to 28%.

The current top corporate tax rate is 35%.




Some say such varying rates can distort the economy by diverting investment into some industries and away from others that might pack a bigger economic punch.

"The administration is not making sense," says Martin Sullivan, contributing editor at publisher Tax Analysts. "The whole idea of corporate tax reform is to get rid of loopholes, and this plan is adding loopholes back in."

Other economists oppose a separate plank of the Obama plan: a minimum tax on foreign earnings of U.S. multinational companies. No other country imposes such a tax on its companies, they note. U.S. businesses would face a competitive disadvantage.

Facing resistance from Republicans and many businesses, Obama's plan is in any case a longshot proposal so close to Election Day.

"For anything that Obama recommends during an election year and with a divided Congress, the best one can say is, 'Good luck,'" says Henry Aaron, senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. "Those who stand to lose are really upset and will work hard to defeat it."

Just about everybody agrees something has to change. When Japan enacts a corporate tax cut in April, the United States will be left with the highest tax rate in the developed world.

That puts the U.S. companies that actually pay the official corporate tax rate at a disadvantage against their foreign competitors. (Many U.S. companies effectively pay lower rates because of tax breaks.)

The loophole-riddled U.S. tax code now benefits numerous industries over others. One tax break, for example, lets oil companies write off drilling costs immediately instead of over time, as most businesses must.

In the end, different industries can pay far different effective rates. The Treasury Department says U.S. utility companies pay an average effective tax rate of 14%. By contrast, retailers pay an average 31%.

The administration says the point of its tax plan is to make the system fairer and more efficient - not to squeeze more overall tax revenue from corporations. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner calls the current tax code "fundamentally unfair." But the administration also needs to end some loopholes to help pay for a lower corporate tax rate.

The White House argues that tax breaks for manufacturers could ultimately pay off for the economy. When factories expand, for example, the benefits tend to spill into other businesses: Shipping companies and warehouses must add jobs, too, to transport and store the goods that manufacturers are producing.

Economists also note that manufacturers account for a disproportionate amount of the research and development that create innovative products and new ways of doing business. The National Science Foundation has found that manufacturing companies are nearly three times likelier to introduce a new or significantly improved product than other companies are.

"Does manufacturing deserve special treatment? This is a hot debate," says Elisabeth Reynolds, executive director of the Industrial Performance Center at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "A case can be made that there's a reason to encourage more manufacturing in the United States because of its links to innovation."

Other economists say that argument is overstated. Among the skeptics is Obama's own former economic adviser, Christina Romer, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley. In a column this month in The New York Times, Romer argued that there was no economic justification for the government to favor manufacturers over service-oriented companies.

"Our earnings from exporting architectural plans for a building in Shanghai are as real as those from exporting cars to Canada," Romer wrote.

Analysts are also divided over Obama's plans to impose a minimum tax on companies' foreign earnings.

Sullivan of Tax Analysts says the current system allows some companies - especially technology and pharmaceutical firms - to avoid U.S. taxes by shifting their earnings to tax havens such as Bermuda and the Cayman Islands. Other multinationals can indefinitely avoid paying U.S. taxes by keeping their earnings overseas.

Lacking such tax breaks, companies that do all their business in the United States suffer a competitive disadvantage.

The minimum tax proposal, Sullivan says, "would level the playing field."

But big U.S. companies complain that they already pay taxes to foreign governments on the income they earn in those countries. A U.S. tax on that income, they argue, would amount to double taxation.

That would raise costs for U.S. companies operating overseas, making them less competitive. Instead, the United States should move toward a "territorial" tax system, business groups argue. Tax would apply only to income earned within the United States.

"No other developed country imposes such a 'minimum tax' on the foreign earnings of their corporations," said the Business Roundtable, a trade group of chief executives of large U.S. companies.

Some economists agree.

The minimum tax proposal for international earnings "is totally misguided both from a competitive standpoint and a jobs standpoint," said Gary Hufbauer, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "Obama's plan, if enacted, will shrink the U.S. footprint in world markets and lose jobs."


NEXT:


Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Economics 101

Intro to economics. But fun.

View Course »

How to Buy a Car

How to get the best deal and buy a car with confidence.

View Course »

TurboTax Articles

What is IRS Form 8824: Like-Kind Exchange

Ordinarily, when you sell something for more than what you paid to get it, you have a capital gain; when you sell it for less than what you paid, you have a capital loss. Both can affect your taxes. But if you immediately buy a similar property to replace the one you sold, the tax code calls that a "like-kind exchange," and it lets you delay some or all of the tax effects. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses Form 8824 for like-kind exchanges.

What are ABLE Accounts? Tax Benefits Explained

Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) accounts allow the families of disabled young people to set aside money for their care in a way that earns special tax benefits. ABLE accounts work much like the so-called 529 accounts that families can use to save money for education; in fact, an ABLE account is really a special kind of 529.

What is IRS Form 8829: Expenses for Business Use of Your Home

One of the many benefits of working at home is that you can deduct legitimate expenses from your taxes. The downside is that since home office tax deductions are so easily abused, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tends to scrutinize them more closely than other parts of your tax return. However, if you are able to substantiate your home office deductions, you shouldn't be afraid to claim them. IRS Form 8829 helps you determine what you can and cannot claim.

What is IRS Form 8859: Carryforward of D.C. First-Time Homebuyer Credit

Form 8859 is a tax form that will never be used by the majority of taxpayers. However, if you live in the District of Columbia (D.C.), it could be the key to saving thousands of dollars on your taxes. While many first-time home purchasers in D.C. are entitled to a federal tax credit, Form 8859 calculates the amount of carry-forward credit you can use in future years, not the amount of your initial tax credit.

What is IRS Form 8379: Injured Spouse Allocation

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has the power to seize income tax refunds when a taxpayer owes certain debts, such as unpaid taxes or overdue child support. Sometimes, a married couple's joint tax refund will be seized because of a debt for which only one spouse is responsible. When that happens, the other spouse is said to be "injured" and can file Form 8379 to get at least some of the refund.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

906 Comments

Filter by:
livin life phat

im surprised that this story is out in public. the liberal media usually has a tight lid on truth. all we can do is pray and vote to save our country as we know it.

February 26 2012 at 11:03 AM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
joyce

Come on libs, defend your King!

February 25 2012 at 8:56 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
Owen

it amazes me ,of how verbal obama has been the past 6 months, he has made more noise now, then in the past 3 1/2 years...........could this be a re election ploy, to make this narcisist look good????
maybe we"ll get lucky, and he will go on another of his 4 1/2 million dollar vacations.at tax payer expense of course
till after the election

February 25 2012 at 8:44 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
seeunmo

It is just like Obama to throw garbage out there KNOWING the republicans wont go along with it (because even Obama knows it is bad policy) Then turn around and blame the republicans. Does he really think we dont know what a failure he is and that he always has to blame someone else for his failing??? I will be sooooooo glad when he is gone!!

February 25 2012 at 8:36 AM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
seeunmo

Obama can never come up with a real plan. He comes up with BS that of course the republicans wont go for then he blames the republicans for blocking him!!!! Does he really think we dont see the BS games he plays. He HAS NO PLANS, NO LEADERSHIP, NO COMMON SENSE ............I will be glad when he is gone

February 25 2012 at 8:17 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
muenft

obama haw to be defeated

February 25 2012 at 7:36 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Kenneth

All this discussion about this tax bill is ridiculous at best. Reid will never even attempt to bring this to the senate floor in an election year.

February 25 2012 at 7:34 AM Report abuse +2 rate up rate down Reply
knkdnsr

All this discussion about this tax bill is ridiculous at best. Reid will never even attempt to bring this to the senate floor in an election year .

February 25 2012 at 7:32 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
socraticknight

how funny is it that when such an article like this comes out, the libs who defend the jive-taking prez have little or nothing to say. Just like scared little animals. lol!

February 25 2012 at 3:19 AM Report abuse +3 rate up rate down Reply
socraticknight

how funny is it that when such an article like this comes out, the idiotic libs who defend the jive-taking prez have little or nothing to say. Just like scared little animals. lol!

February 25 2012 at 3:19 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply