- 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

How Financial Planners go Grocery Shopping

Learn to shop smart and save.

View Course »

Advice for Recent College Grads

Prepare yourself for the "real world".

View Course »

TurboTax Articles

Tax Tips for the Blind

Anyone whose field of vision falls at or below 20 degrees, who wears corrective glasses but whose vision is 20/200 or less in his best eye, or who has no eyesight at all, meets the legal definition of being blind and is eligible for certain tax deductions.

What is Form 4255: Recapture of Investment Credit?

When is a tax credit not a tax credit? When the IRS takes it back. If you're in the situation where you have to file IRS Form 4255, you might have to pay back a tax credit you've earned in prior years. This process, known as recapture, occurs if you claim a credit -- in this case, a credit for a specific type of business investment -- and then no longer qualify for that credit.

The Most Important Tax Forms for ALEs (Applicable Large Employers)

In 2015, some parts of the Affordable Care Act specifically apply to businesses, in particular, large employers. The Employer Shared Responsibility provisions affect companies with 50 or more full-time employees or an equivalent of part-time or seasonal workers. These companies are called Applicable Large Employers, or ALEs. 2015 is considered a transition year as everyone gets used to the new normal for workplace health plans.

Employer Sponsored Health Coverage Explained

The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is simpler than some people may give it credit for. The basic rule to remember is that everyone must carry Minimum Essential Coverage (MEC) or pay a penalty. Employers with 50 full-time employees or more are obligated to sponsor plans for their workers to help them meet this requirement.

How to Report RSUs or Stock Grants on Your Tax Return

Restricted stock units (RSUs) and stock grants are often used by companies to reward their employees with an investment in the company rather than with cash. As the name implies, RSUs have rules as to when they can be sold. Stock grants often carry restrictions as well. How your stock grant is delivered to you, and whether or not it is vested, are the key factors when determining tax treatment.

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