Corporate Taxation: Reducing the Canadian Corporate Rate
Altering the rate of corporate taxation is a vital tool for federal monetary policy when adjusting to the constantly changing local and global economy. The global recession of 2008 has illuminated the political and economic significance of changing the rate of corporate tax in Canada, and has held its effects under great scrutiny. Those that argue for a greater tax burden be placed on the wealthiest businesses demand government intervention, reasoning that increasing tax revenue can decrease the federal deficit and re-allocate money to vital lesser income groups and communities. The opposition contends that the tax revenue gained will ultimately be lost in under-performing
…show more content…
Domestically, corporate taxes are a significant expense to businesses, so much so that corporations pour massive resources toward acquiring the knowledge to take advantage of not only their local tax system, but also international ones, in order to preserve as much capital as possible. As businesses attempt to attain wealth, they mobilize towards lower-tax jurisdictions. Organizational planning is also affected, as uneven taxes on different types of business entities lead companies like Enron to form network webs of varying entities (Luna, LeAnn, and Murray 2008). Resource allocation to operating tax loopholes and allowances may be considered uneconomic, but is crucial for business survival. Domestic corporate tax rates are also inherently political; as each party has differing mandates towards tax revenue generation and allocation. Governments now must consider tax policy one of the major pieces to their platform. In Canada, the Conservative Party of Canada has stressed the importance of the corporate tax rate as a vital cog in maintaining the health of the economy. Over the last 4 years, the Conservative Party has decreased the net corporate tax rate by 2.5% with intention to lower it further to 15% effective January 1, 2012 (Canada Revenue Agency 2011).
The Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party (NDP) advocate a Keynesian-welfare
While most taxpayers agree that tax reform is necessary for our country the problem they encounter is the difficulty they experience when trying to understand all the political terms used when discussing tax reform. This paper is an attempt to help the taxpayers of our country to better understand the political terminology and gain knowledge about some of the proposals that have been explored.
period to complete each in-class quiz. Each quiz will be graded based on 50 points.
Another idea would be to avoid increasing the tax rates as this will help “minimize economic distortions that shrink the level of production” (Baker III, 2009, p. 1). To promote economic growth, our team recommends that we take the approach of increasing the corporate tax base and decreasing the corporate tax rates. Other suggestion is to reduce the deductibility of state and local taxes. Other reforms that could be looked
Both coauthors explain “the myth of corporate taxes” with two statements: “When it comes down to it, no corporation or business really pays taxes,” and therefore, “the burden of it all falls on us [the taxpayers]” (32). They continue their explanation with another claim: “The economic education of Americans is so woefully inadequate that many of us actually think we pay less as individuals when the taxes are transferred to businesses and corporations” (31). To illustrate their point, the authors created a fictional corporation with simple guidelines. Although not their actual example, the following is similar: Qwerty Inc., a manufacturer of computer keyboards, has 200 employees and 100 shareholders. At the end of the year, Qwerty Inc. sold 1000 keyboards at $100 dollars each; therefore, the yearly income was $100,000. After labor, cost, taxes, and other charges, Qwerty’s profit is $2000 for the year. If the government adds a 10% corporate tax increase, Qwerty now owes an additional $200 in taxes. According to Boortz and Linder’s logic, Qwerty has several possibilities to balance the budget from the tax increase: the shareholders could see their dividends decrease, the price on the keyboards could be raised, some employees could be fired to save on cost, or employee benefits could decrease to cover the cost of the tax increase. This simple example demonstrates the current tax code’s consequences on the taxpayers (citizens and consumers) and introduces “the embedded
The American government has struggled with the issue of taxes and the budget for over a hundred years. Class conflict, adversarial political parties, and convoluted economic philosophies have resulted in a never-ending debate over taxation. The New York Times newspaper article, “Senate Panel Vote Backs Budget Plan”, from June 1993, discusses the current feelings of the time in regards to the budget and taxation. Moreover, the article mentions factors such as democrat-republican debate, trickle down economics, and high verse low taxes for the middle class. The issues discussed in this 1993 article differ only slightly from the taxation conversation of today. However, now in 2011, we face a budget crisis that threatens the American economy
However, raising taxes on the rich and corporations is not as helpful to our economy as most people think. Although raising taxes on the top percent of people and companies appears to create more income for the government, the result will make it harder for middle class and lower class citizens to grow. Some argue that by combining several key changes, including the simplification of the tax code to avoid loopholes and the decrease of taxes on the rich and corporations, there will be an improvement in the national economy. Although this may seem a bit counterintuitive, it makes more sense when looked at closely. By lower taxes and remove all loopholes, smaller businesses are given further opportunities to grow instead of facing financial roadblocks and government
Business taxes can have a huge impact on the profitability of businesses and the amount of business investment. Taxation is a very important factor in the financial investment decision-making process because a lower tax burden allows the company to lower prices or generate higher revenue, which can then be paid out in wages, salaries and/or dividends. Business taxes include, Federal Income Tax; a tax levied by a national government on annual income, Payroll Tax; a tax an employer withholds and/or pays on behalf of their employees based on the wage or salary of the employee, Unemployment Tax; a federal tax that is allocated to unemployment agencies to fund unemployment assistance for laid-off workers, and Sales Tax; a tax imposed by the government at the point of sale on retail goods and services. Sales tax is based on a percentage of the selling prices of the goods and services. Consumers pay sales taxes, but effectively, business pay them since the tax increases consumer’s costs and causes them to buy less.
For a corporation in 2012, the domestic production activities deduction is equal to 9% of the higher of (1) qualified production activities income or (2) taxable income. However, the deduction cannot exceed 50% of the W-2 wages related to qualified production activities income.
With the advancements in the globalization of the economy, corporations are finding more ways to avoid the extraordinary tax rates set in place of The United States Of America. With the loss of revenue from large companies dodging taxes the government must make up for the loss by either raising taxes or changing the tax code. A recent company to avoid american taxes is Johnson Controls, a company that “…would not exist as it is today but for American taxpayers, who paid $80 billion in 2008…”(The Editorial Board). This use of American resources to get through tough times, and run to another county during an economic incline is an act that calls for reform in the American tax system. However congress has not passed any legislation to fix the
After the passage of the 16th Amendment, the nature and process of taxation changed many times. An author for the Virginia Law Review wrote in 1972, “Developing and maintaining an appropriate tax structure for a nation as economically complex and dynamic as the United States is a mammoth task” (Graetz, p. 1401). Because of this complexity, the nature of the Tax Code would need to be altered to keep up with what the country requires at a given time. Several significant changes have been made to the Tax Code, but none more significant than the passage of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA 86). TRA 86 was one of the most polarizing changes in tax law and where the current Code gets its name (Spilker et all., 2016, p. 2-11). It brought about more revisions than most people and businesses could keep up with, and it brought to light the deficiencies in implementing amendments to the Code, namely a disturbing lack of awareness from taxpayers of the alterations. Many businesses benefited from the changes—mostly large, well-established firms, but small mom-and-pop stores who have less stake in tax planning suffered (Scholes, Wilson, Wolfson, 1992, p.181). This negative effect would have been avoided if taxpayers had taken precautions and been aware of the impending changes in tax laws and if those changes had been communicated clearly to them.
In recent years, more than twenty major American companies have left the United States and moved overseas to take advantage of lower tax rates, taking with them jobs and investments (Allen, D). The recent surge of interest in United States corporate inversions has triggered calls for Congress to put an end to the practice. A corporate inversion is when an American company merges with a foreign business and moves the combined business’s headquarters to the foreign country. Inversions are a problem because they are a symptom of a broken tax system that is hurting the United States economy. Furthermore, with the strict laws concerning inversions, some companies opt to direct profits to their foreign subsidiaries to take advantage of lower
The less taxes we pay, the more lives we save. The United States has the highest corporate tax rate of the 34 developed, free market nations that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (DECD). Unlike other countries, the United States pays a marginal corporate tax rate of 35% at the federal level and 39.2% state taxes are accounted. This is causing thousands of corporations to move operations out of the United States and into other countries. Therefore, the United States should lower the taxes of big corporations.
In addition to economic issues, taxation is also a political issue. Political leaders formulate tax policies to bring reforms in the taxation system in order to promote their agendas. The major tax reforms include: increasing or decreasing the tax rate, imposing new taxes on certain products and changing the definition of taxable income. It is evident from the research studies that no one deliberately wants to pay taxes. U.S’ tax policy reflects expression of influence - i.e., those who have power are successful in paying low taxes and their burden is shifted to people who have no power. Therefore retired individuals, small business owners and farmers find ways efforts to reduce their tax burden. Since its existence, tax policy has been enormously used for promoting political and economic agendas.
The United States is in a recession; it has been facing some of the worse economic times since the Great Depression in the 1930’s. One option to fix the economy is to change the corporate tax rate. To lower it or to raise it, that is the question economists have been speculating. America's high corporate tax rate and worldwide system of taxation discourages U.S. companies from sending their foreign-source revenue home, which makes U.S. companies defenseless to foreign acquisition from the international opponents (Camp). Corporations and United States citizens have been fighting for a tax reform, which would hopefully help the American economy; either by lowering the corporate tax, or by raising the tax.
On July 18, the Federal Government announced their intention to restrict certain tax planning strategies available to shareholders of private corporations that they felt unfairly benefit business owners over salary-earning Canadians. The consultation period during which stakeholders were allowed to provide comments on the proposals ended on October 2, 2017. Ottawa’s original proposals were met with widespread criticism from the business community. As a result, during Small Business Week, October 16 - 20, some revisions were announced. The below summarizes the original proposals as well as where we currently stand.