Obama Is Going After The Loophole That Sends American Companies To Cheap Tax Countries

[xchrom]

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-obama-presses-to-close-corporate-tax-loophole-inversions-2014-24

President Barack Obama will call on Thursday for an end to a corporate loophole that allows companies to avoid federal taxes by shifting their tax domiciles overseas in deals known as "inversions," White House officials said.

Obama will make the comments during remarks about the economy at Los Angeles Technical College. The president is in California on a three-day fundraising swing for Democrats.

So-called inversion deals occur when a U.S. company acquires or sets up a foreign company, then moves its U.S. tax domicile to the foreign company and its lower-tax home country.

Nine inversion deals have been agreed to this year by companies ranging from banana distributor Chiquita Brands International Inc to drug maker AbbVie Inc and more are under consideration. The transactions are setting a record pace since the first inversion was done 32 years ago.



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/r-obama-presses-to-close-corporate-tax-loophole-inversions-2014-24#ixzz38Nhr7rge

[napi21]

1. GREAT! I'll do everything I can to support him on that! nt

[progressoid]

2. Rec!

[Dawgs]

3. Great, but this should have been addressed years ago.

Would have had better luck in his first term.

[Hotler]

4. +1......

too little too late. It is just talk for campaign donations.

[leftyohiolib]

5. how about better late than never

[randys1]

27. Never, cant say that. Cant support Obama, that would be blasphemy LOL

oh man is this country broken

[joshcryer]

7. He's been talking about closing the loopholes since 2008.

You act as if he's not been addressing it. He needs a Congress that will pass the bill. It really is that simple.

[BumRushDaShow]

8. Note the knee-jerk bashers

appear once again to sing their one-note samba.

[joshcryer]

10. Oh that's not even the funny part.

This loophole covers $17 billion over 10 years. This comes out to roughly 4 hours a year of US expenditures. It is so close to a rounding error that it's actually laughable.

Of course, they wouldn't be mentioning it if they didn't have a chance to at least get it through committee and up for a vote. It goes up, goes down via party lines, Democrats get to say they wanted to "cut corporate loopholes" Republicans get to say "voted against raising taxes."

There, theater. A joke.

Obama's loophole views go far beyond this one thing, he wants to close them all, cut subsidies for oil, etc.

[Dawgs]

12. Showing concern that it may be too late is not bashing.

I said great, which means I actually like that he's doing this.

'Knee-jerk' would be what you're doing.

[BumRushDaShow]

18. He has been concerned for a long time

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1849138_1849551_1849917,00.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/state-of-the-union-corporate-tax-loopholes_n_2674097.html

But on DU it's fashionable to manufacture amnesia. Thank you for approving but your original assertion is what is typical-

Great, but this should have been addressed years ago

[Dawgs]

11. Talk's enough I guess.

Glad you're satisfied.

[joshcryer]

13. That's literally all Presidents can do on domestic issues.

This is why I wish Presidential candidates wouldn't say "I will do X," but that they would say "If I have a congress that is willing, I will do X."

Of course, you appeared happy he was "addressing" the issue when he's literally been addressing the ovrearching issue of tax loopholes on regular intervals whenever the opportunity arose. This particular tax loophole is actually so small on the scheme of things it's a joke. Obama's views on tax subsidies for big oil, for the effective corporate tax rate, those are much bigger deals. Huge really.

[Dawgs]

14. Our best Presidents have been able to do more than just talk. n/t

[joshcryer]

15. With Congressional majorities you can do a lot more.

With a highly divided obstructionist Congress, not so much.

[BumRushDaShow]

19. "Our best Presidents have been able to do more than just talk. "

Is that how FDR got a universal healthcare insurance provision passed in 1935 with the passage of OASDI or Truman in 1949 or Johnson in 1965 with Medicare or Carter in 1979 on his way out and not too pleased with Ted?

Oh wait...

[joshcryer]

6. Heh, good luck getting this Congress to do that.

[PatrickforO]

9. Yes!!!!

[packman]

16. If he does that

I will take down the blue-eyed,white skinned, brown flaxen hair picture of Jesus that my dear Grandmama left me, and put up Barak's picture in its stead.

Would love , oh so much , for this to happen-but, reminds me of King Canute ordering the sea not to advance. Regardless, it should send a message that will ring with the voters. Republicans will probably oppose it, which is a win-win for us in that it will further define the difference between the two camps.

[rhett o rick]

17. I hope this goes somewhere and isn't just election rhetoric. nm

[kelliekat44]

20. Don't be surprised if AIPAC and Koch put up a huge campaign against this along with the GOP. nt

[KamaAina]

26. AIPAC?

Is Israel one of the destination countries? I hadn't heard that.

[csziggy]

21. If corporations are people, they should be taxed like individuals

An individual born in the US is still liable for US taxes even if they leave the country and never set foot on US soil again, don't do business in the US, and don't receive income from any US source.

Why should corporations that began in the US be allowed to avoid US taxes especially if they still do business in the US?

If corporations are considered people under US law to the extent that a corporation can have a religious point of view, then they need to be treated the same as any other US person!

[sarisataka]

22. It is about time

Another Regan legacy that has been hurting the economy in many ways for far too long

[countryjake]

23. K&R!

[LondonReign2]

24. The Republidicks

have already indicated they will refuse to address this unless it includes a full overhaul of the corporate tax code, which in their "minds" means simply reducing corporate tax rates.

[stillwaiting]

25. This is good. I've wondered why no one tried this when we had a Dem Congress in '08-'10.

I've also wondered why Dems haven't campaigned HARD on this issue. It's a sure-fire winner with a huge majority of Americans.