|
MrRodgers -> More corporate bullshit (extortion) (6/28/2016 12:01:10 PM)
|
Delaying tax rules to reduce or eliminate 'inversion' which means...Corporate inversion refers to re-incorporating a company overseas in order to reduce the tax burden on income earned abroad. The delay is in Section 385 regs in defining various status and thus taxation of corporate profits, taxes upon which would be...'repatriated' [sic] to the US treasury.
Here are the low-lites and it's typical corporate (economic bullshit) particularly as exemplified by the fact the the fortune 500 (maybe 1000) does not invest in American jobs with the money they have here.
Ways and Means Committee Chair Kevin Brady, R-Texas, told reporters the regulations should be delayed because their impact is too broad. "I'm convinced that if that regulation goes forward, there's going to be real economic damage in our communities," he said. "While Treasury was trying to stop inversions, they overreached in a major way, and I think America is going to lose jobs." HERE
Bullshit, that money and 'patriated' money is not being invested except in maybe buying existing companies which more often than not...results in a net loss of jobs.
Here is the net effect kinkroids;
A corporate inversion is a transaction in which a U.S.-parented multinational group changes its tax residence to reduce or avoid paying U.S. taxes. More specifically, a U.S.-parented group engages in an inversion when it acquires a smaller foreign company and then locates the tax residence of the merged group outside the United States, typically in a low-tax country. Typically, the primary purpose of an inversion is not to grow the underlying business, maximize synergies, or pursue other commercial benefits. Rather, the primary purpose of the transaction is to reduce taxes, often substantially.
After a corporate inversion, multinational corporations often use a tactic called earnings stripping to minimize U.S. taxes by paying deductible interest to their new foreign parent or one of its foreign affiliates in a low-tax country. Treasury has previously said it was considering potential guidance in this area. HERE
Why am I not surprised that today's right wants to delay any changes in this code ? (they'd like the whole issue to go away unless of course...make it all tax free)
|
|
|
|
