LyrArc Article Gist
The UK corporate tax rate is set to go down to 17% in 2020. To discourage the one fifth of British companies planning to move headquarters overseas the Theresa May government plans to accelerate the lowering of the corporate tax rate. The Trump administration is considering reducing the corporate tax rate down to 15%. Ireland has a tax rate of 12.5%. The move by the Trump administration would reduce the incentive for inversion by corporations trying to reduce taxes by moving overseas.

LyrArc Article Gist
A second estimate by the OECD increases the revenues generated from the global minimum tax of 15% on corporations by as much as $150 billion. The original estimate was of $150 billion, so the real amount generate could be twice that. It means it will help countries build the infrastructure they need to revive their economies.The international tax agreement of 2021 sets the rate based on where companies sell to consumers rather than where they are based. It is the most important tax agreement in a century with 137 countries participating. 

The original estimate estimated revenues to be $150 billion- it raised this to $200 billion. It sees $200 billion in existing revenues that will be reallocated up from $125 billion. Taxing rights will generate additional $36 billion.

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
"I’m going to make sure that the richest among us, who can afford it, pay their fair share in taxes. It is not right that teachers and nurses and firefighters are paying a higher tax rate than billionaires and the biggest corporations, and I plan on making that fair.” Kamala Harris will finance child care tax credit, aid to small businesses and for first time home buyers, homecare for seniors, and other benefits by everyone paying their fair share and from savings in what Medicare pays out. "When you talk quietly with a lot of folks in Congress, they know exactly what I’m talking about because their constituents know exactly what I’m talking about. Their constituents are those firefighters and teachers and nurses.” For three Reaganite decades America has neglected access to all for child care, education, healthcare, seniors care, the very things that makes America a strong Nation, a Nation where the future belongs, going against the warnings of George Washington in the Draft of the First Inaugural in 1789 that - "I rejoice in the belief that intellectual light will spring up in the dark corners of the earth...That mankind will reverse the absurd notion that the many are made for the few." Absurd notion it was in 1789, absurd notion it is now in 2024. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new budget in France is designed around two goals. The first is to take aggressive action to bring the deficit down to 3% by 2013, not a gradual program but one intended to send a strong message to capital markets that France under a Socialist government is dead serious when it comes to the deficit and debt reduction. Every 0.1% increase in France's borrowing rate would mean $260 million going into interest payments on the debt, according to Pierre Muscovici, the finance minister. France's borrowing rate is close to Germany's 1%, and the French are determined to keep it this way. The other goal was stated by Mr. Muscovici: "I don't want a policy of austerity, hitting salaries, weakening the state and turning it into a pauper." The idea being that hitting the common man would mean decline in consumer spending and lower growth and tax revenues that would create the kind of negative spiral facing Spain of declining growth and rising unemployment, worsening deficits, and higher debt payments. The way Muscovici raised the $39 billion- beyond the $9 billion in higher taxes and savings already implemented for 2012- is through $13 billion in new taxes on corporations, and additional $10 billion from new income taxes, including a higher tax rate of 45% on incomes over $193,000. Additional $13 billion will come from a freeze in public spending, so that some ministries take cuts adjusted for inflation keeping the overall budget the same. Spending cuts could come later to balance the budget as growth picks up to 2% in 2014, is the government reasoning, softening the impact. The new budget is well received by German public opinion as showing the resolve of Germany's key partner in the EU. Part of the reason the French are able to get business and people with higher incomes to contribute is that France is unique in that there is a greater consensus than in other countries on the steps needed and a sense that austerity measures targeting the middle class would be counterproductive. The aggressive action with considerations for equity and fairness also gives France the chance for a faster turnaround and avoid the problems plaguing Spain and Italy, which French public opinion and business appears to have grasped and the government's experienced ministers for the economy have successfully presented. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Britain's Tax Service reports the number of taxpayers reporting incomes of 1 million pounds a year declined by over 60% in fiscal 2010-2011 from the prior year. In 2010 the Labor government of Gordon Brown introduced a 50% income tax rate for this income group, up from 40%. The number of million dollar incomes filed declined to 6000 from 16000 in 2009-2010, and revenues declined from 13.4 billion pounds or 9% of total taxes from taxpayers to 6.5 billion pounds or 4.4% or about half. The Labor government had hoped for additional 2.5 billion pounds in revenue, showig unintended consequences and surprises in economic policies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the federal tax rate for the top 1% is 34% in 2013, according to the Congressional Budget Office, because president Obama let the high end Bush tax cuts to expire. It is the number to remember says Krugman- 34. In 2008 the figure was 28.2. Under Hillary Clinton the average tax rate for the top 1% would go up by 3.4 percentage points, according to the Tax Policy Center. Some of this would help pay for the tution plan to provide access to the middle class to public universities. Under populist Trump, Krugman points to the elimination of the inheritance tax and tax rates going down substantially, and no such programs to promote the upward mobility that everyone is talking about, and no way to pay for a big infrastructure building effort for growth and jobs- upward mobility that is the focus of every candidate's election campaign including Sanders, Trump in appealing to older white working class families, Clinton, Ryan, Bush, and others in both parties.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Altman's proposal for a tax on wealth over $1 million. He makes the case for taxing wealth not incomes to reduce inequality as this is where the situation in terms of inequality has worsened for the U.S. in recent decades. To support this proposal Altman cites the change in the U.S. Ginni coefficient, which measures inequality. The Ginni coefficient is anumber from 0 to 100 which goes up with higher income inequality. From the late 70's to the 1990's, the Cnesus Bureau showed this to be in the low 40's. By 1992 the Ginni coefficient went up to the mid-70's, according to the Federal Reserve data. It increased to about 80 in 2010. In 1992 the top 10% in the U.S. population controlled 20 times the wealth of the bottom 50%. By 2010 this figure triples to 65 times. and the graduated income tax even if it redistributes a small share of the wealth does little to affect the trend of wealth extremes from building up and threatening the social fabric of America, reducing mobility and opportunities for the bottom 50% to unprecedented levels since the 1950's. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's proposed budget for fiscal 2013- for the year beginning Oct. 1, 2012- shows the budget deficit for the year at over $1 trillion. It shows new revenue of $1.7 trillion over 10 years mostly from ending the Bush period tax cuts on families earning more than $250,000 a year, restoring the estate tax to the 2009 level and limiting subsidies for oil and gas companies. It proposes raising the tax rate on dividends from 15% to as much as 39.6%, for households earning more than $250,000 a year. This measure is expected to generate $206 billion over 10 years. The budget also offers "principles" for future tax reform by proposing the Buffett rule replace the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The AMT was not indexed for inflation so it has the weakness of putting more middle class taxpayers into AMT, leading to temporary solutions by Congress. The Buffett rule would have people earning more than $1 million pay a tax rate of at least 30%. Many wealthy Americans like Mitt Romney paid lower taxes using deductions to lower tax rates- Romney's tax disclosures show he paid effective tax rate of 14%. The White House says the budget will reduce the deficit by $3 trillion over 10 years through the new taxes, and small changes to Medicare and Medicaid and other spending cuts. This is in addition to the $1 trillion in spending cuts agreed to in a deficit reduction agreement in 2011 between Democrats and Republicans in Congress. The budget proposal proposes investment in education and transportation projects of $137 billion, and continuing through Dec. 2012, a tax break for businesses to increase investment. It includes mandatory spending of $2.7 billion for new community college programs, $6 billion to modernize schools, and $1.8 billion to make homes more energy efficient. It also increases the resources of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC (two agencies overseeing the banks), $26 million for a new Interagency Trade Enforcement Center to counter unfair trade practices, and cuts U.S. postal delivery to 5 days a week. The result is a program designed to be balanced in terms of economic fairness, making modest investments in the future for education and energy, continuing policies to stimulate growth, and extending the date for bringing the deficit under control to 2018 instead of 2014 as planned earlier....

LyrArc Article Gist
The European Union Commission says Ireland must recover 13 billion euros in back taxes for giving tax preferences to Apple that are against EU rules. The EU Commission says Ireland allowed Apple to pay a corporate tax rate of 1% on its European profits in 2003, and .005% in 2014. The EU Commissioner says the use of Ireland as the place where Apple pays taxes on operations in Europe has no base in reality, as most profits are earned in other countries outside Ireland. Taxable profits of Apple "did not correspond to economic reality," according to Ms. Vestager, the EU Commissioner.  In the current environment where political upheaval is unsettling the democratic process in the U.S., Britain, Spain, France and Italy, as well as in Brazil and other countries in the developing world- because of deep recessions, and efforts to cut the deficits with deep cuts in state spending including in education and healthcare, basic services- the moves by companies to reduce taxes to these absurdly low levels such as .005% when other companies in the EU are paying 12.5%, is becoming increasingly unpopular. As pointed out in this BBC News article this sounds like the way Carnegie, Rockefeller and Vanderbilt operated during the late 19th century, and were seen as operating in a manner that was above the law. Janet Yellen pointed out at a Boston Fed Conference on inequality in Oct 2014 that the bottom half of the distribution or 62 million households in the U.S. in 2013, had a net worth of about $10,000, One quarter of these households had a net worth of zero dollars. The working class and blue collar workers in the U.S. provide much of the support at Trump rallies. Younger college educated people support Sanders, because of the situation of the working and middle class in the U.S., and a similar situation exists in Europe. It is for the sake of the democratic process and delivering services in education, healthcare, and other basic areas to all, that companies small and large need to pay their fair share of taxes, regardless of size, influence, or technological advantages. Today this is is seen by most leaders who draw public support as the right way forward for the U.S., Latin America, Europe and Asian countries, including proper allocation of resources to best serve the needs of working people. For example the 13 billion euros is equal to all of Ireland's healthcare budget, and 66% of its social welfare budget.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. ranked first in an annual survey of executives rating places with favorable prospects for foreign direct investment. The survey by consulting firm A.T. Kearney has questions for executives of 302 large companies, all with sales above $500 million, about how likely they are to invest in countries over 2013-2015. It was done in October and November of 2012. On a scale of 0 to 3, the U.S. scored 2.09, China 2.02, Brazil 1.97, Canada 1.86, India 1.85, followed closely by Australia and Germany at 1.83 and the UK at 1.81. Mexico and Singapore are at No. 9 and 10 with 1.77. The survey shows the U.S., and Mexico gaining, China and India slipping, and English speaking countries UK, Australia and Singapore, as part of the 6 that are English speaking of the top 10 countries. Brazil's hosting of the Olympics and World Cup helped it maintain its position. The emerging market countries performance has slipped further since the survey, including Brazil, and the U.S. has made further gains in investor sentiment. The unrest among young people in Turkey, India, China, and Brazil as seen in street protests and credit financed booms may have further affected investor sentiment. The increase in natural gas production, revival of the midwestern economies, and a recovering housing market have boosted the U.S. economic prospects compared to emerging markets and the eurozone....

LyrArc Article Gist
New rules by the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and Moody's would show U.S. public pension funds as about 57% funded instead of 75% funded under earlier rules. This will open up an even wider gap in how much they have in the funds and their promises to retirees to about an estimated $2.2 trillion. This puts pressure on state and local governments to either reduce benefits for new hires, have workers increase contributions, or set aside more money from the budget. Local governments face the risk of credit downgrades and higher borrowing costs if no action is taken and finances are worsening. An example is Illinois retired teachers who earn annual pensions of about $46,000 on average, and do not participate in Social Security under state opt-out. Even under old accounting rules this pension fund had $37 billion of assets and $81 in future liabilities. Under the new rules the unfunded liabilities could jump to 83% by one estimate, from over 50%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Joe Nocera describes his personal situation which also reflects the situation of the average investor in his 401(K) for retirement - inexperience in handling the boom-bust cycles in the market and loss of savings, especially in the last two decades with sharp swings in the market. The Employee Benefit Research Institute statistics on savings of the average American are striking, dismal is the right word- only 22% of workers 55 or older have more than $250,000 set aside for retirement, and 60% have less than $100,000 in a retirement account. The average savings of an American near retirement are $100,000.

LyrArc Article Gist
This New York Times editorial says a smaller Wall Street and growing jobs in other fields will be good for New York as well as good for the country. It says New York politicians should focus on finding new ways for New York to broaden its tax base and get new businesses and new opportunites in fields such as media, advertising, entertainment, health care and tourism. Especially welcome are initiatives such as the science and tech campus of Cornell University promoted by Mayor Bloomberg. Tighter financial rules and higher capital requirements are good for the country and for New York the editorial emphasizes, because they help control reckless banking practices that destroy capital and opportunities for growth elsewhere in the economy. It points to Kevin Rose's Nov. 21, 2011 account in the Times showing a healthy culture shift in New York and the country with the status jobs being seen not at Goldman Sachs but at Google, Apple and Facebook. Rose's account shows that in the last 3 years the number of Wall Street employees of ages 20-34 declined by 25%....

LyrArc Article Gist
A shift in priorities away from focussing on high growth to lower sustainable growth was announced by China's premier Wen Jiabao at the National People's Congress, China's parliament, in March 2012. This shift will reduce investment in infrastructure, power generation and exports, which will affect the level of imports of commodities from commodity producing nations in the Middle East, Australia, Canada and Brazil. It should increase imports of software, computers, entertainment, tourism and high tech goods from the U.S. and Europe. Chinese leaders have said they would make this kind of shift for some years now but growth has consistently increased more than the target rate, and domestic consumption as a percentage of the economy has actually decreased in the last decade. Now 9-10% growth rates may be a thing of the past and the target of 7.5% set this year may be actually closer to the real figure. The Chinese leaders have belatedly realized the need to make these changes now because slowing markets in Europe -which is seeing declining growth and high unemployment- and in the U.S., make the issue impossible to avoid. Wen told the Congress: "Accelerating the transformation of the pattern of economc development... is both a long term task and our most pressing task at present... Domestically it has become more urgent but also more difficult... to alleviate the problem of unbalanced, uncoordinated and unsustainable development." This is his way of saying that its unavoidable and better to start in earnest now, and at the same time recognizing the resistance to change from the stateowned companies and the other interests who have benefitted from surging growth, and now occupy a central role in the power structure. An opinion article in the People's Daily, China's official newspaper, said: "imperfect reforms are to be preferred to a crisis caused by no reforms." The World Bank's president Zoellick is respected by the Chinese leaders. He also urged them to make changes now. The recent report of the DRC, China's planning research arm, and the World Bank, also laid out the new direction away from a focus on infrastructure to domestic consumption. The fear is sudden deceleration in the absence of policy action. The impact of this will be negative for commodities over time, leading to slower growth in Australia, Brazil, and Canada. It should boost imports from Europe and the U.S. of high tech, consumer, pharmaceutical goods over time....

LyrArc Article Gist
People who worked with Romney in the Mormon church describe the experience of Romney who started as an "iron rodder" walking the straight path, and gradually learning of other people's experiences that led to learning and growth and showing a new openness. In contrast to his "47%" remark about people dependent on the government, here he is seen telling another church member Barlow, that what bothers him most and what he has thought a lot about is how to genuinely help the poor in his church. Over the years he learned to compromise with Mormon feminists who sought larger roles in the church and was able to make the progress from being less flexible to being open to other ideas and perceptions. In other situations he allowed unorthodox progressives in the Mormon church to play a part in the organization and teach. The outreach efforts Romney participated in actively included efforts in the inner city and working with immigrants from Haiti, some of whom were illegal immigrants. This is a detailed well researched account from talking to many people active in the church organization and in the church community by Jason Horowitz of the Washington Post. It is one of the rare glimpses of the life of Mitt Romney inside the church. Because of the public perception of Mormonism there is a distance kept with accounts of life in the church, and Romney has shown the same reticence to talk about the church. Seen as a church it is is like other churches, Catholic or Protestant, with the same challenges that face all churches- keeping up the size of the congregation, the poor, immigrants, church organization, raising contributions, getting people to donate hours of work to the church activity. It is one of the ironies of the 2012 presidential campaign that Romney as a member of a Mormon church in a predominantly Catholic and Protestant world has remained reticent about his experiences and how it shaped him. And also remained reticent -till the last months of the campaign with the demands for authenticity growing strident- about how the experiences as governor of the liberal state of Massachusetts had shaped him, this time as the number of Republican politicians in sharply liberal states were a distinct minority in the Republican party. To voters this meant not knowing who he was beyond Bain Capital, the perceptions of which doggedly pursued Romney till the reticence became unbearable in the final weeks of the campaign....

LyrArc Article Gist
There are similarities in the Republican and Democratic party platforms in 2016. One area of agreement is in the reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act. That legislation made in the Depression period to separate commercial banking from investment banking was changed  when president Clinton made changes in a deal with Senators Phil Gramm and Jim Leach in 1999. The too big to fail problems of banks and the problems of investment banks during the 2008 financial crisis are attributed to the lack of Glass Steagall protections for financial stability and safety. The result is that in the post 2016 environment banks can expect a tougher regulatory environment. Another are is in trade where both parties are expected to take tougher positions to protect U.S. interests. The Republican platform calls for "better negotiated trade agreemets that put America first."