Economic Globalization: The Real Reason for Corporate Tax Breaks
It's  obvious at this point that the U.S. government isn't the one to blame  for the corporations tax cuts-- the corporations themselves are.  Although banks and investment firms are the most obvious targets (since  they circulate the most money), large corporations of every industry has  been lobbying for lower corporate taxes for the longest time.
If you think about it, the government wouldn't want to lower the taxes  of companies, and especially not the taxes of large corporations and  banks, as this is where the big money is at. Some conspiracy theorists  attempt to show that politicians are either being paid huge bribes to  support lower taxes and cuts for corporate entities, and/or have sizable  investments in those companies to begin with. But all of the  politicians in office put together don't have enough companies lobbying  them to make up the bulk of U.S. corporations, so there's obviously a  bigger force at work-- something that forces politicians to support big  corporations no matter what their "special interests are"
That  something is called "globalization", and it bring the capitalist plague  to the corporate and government layers of things. Basically, it goes  like this: "If you [the U.S. government] don't give us low taxes, we're  [the corporations] going to another country to appreciates our business  more." Large corporations are hitting the U.S. where it hurts-- they are  threatening to leave the U.S. and go overseas, if the U.S. doesn't give  them what they want. You can call it blackmail if you want, but  corporations have more than enough leverage to pull it off.
The examiner has an interesting take on more recent events supporting this: http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/us-corporate-tax-rates-the-primary-cause-for-companies-moving-overseas
If you look at the rate of businesses leaving the U.S. to go overseas  in the past 12 years, it's absolutely disgusting. (see the chart below, courtesy of wsj.com)

 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704821704576270783611823972.html
If you compare tax breaks for corporations from the government over the  same time period, you will see an increase in tax breaks for  corporations that is consistently reactionary in nature. What we see  here is a desperate attempt by the U.S. government to hold onto large  corporations that are increasingly outsourcing their companies, and even  transferring to other countries completely, to get better deals on  their taxes than what the U.S. offers.
There are plenty of  countries out there who are willing to offer far lower taxes than what  we do-- in fact, almost all of them are, as the U.S. has the 2nd-highest  corporate tax in the world. While many large corporations have indeed  escaped the majority of this high tax rate, on paper they are paying  this tax, and continue to levy for even more tax breaks on this premise,  putting the U.S. government in a very diplomatically-weak position when  it comes to tax legislation.
Sure the large corporations  should be paying their dues. But due to the deadly combination of the  free market and globalization, they don't have to. If the U.S.  government threatens to raise taxes for corporations or close tax  loopholes, the corporations will turn around and "remind" the government  that they can always take their money elsewhere. So the U.S. government  is given the choice of "less money", or "no money". Naturally, they  take what they can get, and deal with all the political crap, because  business is business.
The real problem then, is that we allowed  these corporations to become this big to begin with. It's only  significantly profitable for companies to outsource or have a foreign  base, when corporations reach a certain critical mass. Small businesses,  on the other hand, have little incentive to outsource or to move HQ to  another country (due to the complications and expenses of exporting  goods, not to mention the quality-of-life-in-another-country concerns).  If America was more careful about preventing monopolies, and put more  heavy emphasis on fostering small businesses, none of these problems  would have ever happened.
So in the end, it's less about the problem of big government, and more about the threat of big money!
 
 
 
          
      
 
   
No comments:
Post a Comment