Burger King is buying Tim Hortons

[EL PRESIDENTE]

I actually like the whoppers. They used to be better. Remember when them shits were 99 cents? That was the dope shit brah.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

MY MOM USED TO GIVE ME $3 FOR LUNCH MONEY SO ID GET A WHOPPER AND A PACK OF SMOKES AND STILL HAVE 50 CENTS TO PITCH IN ON BEER

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

fuck back in high school I'd eat two whoppers after i got out of school.

 

[Eastoff]

fuck back in high school I'd eat two whoppers after i got out of school.

that explains so much.

 

[Minstrel]

The Obama administration announced on Monday that it will use its regulatory authority to crack down on tax inversions, the maneuver used by Burger King and other companies to cut their tax bills by moving their tax home outside the United States.

“Now that it’s clear that Congress won’t act before the lame-duck session, we’re taking initial steps that we believe will make companies think twice before undertaking an inversion to try to avoid U.S. taxes,” said Treasury Secretary Jack Lew. “This action will significantly diminish the ability of inverted companies to escape U.S. taxation. For some companies considering deals, today’s action will mean that inversions no longer make economic sense.”

It’s the latest bid by the White House to make policy on issues it says Congress cannot agree on, and comes amid a summer of companies mulling the moves offshore. It drew immediate criticism from Republicans.

Both Lew and President Barack Obama have said that they would prefer to see Congress take action to prevent inversions, but lawmakers have been deadlocked. Most Republicans have argued that comprehensive tax reform that reduces the tax rates and shifts the corporate tax structure to a territorial system is the only way to prevent companies from moving abroad, while Democrats would prefer to do something to address inversions while tax reform negotiations continue.

Republicans have been even more skeptical of potential executive action to address the maneuver. Speaker John Boehner and top House tax writer Dave Camp (R-Mich.) blasted the move on Monday.

“A few campaign-style speeches and stopgap measures from Treasury won’t do it — it hasn’t worked in the past, and even Secretary Lew admits the only real solution is tax reform,” Camp said.

The first provision would prevent companies from using what Treasury called “creative” loans to move profits among overseas subsidiaries in order to avoid paying taxes on dividend payments. The so-called hopscotch loans allow the controlled foreign corporation that owes dividends to make a loan to the new foreign “parent” company to avoid U.S. taxation.

The new rules would also make it more difficult for U.S. companies to transfer control of holdings to the new foreign parent company to escape taxes.

The new foreign parent would also be limited in their ability to count passive assets to reach the 80 percent foreign ownership required to avoid U.S. taxes. The notice released today would eliminate the practice, known as a cash box, if at least 50 percent of the foreign corporation’s assets are passive. Banks and financial companies would be exempt.

U.S. companies could not make big dividend payments in advance of an inversion.

Critics of the practice hoped last month’s news that Burger King plans to move its headquarters to Canada in part to slash its U.S. tax bill — making it by far the biggest name so far to announce inversion plans — would force Congress to act. But lawmakers left Washington last week without any agreement on a path forward and are not expected to return until after the November midterm elections.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/white-house-corporate-offshore-taxes-111223.html?hp=l2

 

[Denny Crane]

What is wrong with the republican plan?

 

[Minstrel]

What is wrong with the republican plan?

What is the Republican plan? Comprehensive tax reform? Democrats are down for that, too, but they don't want companies using inversions for the 20-100 years it takes for both sides to agree on comprehensive tax reform.

 

[Denny Crane]

Most Republicans have argued that comprehensive tax reform that reduces the tax rates and shifts the corporate tax structure to a territorial system is the only way to prevent companies from moving abroad.

Why are democrats obstructing this plan?

 

[Minstrel]

Most Republicans have argued that comprehensive tax reform that reduces the tax rates and shifts the corporate tax structure to a territorial system is the only way to prevent companies from moving abroad.

Why are democrats obstructing this plan?

Finish reading the sentence you plagiarized from the above article and you'll see that they're not.

 

[Denny Crane]

If they agree with it, then vote on it. I suspect they want to put Burger King in their campaign ads. Party over country... Typical.

You asked what the plan is, I quoted from the article you posted, but apparently didn't read.

 

[Minstrel]

If they agree with it, then vote on it.

Vote on what? As per the article, negotiations are ongoing.

You asked what the plan is, I quoted from the article you posted, but apparently didn't read.

No, you regurgitated what I already told you. I was asking if you knew of an actual plan the Republicans had ready for vote. "Comprehensive tax reform" is an idea that is then discussed and negotiated over which leads to a plan, ideally. If you know of such a plan that's up for vote, link us up.

 

[Denny Crane]

Vote on what? As per the article, negotiations are ongoing.



No, you regurgitated what I already told you. I was asking if you knew of an actual plan the Republicans had ready for vote. "Comprehensive tax reform" is an idea that is then discussed and negotiated over which leads to a plan, ideally. If you know of such a plan that's up for vote, link us up.

They've had 6 years to get this done and with Obama in office. You seriously think the Democrats want to lower taxes?

 

[Minstrel]

They've had 6 years to get this done and with Obama in office. You seriously think the Democrats want to lower taxes?

No.

 

[Denny Crane]

Well we agree. They want to "punish" a huge employer for political gain.

 

[Minstrel]

Well we agree. They want to "punish" a huge employer for political gain.

We agree that, due to a mix of ideological beliefs and desire for political gain, they want to prevent huge companies from cheating the tax system.

 

[Denny Crane]

We agree that, due to a mix of ideological beliefs and desire for political gain, they want to prevent huge companies from cheating the tax system.

But they don't. They want to transfer income and wealth from the poor and middle class to big corporations. You know, like ObamaCare is transferring money from our pockets and the treasury to the insurance companies. That's the guys you root for.

 

[Minstrel]

But they don't. They want to transfer income and wealth from the poor and middle class to big corporations. You know, like ObamaCare is transferring money from our pockets and the treasury to the insurance companies.

We can agree to disagree.

 

[Denny Crane]

Why not judge by their deeds instead of broken promises and lies?

The reality is the democrats are likely to lose the senate at this point. To rally the base, the alienated loony left, they make anticapitalist noises.

 

[Minstrel]

The reality is the democrats are likely to lose the senate at this point. To rally the base, the alienated loony left, they make anticapitalist noises.

I'm not sure that many people consider preventing tax evasion to be "anticapitalist."

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm not sure that many people consider preventing tax evasion to be "anticapitalist."

It's not tax evasion. If it were, they wouldn't need to pass anything new. This isn't a crime of any sort. It's a big evil company that the administration can stick it to.

Seriously, this is closing the corral after the horse has run away.

Address the reasons why companies do this:

1) more taxes means less to spend
2) less to spend means people are attracted to lower and lower prices.
3) companies reduce cost to be able to sell at lower prices (or not increase them)
4) increased expense burden on companies due to new regulations, minimum wage hikes, obamacare, etc.
5) highest tax burden in the modern world

All these Obamanomics kids who graduate college in debt up to their eyeballs and end up living with their parents can't afford food that's cheaper or better than Burger King.

 

[Minstrel]

It's not tax evasion. If it were, they wouldn't need to pass anything new. This isn't a crime of any sort.

Amusing. "It can't be wrong because there's no law against it. Unrelated, how dare they make laws against stuff?"

Well, guess what. Now it's wrong.

 

[Denny Crane]

Amusing. "It can't be wrong because there's no law against it. Unrelated, how dare they make laws against stuff?"

Well, guess what. Now it's wrong.

It's still not wrong or a crime.

You do realize that Burger King always did have to pay taxes on every dollar they made in the USA, right?

OMG, the tax code has loopholes?

 

[Denny Crane]

The new edicts don't address inversions proper or the reason why Democrats should stop playing politics with the law if they really care.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_inversion

Tax inversions are a form of tax avoidance. They are driven by a combination of factors, but the most prevalent factor is that the US tax code (uniquely among developed nations) seeks to impose income tax on profits earned abroad by American corporations.[6] This creates a strong incentive for American companies with large overseas markets to seek to recharacterize themselves as a foreign corporation if they want to return foreign earnings to stockholders without double taxation.[7]

 

[Minstrel]

OMG, the tax code has loopholes?

Loopholes aren't surprising. It's only surprising when people cry foul when those loopholes are closed.

 

[Minstrel]

The new edicts don't address inversions proper or the reason why Democrats should stop playing politics with the law if they really care.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_inversion

That's great and all, but companies like Burger King are using tax inversions to avoid paying US taxes on domestic earnings. It's not primarily to avoid double taxation on bringing foreign earnings back to the US.

 

[Denny Crane]

Loopholes aren't surprising. It's only surprising when people cry foul when those loopholes are closed.

Who's crying foul about them changed?

The double taxation is anti-competitive for our companies. That is the real problem.

 

[Denny Crane]

That's great and all, but companies like Burger King are using tax inversions to avoid paying US taxes on domestic earnings. It's not primarily to avoid double taxation on bringing foreign earnings back to the US.

No they're not.

 

[maxiep]

So if the Right "wins" the Senate, will the left start filibustering like mad, like the Right has?

That's how a minority party exercises its authority in the Senate. Harry Reid will rue the day he blew up the filibuster.