THE INTERNET TAX MORATORIUM EXPIRATION

COUNTDOWN

Tell the Senate
to Make the
Moratorium
Permanent.
Click Here to Sign the Petition Before It's Too Late.
00
DAYS
00
HOURS
00
MINUTES
00
SECONDS

Center for Worker Freedom Launches Billboard Campaign in Support of Fresno Farm Workers

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Matt Patterson on Thursday, August 14th, 2014, 1:04 PM PERMALINK


On August 12 the Center for Worker Freedom (CWF) launched the first in a series of billboards in California designed to bring attention to the plight of Fresno farm workers who are being forced into a union against their will.

The workers at Gerawan Farming, Inc. voted last November in a decertification election to rid their workplace of the United Farm Workers.  The labor bosses want to take three percent of the workers’ hard-earned pay, despite the fact that the union has negotiated no wages or working conditions for the workers in over twenty years.

The California Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) is refusing to count the votes from last fall’s decertification election in an outrageous violation of the workers’ Constitutional freedoms of speech and assembly.

Writing for Forbes this week, CWF Executive Director Matt Patterson notes:

The ALRB, like its national counterpart, the NLRB, has functioned as a little more than government enforcer for Big Labor. Does anyone think it is an accident that the ALRB wants to force the union on Gerawan until the election is investigated?  Does anyone doubt that if the union had won that election the votes would have been counted long ago?

The first CWF billboard to bring attention to the plight of the Fresno farm workers (pictured below) is located near the union’s headquarters in Delano, California, and reads, “Hey, UFW, what are you afraid of? Count the votes at Gerawan!”

CWF, a special project of Americans for Tax Reform, is a non-profit organization dedicated to educating the public about the costs and consequences of unionization.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Rednecksrule

Norquist is educating people about the costs of unionization. Let me educate you about the cost of illegal immigration amnesties that this guy supports... it is going to cost a lot more than unions...

WhoNeedsUnionsin21stCentry

About time someone asks UFW correct question. Way to go Workerfreedom.org, way to go!!!!


Kurt Zellers Makes Passionate Case for the Taxpayer

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Jorge Marin on Tuesday, August 12th, 2014, 4:53 PM PERMALINK


Today is Minnesota’s gubernatorial primary and the fight for the Republican nomination has been heated. Voters have clearly contrasting choices when it comes to who is standing up for taxpayers. Minnesota gubernatorial candidate Kurt Zellers opted to make a case for his candidacy in a column in the Star Tribune. The former speaker of the Minnesota House is the only candidate who has made a personal written commitment to oppose higher taxes. Given the massive tax hikes signed into law by Democrat Governor Mark Dayton, Zellers has demonstrated he understands the problems of hardworking small businesses and families in Minnesota. In his column, Zellers explains that

 “In 2013, Gov. Mark Dayton and his DFL-controlled majorities in the Legislature raised taxes on hardworking Minnesotans by more than $2 billion. According to Dayton’s own Revenue Department, the tax increases forced every Minnesotan to pay more for government, and his tax bill actually hit the poorest Minnesotans hardest.”

With this he demonstrates an understanding of the past mistakes of Minnesota’s leaders, for this reason, he states

“That’s why I made a commitment not to raise your taxes, and my plan will move Minnesota out of the top 10 in taxes…

“There is a good reason for the Star Tribune’s Aug. 4 endorsement of Republican Jeff Johnson in the upcoming primary election. Johnson has said in numerous debates and forums that he is open to extending the sales tax to clothing and food, something I am unwilling to do.”

Zellers also has the necessary experience to make the much-needed changes to Minnesota’s tax system,

“When my colleagues elected me speaker of the Minnesota House in 2011, our state was in recession and faced an unprecedented $6 billion deficit. As speaker, I led efforts to turn that record deficit into a $3 billion surplus without raising taxes during tough economic times.”

Lastly, he explains the high stakes of the upcoming elections,

The next governor will have the opportunity to reform a union-centered education system that is failing low-income and minority students; bring billions of dollars and jobs to support responsible mining in northeastern Minnesota, and make our state globally competitive for building careers.”

Kurt Zellers is the candidate most committed to standing up for the Minnesota taxpayers. As the only Republican to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, he has acknowledged that something must be done about the deep-seated spending culture in Saint Paul without increasing the tax burden on Minnesotans. Voters should remember this when they cast their vote in today’s primary.

Photo Credit: Kurt Zellers Facebook

Top Comments

Rednecksrule

IF this stupid organization cared about the cost of taxes, its slimy founder wouldn't support illegal immigrant amnesties that will cost the tax payer trillions after it is enacted..


Big Labor Targets California Farm Workers (and more...)

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Zoe Crain on Tuesday, August 12th, 2014, 1:26 PM PERMALINK


Matt Patterson, executive director of Americans for Tax Reform’s Center for Worker Freedom wrote an op-ed  for Forbes, entitled “Big Labor, Big Government Team Up To Oppress Farm Workers,” highlighting the ALRB’s attack on California farm workers.

Last November, Silvia, along with thousands of her coworkers, voted in a decertification election to rid their workplace of the United Farm Workers (UFW), a union that had done nothing for them; the UFW had bargained no wages or conditions for the Gerawan employees, but still wanted three percent of their wages in dues.

For Silvia, that three percent is a significant sum. She saw no reason to surrender the money she earned with her own hands to union bosses, so last autumn she collected enough signatures from co-workers (3,000 to be exact) to trigger a decertification election. In November, the California Agricultural Labor Relations supervised the voting.

Unfortunately, the ALRB is refusing to count those votes. Was the UFW booted out of Gerawan? We don’t know- the ballots sit under lock and key in the Board’s office. The Board is claiming the votes can’t be counted until the election is “investigated.” Unfortunately, they are not doing any investigating, claiming they have run out of funds to do so.

Newsmax’s Greg Richter wrote a piece detailing the new confusions and challenges that will impact taxpayers next tax season as a result of Obamacare.

Ryan Ellis, tax policy director at Americans for Tax Reform, testified before Congress in early June that the upcoming tax season “has the potential to be one of the most chaotic in years.”

One of the main problems, Ellis said, is in the calculation of subsidies, which are done by estimate and may not reflect actual income- especially for those whose income changes dramatically during the year.

Photo Credit: 
Richard Masoner

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Keep Internet Access Tax Free!

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Cassandra Carroll on Tuesday, August 12th, 2014, 1:14 PM PERMALINK


Keep Internet access tax free!  Sign the petition!

The House recently passed a permanent extension of the internet tax moratorium, H.R. 3086,  Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act (PITFA). PITFA would permanently prevent state and local governments from imposing taxes on internet access. (This should not be confused with the Marketplace Fairness Act, which would allow sales tax to be collected from e-commerce.) The Senate has not yet passed the moratorium, but it is of great importance that they pass it before the current moratorium expires on November 1st.  

The Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act is the only thing stopping state and local governments from taxing internet access and making it significantly less affordable. If internet access is less affordable, fewer people will have it, and if fewer people have internet access, there is less investment in broadband infrastructure and overall less people using the internet as the amazing tool for innovation and entrepreneurship that it ought to be.

There is very little doubt that states and cities would impose taxes as soon as they were allowed.  Using cellular phone access as an example, an average of 17% of the average American cellular phone bill is now comprised of taxes.

Please do your part to keep internet access tax-free by signing our petition telling Congress to pass PITFA!

Photo Credit: 
401kcalculator.org

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


ATR Releases List of 2014 State Pledge Signers Ahead of Elections in Connecticut, Minnesota, and Wisconsin

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Jorge Marin on Monday, August 11th, 2014, 5:22 PM PERMALINK


As the next round of state primary elections approaches, Americans for Tax Reform is proud to release a new list of candidates, both challengers and incumbents, who have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge for the states of Connecticut, Minnesota, Wisconsin. The candidates on this list have announced their strong commitment to the taxpayers of their states and districts and pledged to oppose any and all efforts to increase the tax burden on their constituents. ATR urges taxpayers to consider the individuals who have staked their career to protecting the interests of the American citizen when they cast their ballots on Tuesday, August 12. The list of incumbents and challengers who have signed the Tax payer Protection Pledge and will be on the ballot Tuesday can be found in the following links:

Connecticut

Minnesota

Wisconsin

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


From Taxes to Keystone: Billionaire Steyer’s Ads Are Labeled ‘False’ By Fact-Checkers

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Michael Bastasch on Monday, August 11th, 2014, 11:43 AM PERMALINK


Liberal billionaire Tom Steyer has been increasing his ad buys promoting environmentalist causes and candidates. There’s just one problem: many of his ads are being fact-checked as misleading or even false.

Most recently, a Steyer-backed ad against Iowa Republican candidate for Senate Joni Ernst was rated “false” by the fact-checking site Politifact. Steyer’s group, NextGen Climate Action, put out an ad lambasting Ernst for signing a pledge not to raise taxes that was crafted by the group Americans for Tax Reform.

Republicans have been slammed by Democrats in the past for backing the no tax increase pledge, but the NextGen ad from July claimed the pledge “protects tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.” This, however, was declared to be false by Politifact.

“Ernst signed the Taxpayer Protection pledge, a promise promoted by Americans for Tax Reform, which is a broad vow to oppose all tax increases,” Politifact said. “It does not specify protecting tax loopholes for companies that have employees overseas.”

“In one instance, Americans for Tax Reform urged signers to vote against a bill that closed one of these loopholes, but the decision was more about stopping a tax increase than protecting outsourcing, and Ernst had yet to sign the pledge then, anyway. We rate this claim False,” declared Politifact.

Indeed, the ATR pledge states that signatories should “oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses” and “oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.”

If anything, the pledge allows for closing tax “loopholes” — they just have to be offset by lowering base tax rates. ATR bills itself as a group that wants a “system in which taxes are simpler, flatter, more visible, and lower than they are today.” Getting rid of loopholes would certainly make the tax system simpler.

NextGen Climate Action did not respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment on their anti-Ernst ad.

The attack on Ernst was not the first time that NextGen has been called out for bending the truth in their ads. Back in January, Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler gave a NextGen ad attacking the Keystone XL pipeline “four Pinocchios.”

Steyer was first thrust into the public sphere because of his opposition to it on global warming grounds. Despite some potential conflicts of interest with his former hedge fund, Steyer put out ads and funded studies trying to show that Keystone would harm the U.S. economy and be bad for the planet.

In particular, Steyer tried to paint the pipeline as an export project that would simply move oil through America’s heartland so it could be shipped to China, a dubious claim at best.

One ad put out by NextGen tried to show that Keystone would benefit China, not America. The ad claimed that Chinese government-backed companies had billions invested in Canadian oil sands development and was “counting on the U.S. to approve TransCanada’s pipeline to ship oil through America’s heartland and out to foreign countries like theirs.”

The ad caught the attention from fact-checkers who looked into NextGen’s claims about Keystone being used to ship oil to China. Kessler wrote the “ad does not even meet the minimal standards for such political attack ads. It relies on speculation, not facts, to make insinuations and assertions not justified by the reality.”

Why? Because while China has invested billions in Canadian energy development, it’s only a small player in the oil production game. Asian-owned companies only make up about 7 percent of Canadian oil production — this includes China, Japan and others.

The NextGen ad also features a top TransCanada official saying “I can’t do that…” after the ad claims the company “under oath…won’t commit to selling us one single barrel” of oil. But this quote by TransCanada’s president of energy and oil pipelines, Alexander Pourbaix, was “turned on its head,” reports the Post.

“Here’s the context: Pourbaix had explained that the refiners sometimes export refined products such as diesel, and then will import ‘incremental volumes’ of refined products,” Kessler wrote. “So a lawmaker asked him to ensure that any volume exported was met with an equal volume of imported products, so there was no net difference.”

Pourbaix actually said, “I can’t do that because I am merely the shipper of this oil.” The ad cuts him off and then poses a question he was never asked.

“Chinese state investment in the Canadian oil sands is an interesting development, but not worthy of the jingoistic treatment given here,” Kessler wrote. “While depending on market conditions some refined products may be exported, there is no evidence that every single barrel of oil would simply pass through the pipeline on the way to overseas shores. The twisting of Pourbaix’s remarks is especially disturbing, even by the standards of attack ads.”

Despite the “four Pinocchios” rating by the Post, NextGen later recycled the debunked ad in an attack on Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio in April.

Steyer again attempted to sway public support for Keystone in June by hiring former Navy SEAL chief David Cooper to say the project posed a huge national security risk. Cooper issued a report saying a “small group of evildoers could easily cause a catastrophic spill of millions of gallons of diluted bitumen, or tar sands crude, from the Keystone XL,” reports Bloomberg Businessweek.

“They could do it with as little as four pounds of commercial-grade, improvised explosives,” Businessweek added, citing Cooper’s report.

“A coordinated attack at several critical points would not only wreak havoc,” Cooper wrote in his report, “it would likely overwhelm the existing engineering capability needed to clean it up.”Ad Units

But National Journal noted that the report leaves out “crucial context” that dampens the Steyer’s attempt at painting Keystone as a national security liability.

“Here’s what it doesn’t say,” National Journal reported. “While terrorist attacks on energy infrastructure may be on the rise around the world, terrorist strikes on U.S. soil have declined dramatically in recent decades.”

“During this time, the most likely targets of a terrorist attack in the U.S. were businesses, followed by private citizens and property. Attacks tended to take place in urban areas, and non-fatal events vastly outnumbered deadly strikes,” the report continued, adding that Cooper even acknowledged the low probability of an attack on Keystone.

National Journal concluded that “while Keystone XL could fall victim to a terrorist attack, the odds of that happening in the near future are low relative to potential targets and past years’ activity.”

Follow Michael on Twitter and Facebook

 

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Photo Credit: Fortune Live Media

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


ATR Releases List of 2014 State Pledge Signers Ahead of Elections in Hawaii

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Jorge Marin on Friday, August 8th, 2014, 4:55 PM PERMALINK


As the Hawaii primary approaches, Americans for Tax Reform has released a new list of state legislative and state-wide candidates seeking office who have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. These candidates have shown a strong commitment to their state’s taxpayers by putting their convictions against new and/or higher taxes in writing. Please show your support at the ballot boxes on Saturday, August 9.

 

The list for Hawaii is as follows:

 

Incumbents:

 

  • Sam Slom (S-9)
  • Aaron Johanson (H-32)
  • Bob McDermott (H-40)
  • Cynthia Thielen (H-50)
  • Gene Ward (H-17)
  • Faye Pua Hanonano (H-4)

 

Challengers:

 

  • Miles Shiratori (Lt. Gov)
  • Ruth A. Brown (S-21)
  • Bronson Kekahuna Kaahvi (S-6)
  • Tercia Ku (S-21)
  • Julia Allen (H-20)
  • Frederick Fogel (H-3)
  • Victoria Franks (H-16)
  • Jonathan Hoomanawanui (H-14)
  • Bryan Jeremiah (H-41)
  • Carole Kauhiwai Kaapu (H-28)
  • Sam Kong (H-33)
  • Suk Moses (H-42)
  • Richard H. Pohle (H-12)
  • Emil Svrcina (H-37)
  • Kaimanu Takayama (H-48)

 

Photo Credit: Christopher Jetton

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Virginia Lifts Ban On Ridesharing Companies Uber And Lyft

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Peter Fricke on Friday, August 8th, 2014, 12:00 PM PERMALINK


Virginia announced Wednesday that it would grant temporary operating authority to ridesharing companies Uber and Lyft, allowing them to operate legally in the commonwealth.

In response to concerns about insurance coverage and passenger safety, Virginia sent cease-and-desist letters to Uber and Lyft on June 5, which both companies initially vowed to ignore. (RELATED: Uber, Lyft Defiant in Face of Los Angeles Ban)

The cease-and-desist orders were withdrawn as part of an agreement that “will help ensure the safety of passengers, bring the companies into compliance with Virginia law, provide transparency into their operations, and promote a level playing field for transportation providers,” according to a statement on Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s website. (RELATED: After Virginia’s Uber Ousting, Is DC More Free Than the Old Dominion)

“In order for Virginia to remain economically competitive,” McAuliffe said, “it is important that we welcome innovative companies like Uber and Lyft and provide them with the resources they need to safely and effectively operate in the Commonwealth.”

Attorney General Mark Herring portrayed the agreement as an equitable compromise, saying ridesharing companies “offer services that Virginians want, but it just wasn’t acceptable for them to operate without complying with regulations or other measures to help ensure the safety of passengers and motorists.”

Spokesmen for Uber and Lyft celebrated the agreement, saying it would ensure the safety of consumers while still embracing innovation. Dave Estrada, VP of Communication for Lyft, said the agreement “maintains the highest level of public safety while expanding consumer choice.”

Representatives for the transportation industry, however, do not believe the agreement adequately addresses their concerns. (RELATED: Houston Sting Catches Uber Drivers Accepting Street Hails)

The Taxicab, Limousine, and Paratransit Association (TLPA), an industry trade group, sponsors an initiative called “Who’s Driving You”, which claims on its website that ridesharing companies fail to perform sufficiently rigorous background checks on their drivers, and that the “surge pricing” they employ is equivalent to “price gouging”.

Dave Sutton, a spokesman for Who’s Driving You, released a statement saying, “it is well known that Uber and Lyft have unsafe insurance and background checks,” adding that, “despite these glaring safety risks, Virginia is allowing these companies to provide taxicab services to citizens. Buyer beware.”

 

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Photo Credit: 
Joakim Formo

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Summer Reading: Internet Access Taxes

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Michi Iljazi on Friday, August 8th, 2014, 10:47 AM PERMALINK


When school ends for many children, their teachers assign summer reading to help them to be prepared for the next school year.  In that spirit, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance (TPA) will be assigning crucial summer reading for Congress so that they are prepared when they return from their five-week summer recess. With not much time left between now and the November midterm elections (less so this year since Congress is only scheduled to be in session from September 8 to September 23), the clock is even more limited than usual. The first installment of our ‘Summer Reading’ series centers on internet access taxes.

Congress took a major step earlier this year in making sure that internet access taxes would end for good when they passed the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act (view the House bill here) on a voice vote. TPA urged every member of the House of Representatives to vote YES on the legislation.  The passage of the legislation was a welcome development in what has been a very long battle. However, the work is only halfway done as now the Senate must take action and pass their version (view the Senate bill here).

Underscoring the need for Congressional action in both the House and the Senate, TPA joined with nearly 30 other groups in April signing a letter urging support for both the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act (H.R. 3086) and the Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act (S. 1431). The letter, which was bipartisan, laid out the case for why internet access taxes must be stopped:

Internet taxation affects all Americans from all political views and all walks of life. From healthcare to education, small business entrepreneurs to Fortune 500 companies, the Internet has dramatically transformed the way everyone lives, works, and learns. In 2010, the Internet accounted for an estimated $684 billion, or 4.7 percent of all U.S. economic activity. While the Internet was a nascent technology when the current moratorium was established in 1998, it has become the economic engine driving innovation and growth in our 21st century economy. Throttling that engine at a time when our economy is struggling hurts not only those trying to invest in America’s future, but also those who can least afford it and have the most to gain from the Internet’s potential.

TPA continues to support S. 1431, the Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act. The legislation is being sponsored by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) and like the House version, it would make the ban on internet access taxes permanent. Now that one chamber of Congress has acted, it is time for the other chamber to do their part.

Here are some reasons why the ban on internet access taxes must become permanent before it expires November 1, 2014:

1.  Internet Access Taxes Will Harm Middle Class Families

2.  Internet Access Will Harm Education, Innovation, & Commerce

3.  Preventing Internet Access Taxes Has Bipartisan Support in Congress

4. Fifteen Years Have Passed Since The Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA)

5.  Congress Keeps Renewing the Moratorium, Time to Make it Permanent

6.  Internet Access Taxes Make a Complicated Tax Code Even More Complicated

If those reasons aren’t enough for the Senate, look what happened when TPA took to the National Mall in Washington, D.C. earlier this summer. In a video featured on Townhall.com, TPA spoke to everyday people from all across the country about the possibility that they may be hit with a tax just for going online, unless Congress moved quickly to stop it from happening.

TPA, and the Internet Tax Freedom Act Coalition (ITFA) have continued to work on behalf of millions to highlight the importance of keeping the internet tax free. Last month a major victory was achieved in the House with the passage of PITFA. Now, the focus and pressure must move to the Senate as they have legislation ready and waiting for action. November is approaching and the tax moratorium will expire, unless the Senate follows the House's lead, TPA urges them to enact bipartisan legislation that will prevent Internet access taxes from becoming a harmful reality for all Americans.

 

Michi Iljazi is the Communications and Policy Manager with the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.

Editor's Note: This article was originally posted on Taxpayer Protection Alliance and was republished here with permission.

Photo Credit: 
KOMUnews

Top Comments


Obama Donor Mellody Hobson Concedes Corporate Tax Rate Is Too High

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Jeffrey Meyer on Thursday, August 7th, 2014, 4:14 PM PERMALINK


Here’s something you don’t see every day, a donor for President Obama admitting that America’s corporate tax rate is too high.

Mellody Hobson appeared on CBS This Morning on Thursday, August 7 to discuss pharmacy chain Walgreens’ decision to keep its headquarters in the United States. The CBS News contributor opined that even though she agreed with the company’s decision she acknowledged that in America “it's still the highest tax rate of any developed nation.”

 

The segment began with co-host Charlie Rose promoting how “President Obama says lawmakers are working to keep American companies from shortchanging taxpayers” before playing a lengthy sound bite of the president criticizing companies who switch their citizenship to reduce their tax burden. 

Rose then turned to Hobson who cheered Walgreens’ decision to remain in the United States:

They're making a long term decision. I actually think in this situation they made the right decision. Because the other thing the U.S. Government has said, they may come back retroactively and tax some of these companies.

As the discussion continued, CBS’ Norah O’Donnell was the first person to lament how high America’s corporate tax rate is:

Since 2011 there’s been something like two dozen firms that have relocated. They save billions of dollars in tax money. I can remember when I was covering the White House two years ago this was a topic for the Obama Administration. Lowering corporate tax rates and still nothing has been done.

After being prompted by O’Donnell, the Obama donor concluded her remarks by admitting that the U.S. is hurt by having the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world: 

Now compare that to someone like Ireland, a country like Ireland which is 12 and a half percent. You have a lot of these companies, particularly those that derive a lot of revenues overseas saying maybe I get a better deal by being somewhere else but everyone looks at this and says this is an arms race. You could lower the rate and then there's still going to be another country with a lower rate and maybe someone still defects.   

See relevant transcript below. 

 

CBS

CBS This Morning 

August 7, 2014

NORAH O’DONNELL: Walgreens made a costly decision in more ways than one. America’s largest company is keeping its headquarters in the U.S. The store’s parent company called simply Walgreen considered a move overseas where it could pay a much lower corporate tax rate.  

CHARLIE ROSE: Investors didn't like the choice. Walgreens’ stock dropped more than 14 percent in the past 2 days. President Obama says lawmakers are working to keep American companies from shortchanging taxpayers. 

BARACK OBAMA: These accountants are saying, you know what? We found great loophole. If you just flip your citizenship to another country, even though it's just a paper transaction, we think we can get you out of paying a whole bunch of taxes. Well, it’s not fair. It's not right. There is legislation working its way through Congress that would eliminate some of these tax loopholes entirely. 

ROSE: CBS News contributor and analyst Mellody Hobson is in Chicago. Walgreen is based in Illinois. Melody good morning. 

MELLODY HOBSON: Good morning.

ROSE: So why did they decide not to relocate?

HOBSON: I think they looked at the tax savings, which is huge, $4 billion they could save. They compared that to the backlash growing, the concern. People feeling that these people who use this technique called an inversion, inverters are deserters we’re now hearing people say. They looked at that. And then they also looked at the revenues that they derive from the U.S. government specifically Medicare and Medicaid which represents $17 billion of their revenues and they said maybe we shouldn’t put that in jeopardy. 

O’DONNELLL: And what about the stock getting hammered? 

HOBSON: Well the stock got hammered because a lot of the investors say we don’t get this added profitability from this tax savings. And so they thought over the short term this doesn't look great for them. I think they're making a long term decision. I actually think in this situation they made the right decision. Because the other thing the U.S. Government has said, they may come back retroactively and tax some of these companies. 

O’DONNELL: Melody, I mean since 2011 there’s been something like two dozen firms that have relocated. They save billions of dollars in tax money. I can remember when I was covering the White House two years ago this was a topic for the Obama Administration. Lowering corporate tax rates and still nothing has been done. Why and what does it mean for U.S. companies? 

HOBSON: Right, so the U.S. tax rate has come down over the last couple decades. It was high as 46 percent at one point on the corporate side. It's now 35 percent. But it's still the highest tax rate of any developed nation. Now compare that to someone like Ireland, a country like Ireland which is 12 and a half percent. You have a lot of these companies, particularly those that derive a lot of revenues overseas saying maybe I get a better deal by being somewhere else but everyone looks at this and says this is an arms race. You could lower the rate and then there's still going to be another country with a lower rate and maybe someone still defects. So it's not just a question of tax policy. 

O’DONNELL: Alright, Mellody Hobson good to see you. Thank you so much.

 

Editor's Note: This article was originally posted on NewsBusters and was republished here with permission.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


hidden