tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post8445522446336112518..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Destination Based Cash Flow Tax and Supply-Side SillinessUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-87979590665032573852017-03-06T12:10:29.864-05:002017-03-06T12:10:29.864-05:00"the proposal is clearly superior to the alte..."the proposal is clearly superior to the alternatives on the table, which are the current system plus OECD's BEPS provisions, or some kind of territorial system."<br /><br />If we combine BEPS with a territorial system - we get all the advantages of DBCFT without the controversies. So how is DBCFT superior? I do not think this follows at all. ProGrowthLiberalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17138489390594441753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-69558573626427996882017-03-06T12:08:44.952-05:002017-03-06T12:08:44.952-05:00"moving headquarters outside the US allows co..."moving headquarters outside the US allows companies to return profits to shareholders without having to pay US corporate income tax."<br /><br />There is a much simpler way of addressing this issue. Replace the repatriation tax with stronger transfer pricing enforcement. Why pass an overly complicated and controversial tax if that is the goal? BTW - I went light on Swagel. He conflated low wage with low tax. China and Mexico are low wage but they are not tax havens. Ireland and Switzerland are tax havens but their workers generally make high wages. ProGrowthLiberalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17138489390594441753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-86584748500954044092017-03-06T11:02:17.300-05:002017-03-06T11:02:17.300-05:00I think you're being unfair to Swagel and to t...I think you're being unfair to Swagel and to the proposal. First, Swagel doesn't think that taxes are the sole reason for location decisions, they matter on the margin. Are you suggesting taxes don't influence location decisions? Second, moving headquarters outside the US allows companies to return profits to shareholders without having to pay US corporate income tax. Lots of companies have made the decision to invert in order to achieve this. Many other US companies may have been acquired by foreign companies in part due to the tax advantages of a foreign parent. Third, the proposal is clearly superior to the alternatives on the table, which are the current system plus OECD's BEPS provisions, or some kind of territorial system.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com