On May 23, 2018, we published revised versions of our Privacy Policy and User Agreements. Please read these updated terms and take some time to understand them. Your use of our services is subject to these revised terms.
Yes, I Agree.

The Debate Over Tax Policy

Debate over tax policy is an obviously crucial issue because it impacts everything from various government services like police and infrastructure and judicial system and military funding, to having a successful educational system, and so forth.

Between the two political parties, one area of debate which hasn’t really been brought to close scrutiny is corporate taxation. Republicans argue that America has the highest corporate tax rate at 39.1%, which is well above the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) average of 24.1%. Democrats point out that if you look at the effective tax rate, the largest corporations of the S&P 500 are paying effective tax rates well below that level and typically average out to around 15%.

Essentially, due to years of lobbying the politicians, corporate lawyers have continuously changed tax rules to lean in favor of the largest of corporations. Transnational corporations effectively manage a type of tax arbitrage, where profits are realized in subsidiaries headquartered in parts of the world where the taxes are the least, and losses are realized in subsidiaries which are located in regions where taxes are the highest. Usage of subsidiaries with addresses in countries that act as tax havens, like the Cayman Islands, Switzerland and Ireland, have become a common practice. As a result, revenue to the government from the S&P 500 companies has plummeted over the years as can be seen below:

Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of Federal Revenue
1955 . . . 27.3%
2010 . . . 8.9%

Corporate Taxes as a Percentage of GDP
1955 . . . 4.3%
2010 . . . 1.3%

Individual Income/Payrolls as a Percentage of Federal Revenue
1955 . . . 58.0%
2010 . . . 81.5%

Since 2014, the above figures have generally stayed precisely the same. In other words, as corporations paid less, an even greater burden has been placed on individuals. About 54 of the S&P 500 corporations paid no taxes at all, with the majority getting refunds. For example, from 2010 to 2014, General Electric (GE) made $33 billion in profits, but paid zero in income taxes, and actually received $1.4 billion in tax refunds over that same stretch of time.

One way companies have been cutting their taxes is by corporate inversion, in other words, moving their headquarters offshore to cut their taxes. There is a progressive solution which is given the complicated name of single sales factor apportioned corporate tax. This simply means that if a company has only X percentage of its sales in the United States of America, it only pays taxes on X percentage of its earnings. So if a corporation has a mere 30% of its sales in the United States, it only pays taxes on 30% of its earnings. This was proposed by economist Michael Udell of the District Economics Group. Unfortunately, lobbying groups for special interests manage to succeed in allowing this concept to even be brought before Congress.

Real estate investment trust (REIT) structures have an effective tax rate of close to 10%, and are typically publicly traded real estate management companies that pay-out 90% of their taxable income as a dividend to shareholders. Supposedly, 75% of the REIT’s assets are supposed to be real estate. Over the past decade, however, many corporations have switched to REIT structures to cut their tax obligations. For example, prison management companies like Correctional Corporations of America (CXW) and GEO Group Inc. (GEO), cell phone tower management company American Tower (AMT), document storage company Iron Mountain (IRM), and timber company Weyerhauser (WY) avoided taxes altogether using a REIT structure, and it appears that the railroads and power line management companies may adopt this structure as well.

Setting aside corporations, what about taxes on individuals? Franklin D. Roosevelt had a top tax bracket for the rich of 91%. Of course, that isn’t 91% of all income as our tax system is a graduated structure with brackets. In today’s dollars, every dollar made above something like $1.4 million was taxed at 91 cents at the dollar. This tax bracket was lowered to 70% under President Kennedy and then cut down to as low as 28% under Ronald Reagan, and since then has been raised. What do we have today? A top rate of 39.6% for every dollar made above $406,751, and the rich rarely ever pay that. Most of the rich don’t have a salary that can be taxed as income but earn their money from a portfolio of stocks and bonds.

Taxes on cash dividends used to be taxed as ordinary income; however, that tax has been cut so those dividends are now taxed at 15%. Taxes on corporate bonds are taxed at the ordinary income rate, but if you put the corporate bonds into a fund or a unit investment trust, and then have the bond’s interest payments payed out as dividends to unit holders of that trust, you effectively lower that rate to 15%. Municipal bonds are free of federal taxes and, depending on the bond, may be free of your own state tax as well. Sales from long-term capital gains – stocks held more than a year – are taxed as a rate of 15%. As a result, the rich in the top 1% typically end up paying at an effective tax rate of 15%, which is well below the middle class that typically ends up at a 35% tax bracket. This is why famed investor Warren Buffet of Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) pointed out that his tax rate was well below that of his own secretary.

As mentioned, in the 1980s, Reagan cut the top tax bracket down to 28%. To make up for the decrease in government revenue, Reagan raised the payroll tax 11 times, which amounted to the largest tax increase on the middle class in history. He is better remembered for his tax cuts, but those cuts only benefitted the richest in American society.

Bottom line, not only is the bulk of the government revenue now coming from individuals, a great deal more is now coming from the middle class than it was in the 1950s. So, we went from a system in which the bulk of the tax burden was on capital and far less on labor. Now we are in a system where labor is subsidizing capital.

One of the dominant economic theories is supply side economics, which suggest that greater economic growth is achieved if capital is not taxed and is freed up to invest in assets which encourage job growth and grow the economy. However, historical data counters that narrative. Through what is referred to as globalization, U.S. multinational corporations have been investing since the 1980s in assets offshore seeking cheaper labor costs to enhance profit. For those assets not invested, they are hoarded in savings in other countries to the point where over $2.1 trillion of the S&P 500’s free cash is held in offshore tax havens.

The United States exhibited its highest growth rate in the 1960s when the highest marginal tax rate was initially at levels of 90%, 77%, and 70% throughout that decade, and far higher corporate tax revenue was collected as well. When wealthy elites paid their fair share of taxes, the country benefitted, and both the public and private sectors worked in better balance. Now we appear to be in a system where there is a distribution of wealth from the bottom 90% up to the wealthiest Americans. As a result, the middle class is shrinking, and our infrastructure is poorly funded and falling to disrepair. Republicans continually advocate for flat taxes, which act as yet another tax cut for the rich and further increases the tax burden on the middle class and the poor. Putting in place a more progressive tax structure while eliminating loop holes would aid in growing the middle class, and re-invigorating economic growth.

Archives

Select A Month
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • Market Basics

    New to the micro-cap markets?Get answers to your questions about investing in Small-Cap / Micro-Cap Stocks and learn how to protect yourself.

    The Basics

    Newsletter Publishers

    Have an up and coming newsletter and want to be included in our coverage list? Looking to get more coverage and grow subscriptions? Register for coverage.

    Register

    Public Companies

    Are you a Small-Cap / Micro-Cap company looking for coverage? We'd love to hear from you. Fill out our quick contact form or send us a text.

    Get Covered