Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, May 18, 2007
Larry Kudlow :: Townhall.com Columnist
If You Really Want To Make U.S. Companies More Competitive...
by Larry Kudlow
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


There’s a big hullabaloo in Washington about making America more “competitive.” Much of the hubbub centers around President Bush’s powerful Treasury man, Henry Paulson, who has been busy holding conferences and writing op-eds on the subject.

Competitiveness is a noble venture. But the problem I have with the current campaign is that it’s limited to accounting.

Undoubtedly, more transparent auditing, better financial reporting, and streamlined accounting standards to encourage international companies to list on U.S. exchanges are all good things. And of course, Sarbanes-Oxley is an onerous piece of regulatory overreach -- it throws red tape and huge costs at a problem that could have been easily remedied with the stronger enforcement of existing laws. Sarbox reform is in order.

But there’s plenty missing from this competitiveness calculation. To begin, the U.S. is actually doing quite a lot right.

Ever since Ronald Reagan rejuvenated the American free-market system in the 1980s with lower tax rates, deregulation, and disinflation, the U.S. economy has vastly outperformed its industrial trading partners in Europe and Japan. Amazingly, we’ve slogged through only five negative-GDP quarters over the past twenty-five years, for an unbelievable prosperity rate of 95 percent. Our stock market has increased twelve-fold in this period.

Then, in 2003, President Bush’s large-scale tax cuts on capital lit the booster rockets that launched today’s tremendous bull-market economy.

The Dow Jones is setting new highs almost daily. U.S. employment stands at a record 150 million. Household wealth is $56 trillion, another record. And contrary to what the bubbleheads keep telling us, the market value of assets is growing roughly three-times faster than the value of debt liabilities.

None of this would be happening if we weren’t already competitive.

The alleged demise of U.S. manufacturing is a key example of how uncompetitive perception often trumps competitive reality. U.S. manufacturers produced $1.5 trillion worth of goods in 2005, up 70 percent from $900 billion in 1992, according to Edward Gresser of the left-leaning Progressive Policy Institute. Manufacturing now accounts for a higher share of the U.S. economy than it did fifteen years ago, and for the same share of world production it enjoyed in the early 1990s. Yes, there have been manufacturing job losses, but virtually all of them have come from productivity-enhancing automation.

Another mistaken criticism alleges that the vast majority of new jobs are low wage. Not true. Last year, the two biggest job-creating sectors -- education/health services and professional/business services -- paid their non-management workers significantly more than the average wage for all workers.

Then we have the liberal commentators who rail on about “income inequality.” Democrats in Congress would solve this by taxing the rich. But such fossilized, populist thinking will only take the capital out of capitalism.

Inside the historically low 4.5 percent unemployment rate, there’s a 7.5 percent unemployment rate for those with less than a high-school diploma, a 4.5 percent rate for high-school grads, and a mere 1.8 percent rate for those with college degrees or better. Or look at these figures: Americans who don’t finish high school earn roughly $429 a week. Those finishing high school pocket $602 a week. And Americans with a bachelor’s degree or higher take home $1,030 a week.

So it pays in this country to stay in school.

But if the Treasury Department and Congress really want to improve American competitiveness, they must continue the Reagan tradition by bolstering our corporate tax competitiveness.

Right now, the U.S. suffers from one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. While the European Union has been cutting business taxes -- the average for EU countries is now only 27 percent -- the U.S. is stuck with a 40 percent corporate income-tax rate. Booming Ireland boasts a corporate rate of only 10 percent. Even France’s rate comes in lower than the U.S. rate.

What’s more, our companies are double-taxed on the profits they make in the U.S. and abroad. Not so in Europe. Across the Atlantic, companies are spared this burden through tax rebates. This disparity not only reduces our competitiveness, it forces our companies to leave profits sitting idly overseas.

Here’s a good idea, courtesy of Loews CEO James Tisch: Reduce the corporate capital-gains tax rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. Mr. Tisch correctly believes that this would unlock hundreds of billions of languishing corporate asset dollars, injecting new oxygen into the corporate bloodstream. It’s a move that would pay for itself by unleashing a flood of new businesses and jobs, along with a tidal wave of new tax receipts. France and Germany have virtually no capital-gains taxes.

So, while accounting reforms are all well and good, new tax incentives will have a far greater impact on economic competitiveness than mere bookkeeping. No “competitiveness action plan” can be complete without full-scale corporate tax reform.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Lawrence Kudlow is host of CNBC's Kudlow & Company

Be the first to read Lawrence Kudlow's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

FairTax
Institute the FairTax! That will make America the most competitive economy in the history of the world. It makes perfect sense to tax consumption rather than production; encourage ingenuity, investment, and incentive rather than discouraging them. If Republicans want to win in '08, they need to embrace the FairTax.

Just askin...
Does Kudlow ever make an assertion without resorting to hyperbole. E.g:

"Then, in 2003, President Bush’s large-scale tax cuts on capital lit the booster rockets that launched today’s tremendous bull-market economy."

Also, if Kudlow doesn't think there is a credit bubble, or at least a housing bubble, then, well, I don't know what to say about that.

“Great Labor Shortage Lie”
BusinessWeek Debunks the “Great Labor Shortage Lie”

BusinessWeek: A global labor crunch, already being felt by some employers, appears to have intensified in recent months. That’s in spite of widely publicized layoffs, including Citigroup’s plans to shed as many as 15,000 staffers… Corporations are determined to keep labor costs under control, so they’re reaching deeper into their bag of tricks…Some are lowering their standards for new hires or moving operations to virgin territories other outsourcers haven’t discovered…

Economists, of course, will tell you there’s no such thing as a labor shortage. From a worker’s viewpoint, many so-called shortages could quickly be solved if employers were to offer more money. And worldwide, millions of people still can’t find jobs. The strongest evidence that there’s no general shortage today is that overall worker pay has barely outpaced inflation.

SirotaBlog: Politicians…couch their bought-off immigration positions in humane terms - pretending that they care about the plight of impoverished Mexicans. Yet, most of these same politicians aggressively supported NAFTA, which deliberately drove 19 million Mexicans into poverty.

And even more to the point: advocating for so-called “guest worker” programs that provide a legal framework for American employers to exploit Mexican workers without giving those Mexican workers basic labor/human rights afforded to domestic workers is simply not a humane position either for Mexicans or Americans - it’s a position that creates a 21st Century brand of inhumane economic slavery for Mexicans, and embraces the ongoing efforts to drive American wages into the ground.

READ MORE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/businessweek-debunks-the-%e2%80%9cgreat-labor-shortage-lie%e2%80%9d


One Way
to make the US more competitive is to simply stop the silliness. How many people go to work every day amd measure productivity by the number of emails they answer? How many of those have substance? How many entire departments exist for diversity and for managing change? These things are intuitive, yet we've pushed them to the point of religiosity. It creates an employee dependency of literally having work placed in his inbox or he hasnt a clue what to do.

These problems are profound, expensive, and elsewhere in the world non existent.

I am a big fan of R. Reagan
but if you credit him with "deregulation" you are giving credit where it is not due. There really has been no deregulation in any industry. If there had been the size of the Federal Register and the CFR (Code of Federal Reg) would have decreased. In actuality, what we have called "deregulation" is really "reregulation".

How many times have you seen Congress rush to pass some new law like Sarbanes-Oxley when it is not needed. I have had personal experience with this law, as had anyone who has ever worked for a large corporation. I'll give you an example of how stupid this law is and it's impact.

Once when the Plant Manager at a place I used to work at was away for a week. His secretary submitted het time sheet and asked that one of the Supervisors in my group approve it. We were informed by corporate legal that we would have to get someone of equal authority to the Plant Manager to approve it and not someone who was "acting Manager" in his absense. This turned into a real problem occupying several hours of Management time just to approve a secretary's time sheet.

This is just one example of onerous regulations that have been promulgated on the public. Look at cable TV. it has been deregulated right? Does that mean that there are no regulations for Cable TV? If you believe that, then look at 47CFR.

Interview with Ayn Rand
This will really make you think.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7wsr768hdk4

Nuts and no Christmas
the two biggest job-creating sectors -- education/health services and professional/business services
-------------------

Yes and much of that is tied to Medicare and Medicaid payments to growing use of those systems and tax dollars pay those salaries indirectly because the Gov. payments to the health companies are what they depend on to pay those new workers.

Look at the job reports for the last few and that sector and government employees are the fastest growing. We have 22 million gov. workers that 124 million private sector workers have pay taxes for plus all the cost of gov. That is 1 gov. worker for every 6 workers. Then when you add that 52% of Americans now get some type of gov. funding and that many private sector jobs are actually government spending jobs (defense, health care, highway construction, etc.) we are in deep doo-doo.

Look at how they figure job growth:
quote:
*

BLS is implementing an estimation procedure with two components: the first component uses business deaths to impute employment for business births....

The second component is an ARIMA time series model designed to estimate the residual net birth/death employment not accounted for by the imputation.....
The net birth/death model component figures are unique to each month and exhibit a seasonal pattern that can result in negative adjustments in some months.....

... take a look at last month’s data point, where the Birth-Death Model kicked out a gain of 317,000 jobs for the month of April. The actual report gain from BLS was a much smaller than expected uptick of +88,000 jobs, BUT, that 88,000 gain includes the Birth-Death gain of 317,000, which ex-the Birth–Death gain means we really saw the economy shedding jobs on the order of a hefty loss of –229,000. Even if we assume that part of the Birth-Death Model gains were valid, say for example, 100,000 of the 317,000 jobs, we are still looking at job losses greater then 100,000 for the month....
http://www.financialsense.com
/Market/barbera/2007/0515.html

This is an excellent site to read on many things dealing with our economy. In many articles it demostrates how the inflation, job growth and economy in general is being manipulated to appear to be something it isn't.

fair tax
I support the fair tax because it's the right thing to do. It probably wont help me(actually it will hurt) if it's implemented. Our younger generation needs this increased productivity boost to pay for the greedy geezer generation who ordered the meal and are skipping out on the tab.

For Sved -- on Kudlow's Fair Tax
Sved; You say: “It makes perfect sense to tax consumption rather than production.”
Taxing consumption is taxing production. Take it from Adam Smith, who wrote:

“Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to, only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer. The maxim is so self-evident, that it would be absurd to attempt to prove it.” “Wealth of Nations” Book III, Chapter VIII. Page 625.

Or take it from J.-B. Say, the original supply-sider –- (“Supply creates its own demand.”) Say was emphatic in endorsing Smith’s observation on consumption. In his Book III, “On The Consumption of Wealth”, Say writes in the first paragraph; “I was obliged in the first book to explain the sense, in which I used the term, consumption, because production cannot be effected without consumption.”

Larry Kudlow professes to be a supply-sider, but does he really understand the ramifications of a horrendous tax on consumption; or, may I ask, do you?

There have been a wide variety of suggestions of for ways to offset the consumption tax burden on the poor and middle-class. Some have suggested exempted exempting medical costs ($1.5T) from the sales tax. Some suggest exempting both medical and food costs ($2.9T.) And one young lady is blogging a $10,000 rebate per tax return ($1.35T extra needed to collect.)

The 2006 revenue needed to replace was $2.515T (NIPA 3.2); personal consumption in 2006 was $9.3T. Assuming the economy rolls along at the same rate, a sales tax rate of 27% would be required. Assuming exemption of the $1.5T medical consumption, a sales tax rate 33% would be required. Assuming exemption of the $1.5T medical and $1.4T food consumption, a sales tax rate 39% would be required. Assuming the young lady blogger’s idea prevails ($10,000 rebate/tax return), the tax take required would increase from $2.515T to $3.865T; and that would require a sales tax rate of 42%.

And then, of course, we have to consider the state and local sales taxes – ranging from about 6% to about 10%. That means we would have a combined sales tax rate ranging from 40% to 50%; but that would be enough if we were able retain the 2006 level of economic activity.

In May 1997, the Japanese increased their national sales tax rate from 3% to 5%. Two quarters later, their GDP shrank by 11.2% (at an annual rate.) The Japanese have always been cautious consumers, sporting a 20% savings (or call it non-consumption) rate. After their 2/3rd increase in their sales tax rate, their savings (non-consumption) rate climbed to 28%.

Our savings (non-consumption) rate would also climb dramatically if we quadrupled or quintupled the overall sales tax rate. So would our non-production rate.

Whoever said taxes were...
SUPPOSED to be FAIR??? No, taxes are not made to be fair, they are to enrich the king and enslave the poor. No tax ever helped a man out of poverty, and anyone who likes taxes is on the recipient side --and nuts! Taxes are made to hinder and to dissuade people from whatever they are doing that the tax-or does not want. (they'll never admit that) So HOW can we ever have a FAIR - TAX ? The answer is to tax one's self - voluntarily - for the greater good of maintaining the necessary evil called government. Government IS evil, so you must strive to have the smallest amount possible to promote society. Consider the NRST, which is code for the FairTax. It IS a tax, and therefore unpallateable. However, the thing that makes it FAIR (to you) is "CONTROL". You control your light bill by turning off the switch, so why not taxes? If you WANT to stumble in the dark, it's your prorogative. Now, to eat you have to pay the tax for the food you consume. This might be a good diet - and it works better than the picture of the hippo on the fridge. FairTax ends the hand in your back pocket, and the programs to desire something for nothing, trying to get even with the government's robbery. So, how do we GET this control? --You TAKE it. The government is never going to hand you the reigns, so you must rise up, be vocal, and insist that you are a free citizen, not a slave to feed the state. You work, they take without asking, and then you beg for something back. You have no control over anything in your life, save that some TAX has made you think that you need it. That is slavery! "Oh, NOW I GET IT; taxes are a necessary evil that I have complete control to limit by my consumption habits whenever I want, and that makes it a FAIR exchange." == I work, I keep MY wages, I buy what I want, and I fund the size and type of government that I want.

FairTax.org --do it NOW!

Larry Kudlow professes to be a supply-si
Larry Kudlow professes to be a supply-sider, but does he really understand the ramifications of a horrendous tax on consumption; or, may I ask, do you?
=======================

Yes, If you go to a store and have to choose between a 80 cent American Made Product that used to be a $1.10 before the tax from business was removed or so and a Chinese product that is still $1 or more, whether are paying more visible tax or not, you will buy the U.S. good that is now cheaper. You will have just as much to spend for domestic goods as foreign goods.

Now you have to pay 35% in hidden taxes and compliance costs for the U.S. good, plus your local tax while the Chinese good with shipping costs almost as much. You don't pay more taxes with a consumption tax, you just pay a visible, lower tax if the taxes included in prices have been removed. That is how Ireland with higher wages than we have is eating our lunch in some sectors of manufacturing. There corporate tax rate is 30 pts lower than ours and thus, the company doesn't have to charge as much to have the same after tax profit as a U.S. company.

There the consumer pays taxes and since Irish products are often cheaper saves by buying "local" instead of imports. Business doesn't pay taxes. All their taxes are in the prices we pay. We just don't know they are their and think it is all cost, overhead, and profit and thus, buy the Chinese good not realizing the 35% could be eliminated.

Old Man talk
That 35% in hidden taxes (passed on to us by the business world) that is to be eliminated by a national sales tax has been bandied about for a long time; but is it really true?

Look at the NIPA table for Federal Government Receipts and Expenditures (Table 3.2.) In the year 2006, taxes on corporate income was $388.5B, or 4.2% of the national total of personal consumption expenditures (NIPA Table 2.3.5.)

Businesses, both corporate and non-corporate, paid a trifle less tha 50% of the $919.7B the IRS took in as contributions for government social insurance. That is only another 5% of PCE.

Together, they account for 9.2% of the 35% you mention. Can you help me understand from where the other 26% comes.

But that is not the most relevant point. I believe you when you say you are old, but I don't know if you are old enough to remember the great depression and WW II. People learned to do without a lot of things. First, there was the depression and we had fear itself to fear. One of our fears was that we would run out of money.

Grownups piled up their savings in banks (except for a few days of bank holiday due to bank runs.) Bank reserves exceeded total deposits for several years; there was not enough consumption going around to put the money to work producing something.

Then came WW II; it began when I was 12. We had record consumption, but most of it had to do with fighting the Japanese and German military forces. We learned to do without a lot of things; you would be surprised to know how easy it is to learn to do without something. Particurly if you could save 150% by doing so. (We could save only 100% of the cost by doing without way back then.)

Hey! We are right now learning to do without some of the gasoline we were long accustomed to burning. We can save about $3 per gallon by doing without; and that is about 200% of what it was just a few months ago.


The problem is the size of government
The Fair Tax is all nice and fine and I support it, but the real problem is government SPENDING. We have to decide if socialism is what we want in this country, because that is what we are quickly becoming. Do we want to empower and fund centralized government to look after our every need or do we want to be self-governed as our Founders intended?

If our federal government actually abided by the Constitution that each of the public servants in the 3 branches of government took an oath to uphold, there would be very little left to fund. Instead, much of the powers that the federal government has taken on would be returned to the states and to the people. Responsibility for our well-being would be returned to us and so would our privacy, property and liberty.

Hidden taxes
I can give you some examples that might help but, the main thing is that each part or component has hidden tax in that accumulates as it moves up the chain to final completion.

Also, don't forget, I said compliance costs which are huge and often higher than the tax itself. But, here are couple of sites with examples of the hidden tax portion.
quote:
This study calculates how much additional money middle- income workers must earn to purchase various goods and ser vices--a new car, a computer, or a year's college tuition for their children--after all taxes are fully taken into account. For instance, a wage earner in an average-tax state must earn $17,038 to purchase a $10,000 car. That means that the work er pays $7,038 in income, payroll, and sales taxes on a $10,000 car. The study finds that in some high-tax states, such as California and New York, the "true" price to consum ers of goods and services is twice the retail price because of taxes. Self-employed workers, who must pay a self-employment tax, routinely must also earn double the retail price of an item to have the after-tax income to buy it. That is the "rule of two on taxes."
===================
http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-015.html

This is an older study so things are worse now, especially on complaince but here are some more stats.
quote:
up 20 percent or more percent of all retail prices? It's true. According to Dr. Dale Jorgenson of Harvard University, hidden income taxes are passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices - from an average 22 percent on goods to an average 25 percent on services -
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.
asp?formmode=view&id=4145
======================
Lower estimate and more recent but, to be fair I wanted to include it too. Now for compliance costs which are often higher for a company than the final tax they pay. Why? Look at this.
quote:
According to a 2001 U.S. government report entitled "The Impact of Regulatory Costs on Small Firms," companies spent roughly $800 billion annually on federal compliance issues before Sarbanes-Oxley was even drafted.
http://www.cioinsight.com/article2/0,
1540,1846782,00.asp
============================
And now, due to the huge cost of Sarbanes-Oxley we are seeing business avoiding the U.S. for London and Hong Kong listings. It is also why some businesses are moving out of the U.S.

A friend of mine has a Brother-in-law that manufactures medical equipment. Due to Sarbanes-Oxley, he had to hire more accountants just to keep up and he was a "one accountant" firm. The cost of it has been huge and all gets passed on in the price and all companies are adding it.

There are 14 companies in the flour chain for bread from seed grower to store shelf, each adding their share of payroll, excise, property, income, fuel, etc. All taxes are added in and make up that 35% when compliance costs are added.

All those taxes could be combined and placed on the consumer where he would save money in prices and U.S. business would be competitive again. We pay those taxes anyway so why hide them and add compliance cost to every one of them. Instead of collect them all-in-one, we spread them out all over the place and add cost for each different collection system.

I came right at the end of the Great Depression and only saw the after effects where people remained frugal and prepared for another downturn instead of spending like crazy.

However, that is what we are facing and why I have hope for America. When we are in that condition again, Americans will wake up and do what they did then and also demand a change in government to get the reforms we need.

Our currency will have collapsed and we will be competitive again in the world labor market. We will start up the ladder again and be strong again. But, it will take a crash first before the voters wake up to what is going on.

To Old Man from older man;

As to the link to the Ways and Means, I got this message: “The system cannot find the file specified.”
As to the link to the cioinsight, I got this message: “We're sorry, but something just went wrong...”
As to the Cato link, it came through loud and clear, and I read through it; as I have read through scores, indeed 100’s, of their offerings over the years. I realized long ago that Cato was well practiced in creative analysis.

The sum of the parts cannot be greater than the whole; as my hero, Ross Perot, would say; “It’s as simple as that.”

Here are a couple of links that define the “whole” of taxes paid in the US economy (NIPA Table 3.1) and the Federal portion of the “whole” (NIPA Table 3.2.)

http://webpages.charter.net/prologue/images/NIPA_Table_3.1.gif

http://webpages.charter.net/prologue/images/NIPA_Table_3.2.gif

(I had to expand the second picture a bit to get all the Federal receipts. To eliminate the fuzzy in the image, click the mouse pointer to enlarge the visual image.)

Then there is the matter of what is available to tax via a “national sales tax.”

http://webpages.charter.net/prologue/images/NIPA_Table_2.3.5.gif

Some of PCE would be difficult to tax. Imagine the Sunday morning collection at our local churches; one set of ushers to take up the collection and another set of ushers to take up the sales tax. Imagine an emergency visit to the local hospital for an appendectomy; would the $19,647.22 operation be delayed until the $9,823.61 national sales tax was paid up front? Or would we trust that our insurance company would fork over that cash.

Many of our creative analysts make out that Federal taxes have ballooned all out of proportion. NIPA Table 3.2 includes contributions for government social insurance but not as taxes. Current tax receipts include personal income taxes, corporate taxes, excise taxes, customs duties and transfer receipts (estate and gift taxes from line 3 of NIPA 3.18.) Here is how that charts for the entire NIPA era (from 1929.)

http://webpages.charter.net/prologue/images/Effective_Federal_Tax_Rate.gif

When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in late 1941, the effective federal tax rate was 10.1% when measured as a ratio of GDP. Most people realized at that time that we would forever need to devote a greater amount to national defense; effective tax rates of 10.1%, or lower, would be a thing of the past. But miracle of miracles, in both 2003 and 2004, George Bush managed to get the tax rate down to 10%. That was pure genius!

As to compliance costs, I got a taste of the problem when I began a small business after retirement from a job in industry. But after a couple of years, I reduced the work, and time to do it, to a small fraction. (The learning curve at work. But I was a so-called efficiency expert for many years in industry.) But much of the clamor about compliance costs is smoke. Shareholders demand responsible accounting; that means accurate balance sheets and P&L’s. Once the stockholders are accommodated, it is not a great step to filing honest tax returns. I suppose much the same is true for small businesses that include about six million non-traded corporations and 20 plus million sole proprietorships.

While we are on Kudlow, and I am high on the NIPA’s, let me share part of a response I’m preparing for Kudlow’s bemoaning the Liberal threat to Bush’s “goldilocks economy. This is a year-by-year read of the NIPA’s for 6 years of Bush and 8 years of Clinton. You may recall that, in his 1st year, Clinton raised taxes as significantly as Bush cut taxes in his 1st year. (The challenge to you is to find Goldilocks.)

http://webpages.charter.net/prologue/images/GOLDILOCKS.gif

And we can compare every Administration from the beginning of the NIPA era in the same way.

http://webpages.charter.net/prologue/images/NIPA_Measures.gif


TGoody
Did you copy both lines of the link and paste them together? They should have worked if you did. If you don't break them up they stretch the column and make it hard to read. Just paste the second line onto the end of the first.

Compliance costs are rising rapidly for many reason but Sarbanes-Oxley are one of the main ones. It is listed as one of the main reasons companies aren't listing more on the NYSE.

Also, I am not sure what you are using tax revenues as a guide for? You have to include all taxes paid by business. That means State and federal. While can't get rid of all taxes that will be in a price, we can get rid of payroll (social security and Medicare 15% alone) Corporate income taxes, excise taxes, and of course tax compliance costs.

Most of these studies were done awhile back but here is a site that shows the breakdown of hidden taxes better.
http://www.ipi.org/ipi%5CIPIPublications.nsf/PublicationLookup
FullText/A9A7AA39F78128BB86256AB700627702
===================
Don't forget to use both lines pasted as one line

Don't underestimate compliance costs for just doing payroll. Compliance costs don't show up in tax revenues but do show up on the bottom line and reduce profits and raise prices.
quote:
he U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Department of Labor, and the Small Business Administration estimate that for a company with 10-50 employees, the cost of non-productive time is 6%-10% of gross payroll, with the national average at 8.45%. Few employers recognize this "hidden cost" of doing business.
http://www.vision-hr.com/payroll.html
==============================
quote:
Economists Mark Crain and Thomas Hopkins did a study for the Small Business Administration and found that in the year 2000, federal regulations cost us $843 billion. That’s $8,000 per household -- almost half the amount collected in federal taxes that year.
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed020405b.cfm
==========================
Again, you are trying to use that 35% without including compliance costs. Are you including all payroll taxes that "Fair Tax" or VAT or Consumption tax could eliminate.

Quote:
Finally, let's look at a low-income couple under the FairTax: they pay no federal tax at all. Today, under the income tax system, they not only pay 15 percent in payroll taxes, but they also pay at least 20 percent in hidden corporate taxes, private sector compliance costs, and payroll taxes buried in the cost of every product they buy.
http://www.geocities.com/cmcofer/faq-all.html
==========================

Show me any reputable study that say that with compliance costs, we aren't over 30% in higher prices.

Quote:
Some of these taxes are inadvertently hidden, but others are consciously designed that way to disguise the cost of government. It's easy to see why: the total U.S. tax burden is equal to 40 percent of annual personal consumption spending.(3) If Americans recognized this high level of taxation, there might well be a second American Revolution. To maintain support for so many programs, it's often in the interest of governments to keep their costs hidden.
http://www.ntu.org/main/press.php?PressID=310&org_name=NTUF
============================
It continues with more information
quote:
# Taxes account for 35 cents of the cost of a $1.14 loaf of bread.
# 18 cents of a 50-cent can of soda go toward taxes.
# 72 percent of the cost of a 750 ml bottle of liquor goes toward taxes.
# Taxes for an $80 hotel room average 43 percent.
# Taxes account for $63.60 of a $159 airline ticket.
# A $153.09 monthly utility bill consists of $39.35 in taxes.
# Over half the cost of a $1.33 gallon of gasoline is due to taxes
===============================
Again, this is an older study and things have got worse with Sarbanes-Oxely.

quote:
According to Financial Executives International, an association for accounting and finance professionals, companies spent more than half of the money that went toward SarbOx on auditors—$2 million on average. Gartner estimates that audit fees are up as much as 35 percent from a year ago.
http://www.cioinsight.com/article2/0,1540,1846782,00.asp
============================

I am sure you remember some of the testimony in the Tax Reform Panel a couple of year back and how much they talked about the damage of compliance costs and how they inflated prices along with all the taxes. Remember prices include phone and energy taxes like the tax we were paying for the Spanish American War.
quote:
Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., recently introduced legislation in the House — supported by 98 co-sponsors — aimed at repealing the tax, which was imposed in 1898 to help pay for the Spanish-American War. The war was over in six months, but the tax stayed.

The general excise tax has so far cost consumers about $300 billion, says the Congressional Research Service. The entire Spanish-American War cost only about $6 billion, adjusted for inflation.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/telecom/
2005-06-30-taxes-usat_x.htm
==========================
That and many other taxes are in the price. That 35% tax includes state and local taxes too. Look at the list of taxes in prices. Most find there way into the prices we pay as some stage of business.
quote:
Accounts Receivable Tax,
Building Permit,
Capital GainsTax,
CDL license Tax,
Corporate Income Tax,
Court Fines - (indirect taxes),
Federal Unemployment Tax - (FUTA),
Fuel permit tax Gasoline Tax
Inventory tax, IRS
Interest Charges - (tax on top of tax),
IRS Penalties - (tax on top of tax),
Local Income Tax
Medicare Tax,
Property Tax,
Service Charge Taxes,
Social Security Tax,
Road Usage Taxes - (Truckers),
Road Toll Booth Taxes,
School Tax,
State Income Tax,
State Unemployment Tax - (SUTA),
Telephone federal excise tax,
Telephone federal universal service fee tax,
Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes,
Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax,
Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax,
Telephone State and local tax,
Telephone usage charge tax,
Toll Bridge Taxes,
Toll Tunnel Taxes,
Traffic Fines - (indirect taxation),
Trailer registration tax,
Utility Taxes,
Vehicle License Registration Tax,
Watercraft registration Tax (shipping waterways),
Workers Compensation Tax

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was the most prosperous in the world,
had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

Yes we need to pay taxes and even pay many of these. But, how they are paid and collected can increase compliance costs by a huge factor. Simplifying the 17,000 pages in the actual tax code and about 60,000 pages of instruction, IRS letters, decisions and rulings by courts, forms, etc. could go a long way in reducing the compliance costs in prices.


Remember Exxon?
Everyone got excited because Exxon got $10 billion for a quarter. What they didn't say was that Exxon shareholders got $10 billion and the government got 60% of what they did. The total was $16 billion pre tax profit and the Gov. got 6 and the shareholders 10. Yet, all $16 billion came from you and me at the pump and by the people who buy oil to make plastic and other compounds for other products besides fuel.

Consumers paid $6 billion in taxes while 6.3 billion shares of stock got $10 billion.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.