• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump and Clinton share Delaware tax 'loophole' address with 285,000 firms

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
There aren’t many things upon which Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump agree, especially as they court very different Delaware voters ahead of a primary on Tuesday. But the candidates for president share an affinity for the same nondescript two-storey office building in Wilmington. A building that has become famous for helping tens of thousands of companies avoid hundreds of millions of dollars in tax through the so-called “Delaware loophole”.
The receptionist at 1209 North Orange Street isn’t surprised that a journalist has turned up unannounced on a sunny weekday afternoon.

“You know I can’t speak to you,” she says. A yellow post-it note on her computer screen reads “MEDIA: Chuck Miller” with the phone number of the company’s director of corporate communications. Miller can’t answer many questions either, except to say that the company does not advise clients on their tax affairs.


Both the leading candidates for president – Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump – have companies registered at 1209 North Orange, and have refused to explain why.


Read more @: Trump and Clinton share Delaware tax 'loophole' address with 285,000 firms

Clinton and Trump, both openly hypocrites, both abuse tax loopholes. Sometimes they share a building that lets them abuse a loophole.
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,801
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
how can both be hypocrites when only one of them ( Hillary) is speaking out against such practices?

trump has been very open about him using the system to benefit him and his companies.


in any event, neither did anything wrong.... their actions are perfectly legal.... and pretty smart, as well.
 

reinoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
16,824
Reaction score
7,183
Location
Out West
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Many companies use Delaware as an off-shoring system...the same off-shoring we whinge about in other countries. :peace
 

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
how can both be hypocrites when only one of them ( Hillary) is speaking out against such practices?

trump has been very open about him using the system to benefit him and his companies.


in any event, neither did anything wrong.... their actions are perfectly legal.... and pretty smart, as well.

"The Trump Tax Plan Is Revenue Neutral

The Trump tax cuts are fully paid for by:

1.) Reducing or eliminating most deductions and loopholes available to the very rich.

3.)Reducing or eliminating corporate loopholes that cater to special interests, as well as deductions made unnecessary or redundant by the new lower tax rate on corporations and business income. We will also phase in a reasonable cap on the deductibility of business interest expenses."
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/tax-reform
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,801
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
"The Trump Tax Plan Is Revenue Neutral

The Trump tax cuts are fully paid for by:

1.) Reducing or eliminating most deductions and loopholes available to the very rich.

3.)Reducing or eliminating corporate loopholes that cater to special interests, as well as deductions made unnecessary or redundant by the new lower tax rate on corporations and business income. We will also phase in a reasonable cap on the deductibility of business interest expenses."
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/tax-reform

and?...make you case as to how he's a hypocrite?
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Read more @: Trump and Clinton share Delaware tax 'loophole' address with 285,000 firms

Clinton and Trump, both openly hypocrites, both abuse tax loopholes. Sometimes they share a building that lets them abuse a loophole. [/FONT][/COLOR]

yeeeeeeah....but! The idealist part of me strongly agrees with your argument, but the pragmatist part of me says to hold on here. If you were rich and could save a lot of money by basing your corporation in Delaware instead of Michigan or wherever, would you not do so?

I see it as no different from what we each do on our taxes. I think it's not right that I get to deduct the meals that I provide for my paying residents...but I can, and as long as it's legal, I will continue to do so. If it came up on the ballot, I'd vote to get rid of that deduction, but as long as it's legal, while it might be hypocritical to deduct it while supporting ending that deduction, it's also hypocritical to not use every legal tool at my expense to make this business work.

And that's why I blame neither Trump nor Hillary in this instance.
 

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
and?...make you case as to how he's a hypocrite?

Hes in favor eliminating said loopholes but he uses them. AKA the same way Clinton is hypocrite here bechase she is in favor of eliminating loopholes but is using them....
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,801
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Hes in favor eliminating said loopholes but he uses them. AKA the same way Clinton is hypocrite here bechase she is in favor of eliminating loopholes but is using them....

the key difference being is that she actively and incessantly speaks out in opposition about them.... and he doesn't.... he goes the opposite route.

another thing ot consider is.... is this specific" loophole" something either one of them actually opposes?... there's a very good chance neither one of them is a hypocrite on the matter, if they haven't addressed this specific loophole at all.
 

OrphanSlug

A sinister place...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
26,459
Reaction score
23,066
Location
Atlanta
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Okay... I'll say it.

If Delaware is willing to allow for this then expect many to take advantage. The problem has always been the same, influence on tax code for self serving reasons by those with means. If Hillary is willing to take advantage as Trump and others have then we should be appealing to Delaware to change something. Odds are they won't, and it has little to do with Hillary or Trump.

So what are we really talking about here?

Opportunism to bash on Trump for taking more advantage of Tax Code, or opportunism to bash on Hillary for being that much further out of touch to those she claims she represents? (or both?)
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
58,777
Reaction score
45,621
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I can't stand corporate loopholes!

And the SCOTUS can take "corporate personhood" and stick it where the sun don't shine!
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I don't believe using legal tax loopholes while planning to eliminate those loopholes makes one a hypocrite. Those are the rules of the game currently. You can play by the rules and work to change them at the same time. If the loopholes are removed they won't be able to use them anymore either.
 

EMNofSeattle

No Shame!
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
29,288
Reaction score
8,892
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I can't stand corporate loopholes!

And the SCOTUS can take "corporate personhood" and stick it where the sun don't shine!
Dude, WTF?

There is no amendment for corporate personhood. And this delaware thing has been going on since the 80s
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,801
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I can't stand corporate loopholes!

And the SCOTUS can take "corporate personhood" and stick it where the sun don't shine!

yeah.... no.
corporate personhood is a very good thing.... for all of us.

three might be a few things you don't like corporations doing, but you do not want to do away with corporate peronshood.... that would be incredibly incredibly harmful to the entirely of our country.... in fact, it would literally destroy the entire economy.


I don't mind loopholes.....another phrase for loopholes is "legal activity"
 

EMNofSeattle

No Shame!
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
29,288
Reaction score
8,892
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
yeeeeeeah....but! The idealist part of me strongly agrees with your argument, but the pragmatist part of me says to hold on here. If you were rich and could save a lot of money by basing your corporation in Delaware instead of Michigan or wherever, would you not do so?

I see it as no different from what we each do on our taxes. I think it's not right that I get to deduct the meals that I provide for my paying residents...but I can, and as long as it's legal, I will continue to do so. If it came up on the ballot, I'd vote to get rid of that deduction, but as long as it's legal, while it might be hypocritical to deduct it while supporting ending that deduction, it's also hypocritical to not use every legal tool at my expense to make this business work.

And that's why I blame neither Trump nor Hillary in this instance.

What you operate a bed-and-breakfast?

Providing a meal is a perfectly legitimate business expense. There is no need to eliminate that deduction, unless you agree with eliminating all business expense deductions.

I don't personally think there's any shame in legally operating your business to avoid taxes, so long as it is legal.
For example, I take about three or four personal trips to Oregon every year, i've never failed to come back with more consumer goods that I left with.....

I take one trip to Idaho every year and somehow I enter WA with a full tank of fuel every time
 

reinoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
16,824
Reaction score
7,183
Location
Out West
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Dude, WTF?

There is no amendment for corporate personhood. And this delaware thing has been going on since the 80s
Yeah, it's always amusing to see the unwashed masses learn a new thing or two only to forget two years later. Delaware has been a business venture haven for a very long time. We can thank Joe Biden for it.
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
58,777
Reaction score
45,621
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Dude, WTF?

There is no amendment for corporate personhood. And this delaware thing has been going on since the 80s
I have no idea what you're attempting to debate here.
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
58,777
Reaction score
45,621
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
yeah.... no.
corporate personhood is a very good thing.... for all of us.

three might be a few things you don't like corporations doing, but you do not want to do away with corporate peronshood.... that would be incredibly incredibly harmful to the entirely of our country.... in fact, it would literally destroy the entire economy.


I don't mind loopholes.....another phrase for loopholes is "legal activity"
To the bolded:

And how is that?
 

Fearandloathing

Just watchin'
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
22,315
Reaction score
18,929
Location
Vancouver, Canada Dual citizen
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Hes in favor eliminating said loopholes but he uses them. AKA the same way Clinton is hypocrite here bechase she is in favor of eliminating loopholes but is using them....


If they are there, then it's stupid NOT to use them.

Why should anyone take on more taxes than they legally have to, but as long as they are there you have to utilize them since your competitors sure as hell will
 

Lutherf

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
41,629
Reaction score
48,065
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Oh FFS:doh

The reason many corporations register in Delaware is because their corporate records are not public records there. Delaware also doesn't tax income from "intangible assets" such as Royalties. What used to happen is that corporations would set up a "holding company" in Delaware to "hold" their trademarks. The holding company would then charge the other affiliated entities a Royalty fee. That fee was a business deduction in other states and not taxable income in Delaware. With a large corporation it might save a few million dollars in state corporate income tax. However, pretty much every other state that has a corporate income tax has already addressed this issue and no longer allows that kind of deduction.

Now, if you want to have some fun with Delaware you might want to check out how many political PAC's and non-profit's are registered there so that the officers information isn't public knowledge.
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,801
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
To the bolded:

And how is that?
we like to hold corporations accountable to the law, we like to file suit against them in the case of wrongdoings, we like to invest in them but not be legally liable for more than we put in, we like to have them lobby government for us ( especially when it comes to unions and associations)... the list goes on and on and on... all of it possible only through recognizing them as a legal person.
 

EMNofSeattle

No Shame!
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
29,288
Reaction score
8,892
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I have no idea what you're attempting to debate here.

You're making non sensical arguments that I think you're trying to throw at Citizens United, but it's hard to tell
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,928
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
People who want to keep more of their own money. Imagine that!
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
58,777
Reaction score
45,621
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
we like to hold corporations accountable to the law, we like to file suit against them in the case of wrongdoings, we like to invest in them but not be legally liable for more than we put in, we like to have them lobby government for us ( especially when it comes to unions and associations)... the list goes on and on and on... all of it possible only through recognizing them as a legal person.
The bolded is the only legit reason for a corp that I see, and it was the original rationale for their coming into existence.

I should've been clearer, because it's private Corps in general I have problems with.

Except for the bolded, there's nothing that a corp gives us as individuals that sole proprietorship doesn't. I feel they're over-used and abuse. We see examples of Trump & Clinton using them for tax dodges in this very thread.
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
58,777
Reaction score
45,621
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
You're making non sensical arguments that I think you're trying to throw at Citizens United, but it's hard to tell
Or perhaps, I'm simply against the proliferation of corporate entities above and beyond their original intent (private and public works of great public interest).

We see the abuses in the OP of this thread.

And yes, Citizens United was a terrible decision in my opinion, but wasn't on my mind when I posted.
 
Top Bottom