• 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

I can't stand corporate loopholes!

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

the problem is this has nothing to do with the federal government this has everything to do with the state of Delaware.
 
why should this particular form of tax avoidance be illegal?

Because there is little to no economic substance to the transactions. You have the left hand charging the right hand, and pretending that those two hands are not part of the same whole because someone formed a separate corporate entity and transferred it to DE where this left hand has no employees, no office space, no filing cabinet even - just an address in a mail drop - and it 'earns' millions per year in royalties from the right hand.

It's not even taking the principle to an extreme to conclude that I'm paid for my education and acquired expertise and my name. So why shouldn't I be allowed to create a corporation in DE, transfer my intangible assets to it ("JasperL", my degree, 25 years of experience), assign a value of say, $1 million to it, then when I collect a fee, write myself a bill from the DE corp I own 100% that is a royalty on that asset? Maybe the royalty is worth half my income each year and I just made half my taxable income go "poof" by charging myself a fee to use my own skills!

So it's clearly abusive and most states have closed this absurd tax loophole.
 
Last edited:
what specific taxes are they skirting, and why should they be forced to pay them?

They're stripping operating income out of every state that allows this scheme, and so 'skirting' state corporate/business income taxes. And the reason they should be 'forced to pay them' is the same reason anyone who earns income in a state that taxes income should be 'forced to pay them.'
 
sole proprietorship also have personhood....though it's tied directly to the proprietor.( the business and owner are one "person")
but it's false to assert sole proprietorship are a valid alternative to corporations...SP's are very good for very small operations, anything beyond that, and they cannot operate.

without corporations, you wouldn't have cars, computers, most homes, smartphones, technology... none of it.. sole proprietorship can't operate in the same capacity corporations do... not even close.

in a very real sense, those whom advocate we rid ourselves of corporations are saying " let's completely destroy the US and world economy ...on purpose".

I don't think anyone is arguing to eliminate corporations. What some of us object to is the idea a corporation has 'rights' like an individual, but doesn't bleed, get sick, inhale bad air, have kids, or die. It's sole purpose is so maximize profits, for owners often located all over the globe. IMO, the privileges we grant to that entity are up to society and don't exist as rights as we understand them for living, breathing citizens of the U.S.

that's not to say the government can't be more discerning in incorporation standards though... I too have a problem with corporations being allowed to exist as paper entities.
I think it should be required of a corporation to provide a good , service, or product
those that are Incorporated should most definitely have personhood, though... they can't exist otherwise....and yes, that allows for free speech rights to be exercised, as decided in CU.... the most important reason for this is if you have a company, the right to advertise your wares is fundamental....
one might not like other legal entities exercising their free speech, but this is America, they'll have to get used to not persons exercising their rights... or more accurately, they'll have ot get used to the government not being able ot stop them from exercising them.

Again, we can grant corporations the privilege of advertising subject to regulations on accuracy. Fine.

And let's say we prohibit Citibank from dumping $100 million into elections. Whose rights to 'free speech' are infringed? Every employee including the CEO retain the right to speak on politics in any way available to me or you, shareholders can speak, customers and vendors can speak. The fact they're a massive entity employing 10s of thousands means by virtue of that size they'll be able to exert more influence that me as as sole proprietor, but they all have the same right I do, and me them.

I just don't see the real danger.
 
They're stripping operating income out of every state that allows this scheme, and so 'skirting' state corporate/business income taxes. And the reason they should be 'forced to pay them' is the same reason anyone who earns income in a state that taxes income should be 'forced to pay them.'

so you're basically arguing that corporations should not be able to benefit from difference in state tax codes.... correct?
 
so you're basically arguing that corporations should not be able to benefit from difference in state tax codes.... correct?

Not at all. First of all corporations should and do exploit those differences at every opportunity (assuming the strategy is legal and the PIC is legal) and it's up to the states to address them.

Second, there is something important in the idea that states compete for businesses. I'm all for it, and if Delaware wants to attract companies who deal in intangible assets, that is their prerogative and maybe it works for them, they get a few dollars in annual fees, whatever.

But the PIC strategy has no real economic substance to it - it depends on the fiction that Left Hand, Inc. is a completely independent entity with no relationship to Right Hand Inc., both 100% owned by parent Whole Body, Inc. and the entire strategy uses paper transactions to shift income to no tax states when really nothing, $0, was in any real sense "earned" in DE. It's abusive and many states have (obviously correctly) shut it down.

If states don't they're just shifting taxes from big, multistate corporations to small businesses and individuals and ought to be honest and tell their citizens that. Be honest and subject them to a lower nominal rate, not allow this backdoor stuff that is hidden.
 
sole proprietorship also have personhood....though it's tied directly to the proprietor.( the business and owner are one "person")
but it's false to assert sole proprietorship are a valid alternative to corporations...SP's are very good for very small operations, anything beyond that, and they cannot operate.

without corporations, you wouldn't have cars, computers, most homes, smartphones, technology... none of it.. sole proprietorship can't operate in the same capacity corporations do... not even close.To the bolded

in a very real sense, those whom advocate we rid ourselves of corporations are saying " let's completely destroy the US and world economy ...on purpose".

that's not to say the government can't be more discerning in incorporation standards though... I too have a problem with corporations being allowed to exist as paper entities.
I think it should be required of a corporation to provide a good , service, or product
those that are Incorporated should most definitely have personhood, though... they can't exist otherwise....and yes, that allows for free speech rights to be exercised, as decided in CU.... the most important reason for this is if you have a company, the right to advertise your wares is fundamental....
one might not like other legal entities exercising their free speech, but this is America, they'll have to get used to not persons exercising their rights... or more accurately, they'll have ot get used to the government not being able ot stop them from exercising them.

CU was a case that was decided upon correctly if, in fact, you don't want the government to have the power to violate free speech at will.
To the bolded:

And why is that?

What precludes a proprietor structured entity from doing any of the things you mentioned?

And yes, a proprietor is person behind a corporation, and that was exactly my point: There's an owner individual directly responsible and liable.
 
only at the State level can this be true.... at the federal level , it's false.
It's true at all levels, Thrilla.

Corp's and Trusts are big-time general purpose tax shelters in comparison to those on a W2.
 
the problem is this has nothing to do with the federal government this has everything to do with the state of Delaware.
A loophole is a loophole.

People have to live where their D/L is listed. People with corporations can live where their D/L is, and register their corp somewhere else. The real issue is allowing people to shelter themselves behind fictitious entities with person-hood rights. That's my issue.
 
To the bolded:

And why is that?

What precludes a proprietor structured entity from doing any of the things you mentioned?

And yes, a proprietor is person behind a corporation, and that was exactly my point: There's an owner individual directly responsible and liable.

in a word.. capital.

a single proprietor won't be allowed to be on the hook for a billions and billions of dollars in facilities, resources, and products.... any rational and sane person would refuse to be the only person on the hook for all of that liability...not to mention that no one else would dare risk investing in that one guy, no matter how good his product is.

I've been both a sole proprietor and a corporate officer ( El Presidente)... I did well at both,and both serve their purposes.... but the growth potential and economic output of a corporation dwarfs that of a sole proprietorship.... a sole properitr who builds and designs cars might exist, but you'll be getting a few cars put out a year, at best.


corporate officers are accountable in a corporation, and to lesser degree, employees.... but all of them are replaceable, and the corporation doesn't die when they do.... in a sole proprietorship, the company dies when the proprietor does.
 
It's true at all levels, Thrilla.

Corp's and Trusts are big-time general purpose tax shelters in comparison to those on a W2.

nope, it's only true at the state level.

States rely on tax revenue to operate, losing revenue from one sect will result in it being made up somewhere else( shifting of the burden)

the federal government does not rely on tax revenue to operate.
 
A loophole is a loophole.

People have to live where their D/L is listed. People with corporations can live where their D/L is, and register their corp somewhere else. The real issue is allowing people to shelter themselves behind fictitious entities with person-hood rights. That's my issue.

which is a state problem. there is nothing that Hillary or trump could do about it if they wanted to.
 
Back
Top Bottom