Thrilla
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2011
- Messages
- 20,295
- Reaction score
- 9,801
- Location
- Texas, Vegas, Colombia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Because they are skirting taxes I believe they should be paying.
I can't stand corporate loopholes!
And the SCOTUS can take "corporate personhood" and stick it where the sun don't shine!
why should this particular form of tax avoidance be illegal?
what specific taxes are they skirting, and why should they be forced to pay them?
what specific taxes are they skirting, and why should they 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".
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.
State corporate tax
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?
To the bolded: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.
It's true at all levels, Thrilla.only at the State level can this be true.... at the federal level , it's false.
A loophole is a loophole.the problem is this has nothing to do with the federal government this has everything to do with the state of Delaware.
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.
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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?