Sign this open letter to Congressman Carney: Corprate Tax Reform Needs to be Revenue Positive

Filed in National by on January 25, 2013

Congressman Carney,

Through relentless lobbying, big businesses have turned tax avoidance into an art form. While families and main street businesses pay our mandated tax rates of 30 – 35%, large corporations now have an effective tax rate of about 18 percent.

Worse yet, instead of investing record setting profits in job growth here, large corporations are using off shore tax havens to hoard cash. The “S&P 500” companies alone have $1.5 trillion stashed offshore. And the “Fix the Debt campaign” that you are so enamored with, is working to protect and enhance off shore tax shelters.

How can we “fix the debt” when we are letting large companies pay so little to protect our freedoms? In 1952, corporate income taxes accounted for 32 percent of federal tax receipts; last year corporate taxes were less than 8 percent of total U.S. tax dollars. That means you are forcing main street businesses and families to pick up the check for these anti-American tax slackers.

It is time for big businesses to pay their share of our nation’s bills. We need revenue positive corporate tax reform that does not close some loopholes and subsidies only to offset more tax cuts for big business. Our nation cannot afford “revenue neutral” corporate tax reform that leaves corporate taxes as a share of our economy at historically low levels.

Sincerely,

The DelawareLiberal Community

In addition to delivering this letter, I’ll be participating in a press conference next Wednesday being set up by the ADA’s Ezra Tempko.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Fair Taxes, Not Cuts

Join our Fiscal Cliffhanger campaign launch! We hoped the fiscal cliff would be over, but we have yet to stop $1 trillion in across-the-board cuts through fairer taxes. Join us to announce America needs revenue from wealthy individuals and corporations, not harmful cuts to our economy and citizens.

Who: You!  Come join ADA, AFSCME Council 81, DSEA, and SEIU 32BJ!

What: Fiscal Cliffhanger Press Conference

When:
This Wednesday, January 30,
at 12 noon

Where:
Carvel State Building,
820 N French St, Wilmington
2nd Floor Auditorium

Why:
The fiscal cliff is not over!
We need your support to say no to harmful cuts and to say yes to fairer taxes!

Speakers:

Chris Bullock, New Castle County President

Sam Lathem, Delaware AFL-CIO President

Robyn Harland, Retired Special Education Teacher

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (17)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Andy says:

    Ok this might sound dumb but how would I sign this letter along with others. I did not see any instructions

  2. puck says:

    Right on.

    If you recall, nobody was talking about “tax reform” when Obama was elected. The only tax reform proposal out there was to let the Bush tax cuts expire over $250K. Good times.

    It was Obama himself who created the issue of tax reform in its current meaning in his December 7 2010 press conference justifying his extension of the Bush tax cuts. That was the first place I heard it outside of the Heritage Foundation. I hadn’t realized that was a Democratic issue (it still isn’t).

    Loopholes are good. They give us a way to encourage positive behavior from corporations, if they are well designed. Reform should eliminate the loopholes that aren’t working and create new loopholes where needed.

    I would think an effort to eliminate loopholes would pit corporations like GE (which isn’t paying any tax) against smaller corporations with less ability to take advantage of tax breaks.

    In no case should corporate tax reform be munged together with individual tax reform (i.e, corporate loopholes in a package with home mortgage deductions)

    Personally I’d like to see corporate tax eliminated and replaced in a revenue-neutral way with increased individual taxes on the top brackets. That would give corporations what they want, while encouraging positive behavior among corporate officers.

  3. Jason330 says:

    Andy, I don’t know. That’s a question for the techies. If you agree with the spirit of this, I’ll consider you signed in a virtual sense.

  4. puck says:

    Andy, maybe it would be more effective to print out the letter, sign it, and send it in yourself along with your own comments.

  5. Young Cobain says:

    Since the R’s control the House of Reps and they are demanding some cuts. What happens when D’s say no to cuts and R’s say no to revenue? What happens then?

  6. puck says:

    The D’s have already said yes to cuts (see: sequester). Republicans (and Tom Carper) are just bitching because we didn’t cut benefits for grannies.

    And don’t look now but in the cliff deal, everybody got tax cuts, not increases. Best-kept secret in Washington.

  7. Just a note, Darlene Battle’s group, DSEJ, hasn’t been a functioning 501c4 for about a year now. She is still ED for the sister 501c3 DACA.

    Darlene told me this morning that she wasn’t able to communicate directly with Ezra about the change because DACA is swamped with work being in the middle of their free tax preparation season work (and she took over extra duties for a staffer on leave).

    As a result, incorrect information is now in the Cliffhanger presser about Darlene. She is no longer the ED for DSEJ and she says that she will not be presenting at the Wednesday event. She is going to call Ezra to make sure he removes her from further press notices.

  8. Jason330 says:

    “What happens when D’s say no to cuts and R’s say no to revenue? What happens then?”

    Have that fight, then trounce the Republicans in the mid-term elections. It is called American Democracy. Look into it. Or, maybe you and Congressman Carney have been impressed with the results from the Democratic pre-emptive surrender strategy?

    And BTW, that’s what the GOP would do if the shoe was on the other foot.

  9. Jason330 says:

    Thanks for the update Nancy.

  10. cassandra_m says:

    What happens when D’s say no to cuts and R’s say no to revenue? What happens then?

    The Ds have *already* been saying Yes to cuts. So far, they’ve said yes to enough cuts in the past 2 years to get a $2.4 trillion deficit reduction over the next 10 years. Ds will say yes to more cuts too, but you still have to pay attention to what gets cut. They will propose cuts to various tax subsidy schemes — at least — subsidies that send tax dollars into the pockets of people and companies who certainly don’t need them. Rs will say that these are increases in revenues and rail against them. But closing the loopholes that are giveaways to corporations and wealthy Americans are worthy cuts to make. And cuts that even Boehner put on the table in December.

  11. puck says:

    Republicans have yet to tell us what cuts they want. Forcing them to list their cuts was a killer tactic in the cliff negotiations, but I fear Obama will forget that lesson and let Republicans hide behind a secretly negotiated deal with no fingerprints (but we know it will be Joe Biden’s doing). Hopefully a budget debate will smoke them out.

  12. cassandra_m says:

    You’ve seen the last Ryan budget, so you already know what they want to cut. And you also know that their cuts (to spending and taxes) don’t get them to any meaningful deficit reduction, either.

  13. puck says:

    Or we could just ask Tom Carper.

  14. Young Cobain says:

    Thanks for the assessment Cas. Appreciate your insight. I don’t know why Jason flipped out at my question. He seems ready for a fight. Which now that he has asked for, I will gladly oblige.

    To base your entire strategy on “Have that fight, then trounce the Republicans in the mid-term elections. It is called American Democracy. Look into it” may be one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard from a contributor.

    Sure, you attempt to win seats in the midterm, but historically democrats or the president’s party rarely do well in midterm elections. Throw in the fact that we have gerrymandered districts in states all over the country, there’s a high possibility that D’s may not win the House back in 2014. Also, there is a real chance we could lose 2… maybe 3 seats in the Senate: West VA, Alaska, and Minnesota (not sure about my boy Al Frankin).

    It would be irresponsible as a liberal to allow Social Security and other entitlements to rest on a medterm election in the second term of a sitting Democratic President. Obviously, you haven’t thought this through.

    It’s like a college football team saying that they’re gonna improve their team by first winning a National Championship and then waiting for all the top players to come to their school. You’re basing your entire strategy on a long shot.

    So I ask again, besides “have that fight” which means absolutely nothing. What do we do?

  15. Jason330 says:

    “historically democrats or the president’s party rarely do well in midterm elections”…so we shouldn’t try. Etc, etc.

    Cobain, Your head is full of inside the beltway gibber-gabber. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this kind of defeatist comment wasn’t made from inside the Longworth House office building.

  16. pandora says:

    Given that the GOP can’t seem to get anyone acceptable out of their primaries, 2014 might not follow history. Claire McCaskill, Harry Reid and Chris Coons are all examples of this.

  17. Young Cobain says:

    Sure hope so Pandora. I won’t comment on Jason. His comeback wasn’t strong enough.