I'd also advocate for reforms to make a form of accelerated depreciation (like Sec 179) permanent.
That's also not what I said. In fact, I explicitly paid out the argument of lowering rates while closing loopholes.
There is an upper limit to the rate at which you can pay tax where you add an "ability to pay" problem to the "willingness to pay" problem.
There was a thread about this I started previously (that I could find some other time- I'm typing from my iPhone now), but there is a point where taxes are too low, and the incentive favors keeping all profits over investing, and there is an obvious point where raising taxes too high removes the incentive to operate a business at all.
I'd also advocate for reforms to make a form of accelerated depreciation (like Sec 179) permanent.
Im asking for clarity and not to put words in your mouth. As far as lower limits, how can you spend profits without making a distribution that's taxable to the individual or making capital expenditures? Also, wouldn't the incentive be to make more profit, which would require more labor and capital expenditures?
I agree on the upper limits.
I think the end game is to decide what's the goal for taxing? At the local level obviously to pay bills, but at the federal level i believe it's to promote full employment and tame inflation, much like the fed with interest rates.
I will get back to this when I get back from vacation , this isn't much fun on my iPhone![]()
Smart phone posting is a beating!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)