I read an article last week that estimated the companies like Haliburton, Black and Decker, and Tyco are saving enough money in taxes to pay for the Operation Iraqi Freedom this year.

Here is a link from my least favorite former Congresman's former wife.
I have become a fan of her choice of topics.

Tax Havens: Are You With Us Or Against Us?

Is this not an issue that needs to be addressed. If I tell the IRS that I bought a timeshare in Bermuda so my income here in Tennessee is actually exempt from taxes, they'll be here with a U Haul tomorrow.

I do think it is a problem that needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, I do not yet know enough about it to extend my argument regarding the "tax havens." I have been reading up since initially seeing the post so I hope to contribute more later.

In the meantime, I stumbled across this link the other day that might be of some use here:
WTO imposes sanctions against U.S.While this doesn't address how our government is handling the issue, regarding taxes here at home, it does show others view these havens to be a problem. And they are taking action against them. Perhaps it's time we did more as well?

Why not utilize the therapeutic approach? Let's find out why these companies are doing this, and then see if we can solve that problem.

Also, why does the EU care? Because these firms are also avoiding some of the taxes in the EU. And hell hath no fury like a taxman frustrated.

Is the second half of that post meant to be taken seriously?

EU countries care because they are in competition with the U.S. for business revenue and if the U.S. is using illegal (as spelled out by ratified trade agreements) business practices to lure business then they are taking an unfair advantage. You know, kind of like imposing ridiculous steel or lumber tariffs; or enacting illegal farm subsidies.

Companies are using tax havens to avoid paying taxes because it is their job to. For-profit organizations have a responsibility to their stockholders to make money. Giving more away to the Federal government than they have to is a failure on a company's part.



Even the extremely pro-business, like George W., would like to see this practice done away with. The problem is coming up with a solution that doesn't encourage companies to move everything out of the country. A good start would be getting rid of the loopholes, like the one pointed out in the story provided by Abs.

The real problem is the overly complicated tax system we have forced upon ourselves. Don't get me wrong, however, this is not unusual. Pretty much every country in the world has a system of taxation full of loopholes for those adept enough to find them.

If the EU really wants to fight a battle over farm subsidies, then I pity them. On the other hand, the US has got to stop propping up these dinosaur industries that just can't compete anymore. If we had back the money we've spent propping up agriculture, airlines and steel, we probably wouldn't even have a national debt.

Yes, the second half is meant to be taken seriously. The move towards globalisation of tax collection is very, very strongly supported by the EU. It offends the sensibilities of the statists that someone, somewhere, isn't "paying their fair share."

Now, exactly how the steel tariffs (which I disagree with, BTW), the lumber tariffs (which, strangely enough, are in response to, ta daaaaa, provincial subsidies of the lumber industry) and illegal farm subsidies (uh, which farm subsidies are illegal, and exactly how does the EU avoid being the blackest cooking implement in the kitchen when farm subsidies are discussed? [another BTW, I disagree with the farm subsidies as well]) relate to tax havens, aside from potentially being the other side of the overgrown government?

I don't believe that there should be tax havens, but that's because I don't believe government policies should be so burdensome that tax havens become attractive.

So, do we attack the "underlying cause" (more therapy talk here), or simply go after the corporations with a bigger hammer?