52 votes

Rand Paul defends Apple Inc., scolds House at tax hearing

Instead of hauling Apple in here, we should haul in a giant mirror, so we can look at ourselves and see who created this mess" ~ Senator Rand Paul


http://youtu.be/hi0m0w1kBOQ



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Corporate Tax = Tax on Poor

The corporate tax is inherently a regressive tax structure that targets the poor. If you think about it, corporations are going to attempt to meet their profit and revenue estimates as best they can. To do so they will either raise the price on goods to achieve a certain profit or cut costs in a certain way to make that profit. The later (current practice) could be done via the tax system, however, only with huge corporations that can afford it. So it is inherently unfair to less wealthy corporations (thus hitting the poor). If we cut out the loopholes it creates an equal platform of high taxes giving incentives to raise the price of goods as this would not hurt competitive advantage because everyone is doing it. Sadly, it would hurt the poor and middle class as they are the largest consumers of goods. So if 5 people bought an iphone, 1 would be rich, 1 upper middle, and 3 middle or poor. The price for the iphone is equal to all thus the tax passed down to the consumer would have a greater impact on the poor.

Those that think the CEO is going to pay the tax out of pocket are insane. Those that think the quarterly dividend will go down are either wrong or don't understand that the stock is mostly owned by people's 401k, IRA, or pension fund...not the rich. So yet again it hurts the poor and middle class.

I find it hilarious that liberals want to make the rate higher when it obviously hurts the middle class and poor the most. Anyone who has looked at the tax structure knows it is almost exclusively a transfer tax from rich to poor.

In short, the corporate tax and all business taxes should be 0% on all domestic sales. Foreign sales from the US should be taxed but that's a different discussion.

And if you must make the rich pay more taxes you should do so at the individual level where it actually doesn't transfer to the poor.

Corporations can be taxed other ways

All personal income, sales, and property taxes should be abolished. The income tax was started to pay for war (the Civil War) and to make up for tariff reductions. So, to abolish the IRS, we stop wars and raise tariffs. In conjunction, we tackle Wall Street with a 1% sales tax on all securities trades. This achieves several objectives. First, banks make thousands of computerized trades every second rigging the market. At 1% tax per transaction, that will be the end of rigged markets, and the price of stocks will return to a free market. Second, why should a homeless person pay sales tax on a new wheel for his shopping cart when Warren Buffett pays no sales tax when he buys a company? Make Buffett pay a 1% tax on the securities transaction. Third, CEOs and corporate officers are paid with stock to avoid paying tax. Let them pay a 1% sales tax when they sell their stock.

I think you have some good

I think you have some good ideas and I like the idea of a transaction tax for the stock market. I was merely pointing out that the corporate income tax is a tax on the poor and middle class, a transfer tax.

Of all the taxes, a business tax, such as the corporate income tax, makes the least amount of sense to me.

although i can get rands

although i can get rands point, and to some extent, appreciate apple, if they have indeed created new jobs, i wished it happen to a more nicer company, as i am SERIOUSLY against the monolopoly like actions apple, and not just apple, have used the patent system to deny fair competition, although, ive not heard any recent news on patent suing from apple, so maybe they've realised they were pissing off a few people, and their image, or maybe ive just not been reading the right sites, i know some patents can take a while to come to court once its innitiated, so who knows

Another aspect of us regulation that needs reforming, in my opinion, to stop impeding, natural progress, from a, CONSUMERS standpoint, add copyrights to that list too.

I have a feeling some would disagree, from the corporate perspective, i dont knock it, i just dont agree with it.....unless there is more common sense regulation, for both sides, i.e. non profit driven, and more consumer rights orientated, a balance between the two, not as a tool to, sue or imprison, if it gets that far

sorry, dont mean to bring the mood down

I agree Apple has done some

I agree Apple has done some evil things with patents but the question presented is not about patents, it's about tax structure.

I've always said you gotta be willing to stand with the worst when you depend liberty sometimes.

you're right, about this

you're right, about this particular story being about taxes, rather then patents, just hope they dont throw it in our faces i guess

I wouldn't put it past Apple

I wouldn't put it past Apple to do just that. Let's face it, they are a bunch of opportunistic bastards. I just agree with Rand and Apple in this particular instance.

It's hard to defend crappy people sometimes.

How so? "Opportunistic",

How so? "Opportunistic", certainly. Why should that make them bad in your eyes? Even more "opportunistic" was Google hiring the Android lead programmer/founder who USED TO WORK AT APPLE.

I just don't like how they

I just don't like how they take advantage of patent laws and use bully tactics to get there way instead of just making a better product. Patent round corners? Come on.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Apple did anything illegal or that should be illegal (although we should change the patent laws) I just don't like a company that acts like them. I show that by not purchasing apple products.

Using a foolish argument is

Using a foolish argument is no argument. Apple doesn't have a patent on round corners. That's been "debunked" more times than can be counted, which logically leads into real discussion about the cadre of paid Samsung shills whose job is to troll message boards to post anti-Apple vitriol. All part of Samsung's "marketing" budget.

did the guy go

did the guy go willingly.....seems like a situation where employers would have to treat their employees with respect, not that im saying all employers treat their staff like crap, sure as not trying to imply that is the case in this instance either, for arguments sake, in that given situation you bring up, employees able to move to jobs they choose, would have the by product of a dying breed of bad bosses......if the US government is anything to go by, "bad bosses" is something we dont need more of......sure as hell wouldnt like to encourage it

thats more in general, rather then specific to any one company

You said:

"...i am SERIOUSLY against the monolopoly like actions apple, and not just apple, have used the patent system to deny fair competition..."

Like it or not, patents exist and their use or avoidance of that reality can be extremely impactful on a business. Apple had been the target of many patent suits (and they continue to be a target as their fortunes have increased) and that history has informed their decisions today. I personally believe they would be negligent and more exposed to shareholder lawsuits without an aggressive legal stance.

i speak of apple because that

i speak of apple because that is what the article mentions, i agree that it is not just apple.

I dont agree with some of the things they have ended up patening, and what the patent system allows people to patent, such as shape, size and a combination of existing technologies......i do wanna see, great minds who create trully inovative and something unique(the individual or individuals), and get incentives to carry on, but not forever locked, i believe everything should eventually reach the public domain, i know how unlikely that is, but it wont stop me from thinking it.

At the very least, i believe that the patent system aswell as the copyrigt, needs a big overhaul, that is just what i think anyway

edit: opps, ignore the first bit, it was me who brought up, other companies as doing the same thing, my bad :), probably should ignore the second bit too.......infact, dont read my post at all

You read my post, didnt you :D

Yes, I read your post. Bring

Yes, I read your post.

Bring up any issues you like surrounding this, DP is the place for discussion. So discuss! :D

:)

:)

This posted clip begins at

about 39:06, but right afterwards, Levin really makes an ass out of himself. McCain, the other fossil, does so thru out.

You really gotta listen from here on out. Not only does
Rand come back even stronger around 1:40/45, but the witnesses also seem to be emboldened by Rand's dictate.

Clearly, Levin and McCain haven't figured out yet what planet Rand lives on -- but the two witnesses know. Notice them narrowing their testimony after Rand speaks!

http://www.c-span.org/flvPop.aspx?id=10737439742

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

That late speech of Rand's

is just as good. If the country followed that kind direct and simple thinking, America would dominate.

Who doesn't legally maximize their tax returns?

If it's legal, why TF shouldn't Apple? Just look in the mirror, LAWMAKERS...

Loved the way he posed it as a question to EVERYONE....

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

I know you meant to say

I know you meant to say "minimize their tax burden".

It's an awkward expression, for sure-

but I took the quote to mean that maximizing tax returns means minimizing tax burdens. But I get your point.

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

That's one of the clearest

and cutting speeches I've ever heard in a committee.

fireant's picture

Spot on Rand!

Can someone find Levin's rant at the hearing? I heard a snip on the radio today, and it was nauseating. Would make a good comparison to Rand's comments.

Undo what Wilson did

Nauseating is good description

It would make a killing comparison. A great campaign ad? "Status quo vs. the American Way."

The 74,000 page US Tax Code

The 74,000 page US Tax Code is the problem, and the tax rates are too high. Good Job Rand Paul.

Blunt and frank...

... and to the point. I'm liking it. :)

Keep your eye on the prize! - Ending legal tender laws in order for the Federal Reserve System to self-destruct is of the upmost importance.
What in the World are They Spraying https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA
http://geoengineeringwatch.org

He is absolutely like his

He is absolutely like his dad! Every time he speaks he's schooling somebody!

BRILLIANT!

Rand Paul hits a grand slam home run - again!

UP4Liberty

Bravo! Bravo! You aint your

Bravo! Bravo!

You aint your dad, and this is one example of why I am glad you are not exactly like your dad. Mr. Paul Seniors' nature does not allow him to be this confrontational.

I am standin with Rand!

peAce

Liberty = Responsibility

Far from perfect

Rand Paul is far from perfect, but the ratio of "good" to "bad" is relatively high, and when multiplied by the realistic chance of winning, he's the best I've seen in decades.


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

distraction to Jamie welfare FED vote.

I think people are understanding the moral hazard of TBTF too big to jail.