Rep. Camp yesterday proposed an overhaul of the U.S. corporate tax code that would bring it in line with tax competitiveness in the rest of the world.
One trillion dollars is roughly the amount of earnings that American companies have in their foreign operations?and that they could repatriate to the United States. That money, in turn, could be invested in U.S. jobs, capital assets, research and development, and more.
But for U.S companies such repatriation of earnings carries a significant penalty: a federal tax of up to 35%. This means that U.S. companies can, without significant consequence, use their foreign earnings to invest in any country in the world?except here.
The U.S. government's treatment of repatriated foreign earnings stands in marked contrast to the tax practices of almost every major developed economy, including Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Italy, Russia, Australia and Canada, to name a few. Companies headquartered in any of these countries can repatriate foreign earnings to their home countries at a tax rate of 0%-2%. That's because those countries realize that choking off foreign capital from their economies is decidedly against their national interests.
Especially with corporate bond rates falling below 4%, it's hard to imagine any responsible corporation repatriating foreign earnings at a combined federal and state tax rate approaching 40%.
By permitting companies to repatriate foreign earnings at a low tax rate?say, 5%?Congress and the president could create a privately funded stimulus of up to a trillion dollars. They could also raise up to $50 billion in federal tax revenue. That's money the economy would not otherwise receive.
The amount of corporate cash that would come flooding into the country could be larger than the entire federal stimulus package, and it could be used for creating jobs, investing in research, building plants, purchasing equipment, and other uses. It could also provide needed stability for the equity markets because companies would expand their activity in mergers and acquisitions, and would pay dividends or buy back stock. And when markets go up, confidence increases and businesses and consumers begin to spend.
The $50 billion boost in federal tax revenue, meanwhile, could be used to help put America back to work. For example, Congress could use it to give employers?large or small?a refundable tax credit for hiring previously unemployed workers (including recent graduates). The tax credit could equal up to 50% of a worker's first-year and second-year wages, capped at $12,500 per year (or $25,000 total per new hire).
Such a program could help put more than two million Americans back to work at no cost to the government or American taxpayers. How's that for a good idea?
Mr. Chambers is chairman and chief executive officer of Cisco Systems. Ms. Catz is president of Oracle Corporation.
The House's top tax writer proposed Wednesday exempting from taxes 95 percent of the profits that American companies earn overseas.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman David Camp, R-Mich., said he would tax the remaining profits at just 5 percent. That is well below the current top corporate tax rate of 35 percent that applies when companies bring their profits back home, making his proposal a major victory for U.S.-based multinational firms.The U.S. is one of very few countries that taxes corporate earnings at the full rate as they would be taxed at home. In an editorial in The Wall Street Journal, business leaders John Chambers and Safra Catz noted last year that the U.S. corporate tax system incentivizes keeping money overseas.
The U.S. government's treatment of repatriated foreign earnings stands in marked contrast to the tax practices of almost every major developed economy, including Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Italy, Russia, Australia and Canada, to name a few. Companies headquartered in any of these countries can repatriate foreign earnings to their home countries at a tax rate of 0%-2%. That's because those countries realize that choking off foreign capital from their economies is decidedly against their national interests.The U.S. corporate tax code is needlessly complicated and imposes an inordinately high statutory rate, especially compared with other developed nations. Reform is needed, and luckily, Dave Camp seems ready to take on the problem.
The Overseas Profits Elephant in the Room
By JOHN CHAMBERS AND SAFRA CATZ
During last year's "Jobs Summit," President Obama said he was open to any good idea to get the economy moving again. Today he should be especially so, since Washington's many monetary and fiscal policy decisions have not been able to spur the robust growth or job expansion that we all would like. And yet there is a simple idea?the trillion-dollar elephant in the room?that has apparently been dismissed for no good reason.One trillion dollars is roughly the amount of earnings that American companies have in their foreign operations?and that they could repatriate to the United States. That money, in turn, could be invested in U.S. jobs, capital assets, research and development, and more.
But for U.S companies such repatriation of earnings carries a significant penalty: a federal tax of up to 35%. This means that U.S. companies can, without significant consequence, use their foreign earnings to invest in any country in the world?except here.
The U.S. government's treatment of repatriated foreign earnings stands in marked contrast to the tax practices of almost every major developed economy, including Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Italy, Russia, Australia and Canada, to name a few. Companies headquartered in any of these countries can repatriate foreign earnings to their home countries at a tax rate of 0%-2%. That's because those countries realize that choking off foreign capital from their economies is decidedly against their national interests.
Especially with corporate bond rates falling below 4%, it's hard to imagine any responsible corporation repatriating foreign earnings at a combined federal and state tax rate approaching 40%.
By permitting companies to repatriate foreign earnings at a low tax rate?say, 5%?Congress and the president could create a privately funded stimulus of up to a trillion dollars. They could also raise up to $50 billion in federal tax revenue. That's money the economy would not otherwise receive.
The amount of corporate cash that would come flooding into the country could be larger than the entire federal stimulus package, and it could be used for creating jobs, investing in research, building plants, purchasing equipment, and other uses. It could also provide needed stability for the equity markets because companies would expand their activity in mergers and acquisitions, and would pay dividends or buy back stock. And when markets go up, confidence increases and businesses and consumers begin to spend.
The $50 billion boost in federal tax revenue, meanwhile, could be used to help put America back to work. For example, Congress could use it to give employers?large or small?a refundable tax credit for hiring previously unemployed workers (including recent graduates). The tax credit could equal up to 50% of a worker's first-year and second-year wages, capped at $12,500 per year (or $25,000 total per new hire).
Such a program could help put more than two million Americans back to work at no cost to the government or American taxpayers. How's that for a good idea?
Mr. Chambers is chairman and chief executive officer of Cisco Systems. Ms. Catz is president of Oracle Corporation.
No comments:
Post a Comment