Corporate Taxes Are a Heinous, Hidden Tax on the Poor - by Nick Gromicko

Corporate Taxes are a Heinous, Hidden Tax on the Poor.

By Nick Gromicko

Business entities in the U.S. fall into two major categories: C corporations, which pay corporate income tax; and pass-through entities such as S corporations, LLCs, partnerships, and sole proprietorships, which “pass” their income “through” to their owners as personal income tax.

Many Americans believe that corporate taxes are paid by corporations. Let us dispel this myth.

Corporations are legally separate entities. The human managers of for-profit corporations owe their fiduciary duty to the company’s stockholders. At times, this duty might make a corporation appear to be greedy because management is trying to maximize value for those stockholders. But corporations are not human beings. They can’t be greedy. Corporations are merely pieces of paper in a file cabinet.

The taxes that a corporation pays is money that comes from someone. Taxes are simply another line-item expense for a corporation like utilities are. The corporation passes those costs on to human beings. Higher corporate taxes result in:

  • smaller profits for shareholders,

  • slower wage growth for employees, and/or

  • higher prices for consumers.

These stockholders, employees and consumers are us. There is no free lunch. And corporate management prefers to pass on tax increases to consumers in the form of higher pricing as opposed to disappointing their own stockholders and employees.

Corporations simply don’t pay taxes. They collect taxes from us and pass that money on to the government. Corporate taxes are just a sneaky way for the government to tax Americans. And the earlier the tax is levied in a supply chain, the more hidden it is from the end customer. For example: When we tax aluminum mining companies, we are taxing every consumer of products that contain aluminum. Every corporate tax is an indirect sales tax on people.

Corporate taxes are inflationary in four ways:

  • First, and most obviously, is that all increased costs of production are reflected in higher prices.

  • Any money a corporation gives to the government can’t be used for innovation or the production of goods and services. Fewer goods and services lead to higher prices.

  • The government uses tax money to hire people. And since the government doesn’t produce anything (it has no factories), siphoning otherwise productive labor out of the economy is inflationary.

  • And, lastly, the government competes with consumers for products and services. Every ream of paper or rubber stamp that a bureaucrat buys causes the price of paper and rubber stamps to increase.

Inflation pumps up assets owned by the wealthy, such as stocks, businesses, and real estate. Conversely, for the poor and middle class, inflation also increases their cost of living. Warren Buffet loves when inflation causes the price of his breakfast sandwich to double because his railroad stock also went up.

Inflation is a regressive tax. The term “regressive” refers to a tax that takes a larger percentage of income from low-income earners than from high-income earners by blindly charging everyone equally. For example, when we raise the taxes on oil companies, they collect that tax from us at the gas pump. And gas pumps charge everyone the same. Gas pumps don’t know or care if you are rich or poor.

We sometimes hear politicians say nonsense like “We need to make corporations pay their fair share of taxes.” But politicians have economic advisors. They know the truth.

Corporate taxes are inflationary and regressive. They are a heinous and hidden tax on the poor.

13 Likes

When looking at “corporate greed”, you have to look at employee (mainly C-suite) compensation. I have no problem with outstanding compensation for outstanding performance of course. But is half a billion plus in annual compensation ever justifiable?

1 Like

There is no truth in that article. The author(s) are liars and know it. That’s why the author(s) won’t credit their personal name(s) to the article. For example: Elon Musk is only paid $55 million, not 23.5 billion. The 23.5 billion is just the increase in the value of the stock he owns in his companies… once worth nothing. He bet on the right horse, himself. That isn’t pay. That’s just a good investment.

3 Likes

The stock is part of his compensation.

But anyway, here is why it matters…

When a corporation pays extravagant salaries to its C-suite employees, it of course reduces the amount of pay available to its front line workers. Many corporations pay their front line workers such low wages that us taxpayers have to subsidize their cost of living through things like childcare assistance, earned income credits, head of household credits, college tuition grants, food assistance, rent assistance, and medical cost assistance.

So in effect, (some) corporations pass on the true cost of doing business to taxpayers. And therefore, they should be taxed appropriately so that we can recover the costs of subsidizing their business.

2 Likes

Nope, those were stock options: worthless if the stock goes down. Only worth something if he performs… and he did. If I made you $10 for every $1 you paid me… I’m going to assume you’d like to pay me billions. Yes?

Here is how to look at this more clearly. Instead of trying to figure out what Musk is worth to his companies, ask what it would cost those companies if tomorrow morning… he quit. Oh! Now it becomes clear what he is worth.

Here is a great way to look at this for anyone that wasn’t exposed to any economics schooling.

We have a certain amount of resources available in our country. The utilization of these resources is what generates profit for companies.

Oil under our ground is one of those resources. Any company that takes that resource and sells it for a profit must give us (all of us) back something in exchange for letting them take and sell our resources. Oil companies pay us a royalty for all of their production on federal land.

Labor is another resource that must be accounted and compensated for. We do not (or should not) allow companies to use our labor resources for gain without just compensation. When companies are paying C-suite execs 400+ times more than workers, and when taxpayers are required to pay in to support these workers, we can rest assured that all of us are being taken advantage of.

2 Likes

The taxpayer would have to subsidize their cost of living more if they were unemployed. So don’t blame corporations for offering a paying (even a low-paying) option to being fully dependent on government assistance. And corporations don’t determine pay anyway. The market does.

No. Every company that offers jobs (even if those jobs go unfilled), causes the demand for workers to increase somewhere, and thus push wages up. The true cost to the taxpayer is relieved by providing jobs. Furthermore, employers have to pay taxes to cut each paycheck. I know this for certain as I employ 112 people and I have to pay the government a small fortune every two weeks for the privilege of paying my own employees. The employee is getting paid and the government is getting paid, every time a paycheck comes off the printer.

2 Likes

But even if you were correct on these points and that corporations should pay MORE taxes. That doesn’t change the fact that those taxes aren’t actually paid by those corporations. Those taxes are paid for by us. Corporations merely collect taxes for the government from stockholders, workers (as I explained above) and consumers (as I explained in the article). Corporate taxes are a tax on us, an inflationary, regressive tax that disproportionally harm the poor.

1 Like

And they would have to subsidize less if workers were paid a decent wage instead of paying the C-suite execs exorbitant and obscene wages. We have many full-time workers in this country who get large amounts of government assistance. Does any exec need $200+ million of compensation annually while their full time workers rely on taxpayer subsidies?

3 Likes

The taxes are meant to reclaim the amount the rest of us pay to support corporation front line workers who are underpaid and rely on taxpayer funds to make ends meet.

It is basically a way to try and make corporations pay their true cost of doing business.

1 Like

Of course. And if corporations paid every employee a million a year, we’d all be rich I suppose. But corporations don’t determine pay rates. Sellers of time (employees) do. When you buy a coffee at a coffee shop, you don’t determine what the coffee shop demands to be paid for their cup of coffee. You either buy it or you don’t. When you buy a sheet of plywood at Home Depot, you don’t determine what Home Depot demands to be paid for their plywood. You either buy it or you don’t. It’s over-obvious that buyers don’t get to set the prices. If that were true, I’d like to pay 1 cent for coffee, 10 cents for plywood and $1/hour for employee time. Obviously it isn’t true. Corporations don’t determine pay rates. Employees do. There are employees that I’d love to hire, but they simply want to much for their time. I don’t buy Starbucks coffee for the same reason.

4 Likes

Again, without the corporation, those unemployed front line workers would be paid nothing. Using your thinking, corporations (job providers) are subsidizing the taxpayer of the true cost of full government assistance. I agree. And they additionally pay the government for the privilege of providing that relief, every time they cut a paycheck.

Pay whom? I didn’t get a dividend check. The government took that money OUT of the productive economy. It’s gone. With few exceptions, at best it paid for a bureaucrat to do unproductive work. At worst it paid for a bomb to blow something up that isn’t ours on the other side of the world and then paid to rebuild it.

2 Likes

Fixed…

1 Like

Pay the taxpayers, for the use of their (our) resources.

The government does not hoard money. It may not always spend it wisely, but it does put the money back into the economy.

2 Likes

True, corporate taxes have some effect on prices and are therefore passed on to consumers. Some of the tax is passed on to workers in the form of lower wages, and some is passed on to shareholders in the form of lower profits. How much each of the various stakeholders shoulder has been a long-standing debate.

1 Like

It is a circular firing squad.

IMO, the answer lies in an equitable partnership between the stakeholder and the stockholder. Not the government and the stockholders.

The first few minutes of this video say it all. I highly recommend everyone watch the entire interview.

What makes diamonds and gold so expensive? Scarcity. If all the dirt in the world was either diamonds or gold then they would be worthless. Dirt would be extremely valuable because you can’t grow crops in gold or diamonds. When you flood the world with cash then it has the same effect. Print billions of dollars and give it away to individuals that have not provided any service or value to get it and you get rapid inflation. Let’s give everyone a million dollars, and everyone will be paying 10K for a cup of Starbucks… People that don’t grasp the taxation on corporations or that printing money for subsidization of laziness and funding other countries cronies is hurting the economy are either lacking common sense or are politicians.

4 Likes

Agreed. Government employees are spending their income in a productive economy. It’s the corporate heads and wealthy investors who are hoarding all of the money.

Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.” Can you imagine an economy where taxes are eliminated and millions of government employees immediately lose their jobs?

1 Like

Absolutely. Other than the “suddenly” part, it would be glorious. Currently, the government is bloated and siphons money off of a productive economy. Only some communist/progressive/socialist academic imbecile who has never owned or operated any business in their lives would say such a thing. (I am talking about the teachers, professors and “money experts” that tout this foolishness)

2 Likes