Tax cuts for sending jobs over seas??

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MyDesktopBroke, Jun 1, 2010.

  1. macrumors 6502

    Jun 2, 2007
    So, apparently Democrats with "I was for healthcare before I was against it" Republican Joseph Cao passed an amendment that aims to end tax cuts for companies that outsource jobs.

    This leaves me completely confused for a number of reasons. First, why on earth were there any tax cuts for companies that basically make unemployment higher, especially in the middle of a recession? Should that be one of the first things to eliminate? You get less people on unemployment benefits and more people paying income tax. Seems like a no-brainer? If anything, we should tax companies that outsource jobs more because they're saving so much on cheap foreign labor while putting more Americans on taxpayer funded unemployment checks.

    Second, why on earth would anyone vote to keep this cuts in place??. The GoP's platform for 2010 is two things: repeal HCR and create jobs, yet only one voted to end a huge incentive to send jobs out of America. Isn't this handing Dems a huge talking point to use against them?? Every time a republican says "jobs," the Democrats can say, "but you voted to send jobs overseas."

    Maybe the GoP figures if we get rid of all our jobs to other countries they can end illegal immigration. Why come to America when all we already gave them all our jobs?
  2. macrumors 6502a

    Jan 6, 2006
    Or there could be other things in the bill that those voting against it think will be harmful? I believe the bill in question is HR 4213 and is expected to cost $87 billion. Some tax professionals think this bill actually punishes small businesses.

    Rarely is a bill so cut and dry that it only accomplishes one thing. From a tax standpoint and economic standpoint, there are definitely reasons to vote against this bill (including the fact that it will cost $87 billion, may hurt small business, and is pretty poorly thought out tax code).
  3. macrumors 68040


    Oct 15, 2007
    Los Angeles, CA
    You are misunderstanding part of it. There isn't a tax break that exists that says, "if you send jobs overseas you owe this amount less on your taxes." What they are trying to do is take existing tax breaks (for whatever) away from companies who do send jobs overseas.
  4. macrumors 68000


    Aug 17, 2009
    It will make little difference. Companies that want to protect their bottom line will just move the corporate HQ to Lichtenstein or the Caymans.

Share This Page