Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt
From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Corporate Taxation -- Reply to Sevener
Message-ID: <1490@dciem.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 27-Mar-85 18:45:11 EST
Article-I.D.: dciem.1490
Posted: Wed Mar 27 18:45:11 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Mar-85 19:22:02 EST
References: <ratex.1000>
Reply-To: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor)
Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada
Lines: 27
Summary: 


>     In responding to my point that taxing corporate income involves double
>taxation, sevener begins by noting:
>>This is an argument that is constantly reiterated by conservatives.

Well, of course taxing corporate income involves double taxation,
since the taxed amount is mostly passed on to consumers in the form of
raised prices.  It is a regressive form of tax, since poor and rich
pay the same proportion of the price.  But then all taxation is multiple
if you look at it from a suitable viewpoint.  Income tax on the workers
requires higher wages than would be necessary if the workers paid
no income tax, and those higher waged are passed on as higher prices
as well.  Value-added tax is applied to every stage of production or
service.  It likewise is a regressive form of double taxation.
I don't think you can get around the problem, and you certainly can't
get around it by defining corporations as bad guys who should be
heavily taxed (our NDP --socialist -- party won quite a few seats
in an election a few years ago with the slogan "corporate welfare bums"
in reference to low corporate taxes and bailouts).  I usually agree
with Severner's attempts to inject a little sense into this rather
polemic group, but this time I think he is dead wrong, and DKMcK,
with whom I generally disagree, is right.
-- 

Martin Taylor
{allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt
{uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt