Business and Jobs Flee Democrats New High-tax, High-Regulation America

KingCondanomation

KingCondanomation

New member
Obama and Dems high tax and high regulation far left Liberal government policies are chasing out businesses and the jobs that come with them.

"Companies seek Swiss domiciles despite tax row

* U.S. political climate may be helping

* Appeal as corporate location may outlast offshore dispute

By Sam Cage

ZUG, Switzerland, March 12 (Reuters) - The tidy towns and mountain vistas of Switzerland are an unlikely setting for an oil boom.

Yet a wave of energy companies has in the last few months announced plans to move to Switzerland -- mainly for its appeal as a low-tax corporate domicile that looks relatively likely to stay out of reach of Barack Obama's tax-seeking administration.

In a country with scant crude oil production of its own, the virtual energy boom has changed the canton or state of Zug, about 30 minutes' drive from Zurich, beyond all recognition. Its economy was based on farming until it slashed tax rates to attract commerce after World War Two."
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbss...2?feedType=RSS&feedName=rbssEnergyNews&rpc=22
 
Dungheap said:
I'm curious to know how jobs are fleeing to Switzerland.
Click to expand...

It's because you only think of jobs in terms of those workers these energy companies need to extract oil which of course can not leave the country where they are extracting oil.
But their head offices, lawyers, accountants, consultants and top executives CAN.
 
KingCondanomation said:
It's because you only think of jobs in terms of those workers these energy companies need to extract oil which of course can not leave the country where they are extracting oil.
But their head offices, lawyers, accountants, consultants and top executives CAN.
Click to expand...

No. It's because I am fully aware that corporate domestication is a legal fiction that does not require any real presence in the state (or country) of domestication.

I suppose some Delaware registered agents will lose some business, but that's about it.
 
Dungheap said:
No. It's because I am fully aware that corporate domestication is a legal fiction that does not require any real presence in the state (or country) of domestication.

I suppose some Delaware registered agents will lose some business, but that's about it.
Click to expand...

are you saying that it wouldn't matter if chevron moved it's corporate headquarters to switzerland, they'd still be an american company paying american income tax?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
are you saying that it wouldn't matter if chevron moved it's corporate headquarters to switzerland, they'd still be an american company paying american income tax?
Click to expand...


No. I'm saying that virtually no change in physical location of the business would occur and that there would be virtually no loss of employment in the United States among Chevron's operations.
 
this is not the big boys, maybe a few tiny independents
secondly, Rangel is one of the biggest supporters of a lower corporate tax.
 
Dungheap said:
No. I'm saying that virtually no change in physical location of the business would occur and that there would be virtually no loss of employment in the United States among Chevron's operations.
Click to expand...

but the OP story isn't about how it will affect employment/unemployment. It's about corporate tax revenue.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
but the OP story isn't about how it will affect employment/unemployment. It's about corporate tax revenue.
Click to expand...


Read the title of the post. The article doesn't mention anything about jobs or regulations because the author of the article has a clue what he is writing about.

Dano, on the other hand, thinks that a change in corporate domestication with "chase out businesses and the jobs that come with them," which just plain is not true.
 
Dungheap said:
Read the title of the post. The article doesn't mention anything about jobs or regulations because the author of the article has a clue what he is writing about.

Dano, on the other hand, thinks that a change in corporate domestication with "chase out businesses and the jobs that come with them," which just plain is not true.
Click to expand...

yeah, i kinda noticed that. article title and post title have nothing in common.
 
Dungheap said:
Read the title of the post. The article doesn't mention anything about jobs or regulations because the author of the article has a clue what he is writing about.

Dano, on the other hand, thinks that a change in corporate domestication with "chase out businesses and the jobs that come with them," which just plain is not true.
Click to expand...

LIKELY bullshit because you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, of course corporations can change their place of registration and ONLY that. But certainly SOME are going to hire or allow current employees to work there and hire locally. If you were a consultant or accountant, etc... that was offered a chance to work there, you may well be very pursuaded to go. Switzerland is a very nice country.

Ireland drastically lowered their corporate tax rate and generated a PHENOMENAL amount of jobs from that, obviously all the companies that registered as Irish did not just do it on paper and leave it at that.

If you want to really get technical, the loss in corporate tax revenue out of America's domestic economy is surely going to implictly result in job losses, both public with less tax revenue and private with less wealth being spent in the domestic consumer economy.

Don't sit there and be a fucking ass because you think it's no big deal if a nation loses some corporate tax revenue, presence and yes jobs. The reality is that you need them and should very concerned that Obama and Liberal Democrats are starting a wave of companies leaving.
 
KingCondanomation said:
LIKELY bullshit because you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, of course corporations can change their place of registration and ONLY that. But certainly SOME are going to hire or allow current employees to work there and hire locally. If you were a consultant or accountant, etc... that was offered a chance to work there, you may well be very pursuaded to go. Switzerland is a very nice country.

Ireland drastically lowered their corporate tax rate and generated a PHENOMENAL amount of jobs from that, obviously all the companies that registered as Irish did not just do it on paper and leave it at that.

If you want to really get technical, the loss in corporate tax revenue out of America's domestic economy is surely going to implictly result in job losses, both public with less tax revenue and private with less wealth being spent in the domestic consumer economy.

Don't sit there and be a fucking ass because you think it's no big deal if a nation loses some corporate tax revenue, presence and yes jobs. The reality is that you need them and should very concerned that Obama and Liberal Democrats are starting a wave of companies leaving.
Click to expand...


1) You may want to update your information on Ireland. It's economy is circling the drain and the unemployment rate is soaring. And I belive I recall that it has soaring deficits.

2) You keep pretending that there is a need to move staff to Switzerland if a corporation decides to domesticate there. That is not the case. There is no need to do that. At all. Assuming even a mass exodus of corporations to Switzerland the net number of jobs going to Switzerland would be de minimis. Much like corporations domesticate in the Delaware in the United States but have no physical presence in Delaware, there would be no need for a physical presence in Switzerland.

3) Corporations moving to Switzerland would result in less public revenue and spending and yes, this would have a negative impact if a lot of corporations do that, but that isn't what you claimed in the original post. And really, I thought you were of the opinion that less government is a good thing and that belief that government spending is a bad thing. Now you're claiming it's a good thing?

4) I'm not terribly concerned about this because there aren't all that many corporations that would move to Switzerland. There are already plenty of tax havens in existence. One more isn't going to change much of anything. And, if it did, I'd just press for passage of Senator Levin's Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act and be done with it. At the same time Congress should pass Rangel's bill to lower the corporate tax rate while closing corporate tax loopholes.
 
Last edited:
Dungheap said:
1) You may want to update your information on Ireland. It's economy is circling the drain and the unemployment rate is soaring. And I belive I recall that it has soaring deficits.
Click to expand...
No shit, but that is like saying less government didn't work well for America in the 90's. Like us they have moved away from the model that worked well for them.

Dungheap said:
2) You keep pretending that there is a need to move staff to Switzerland if a corporation decides to domesticate there. That is not the case. There is no need to do that. At all. Assuming even a mass exodus of corporations to Switzerland the net number of jobs going to Switzerland would be de minimis. Much like corporations domesticate in the Delaware in the United States but have no physical presence in Delaware, there would be no need for a physical presence in Switzerland.
Click to expand...
There sure as hell is a need, you need accountants and lawyers familiar with laws and taxes of the country they move to. From that you establish a presence and from there it builds.
You are just some college lawyer kid, I have been through this with a company I used to work for starting out operating with the registration paper sitting in the drawer from a different state, years later, much of the executive team and even sales team were based there.

Dungheap said:
3) Corporations moving to Switzerland would result in less public revenue and spending and yes, this would have a negative impact if a lot of corporations do that, but that isn't what you claimed in the original post. And really, I thought you were of the opinion that less government is a good thing and that belief that government spending is a bad thing. Now you're claiming it's a good thing?
Click to expand...
No, I am saying that if you are GOING to tax them it sure as hell is better to tax and keep the money in the domestic economy, rather than lose all as some other country taxes it at a lower rate.
Lower taxes and less government spending would have prevented this.

And no shit there isn't a lot of corporations moving yet but you understand what a wave is and how trends go.

Dungheap said:
4) I'm not terribly concerned about this because there aren't all that many corporations that would move to Switzerland. There are already plenty of tax havens in existence. One more isn't going to change much of anything. And, if it did, I'd just press for passage of Senator Levin's Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act and be done with it. At the same time Congress should pass Rangel's bill to lower the corporate tax rate while closing corporate tax loopholes.
Click to expand...
WTF? Switzerland is not some new additional tax haven, we are talking about America becoming less friendly in terms of taxation. Other tax havens are almost certainly also benefitting, this article just deals with some companies and Switzerland.

If Levin had his retarded bill passed then you really would see a LOT of jobs leave because companies would be forced to do more than just a legal country of registration change with some admin staff.
 
KingCondanomation said:
No shit, but that is like saying less government didn't work well for America in the 90's. Like us they have moved away from the model that worked well for them.

There sure as hell is a need, you need accountants and lawyers familiar with laws and taxes of the country they move to. From that you establish a presence and from there it builds.
You are just some college lawyer kid, I have been through this with a company I used to work for starting out operating with the registration paper sitting in the drawer from a different state, years later, much of the executive team and even sales team were based there.


No, I am saying that if you are GOING to tax them it sure as hell is better to tax and keep the money in the domestic economy, rather than lose all as some other country taxes it at a lower rate.
Lower taxes and less government spending would have prevented this.

And no shit there isn't a lot of corporations moving yet but you understand what a wave is and how trends go.


WTF? Switzerland is not some new additional tax haven, we are talking about America becoming less friendly in terms of taxation. Other tax havens are almost certainly also benefitting, this article just deals with some companies and Switzerland.

If Levin had his retarded bill passed then you really would see a LOT of jobs leave because companies would be forced to do more than just a legal country of registration change with some admin staff.
Click to expand...


Hilarious. Of course, you could just admit that you were wrong. Again.
 
I'd also note that the four specific companies mentioned in the article (Noble Corp, Transocean, Foster Wheeler and Weatherfield International) are not or were not US corporations prior to moving to Switzerland. They were incorporated in either Bermuda or the Cayman Islands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top