USA Today does a Kerry versus Bush jobs creation plan comparison

[papau]

I wonder if we will ever get a front page discusson the Bush versus Kerry job creation plans. Meanwhile I'm just glad that USA Today does a buried and bit simplified comparison. To refresh ones memory:

Bush plan
•Stimulate growth in the economy and jobs by speeding up and extending indefinitely the temporary 2001 and 2003 income-tax cuts.
•Stimulate investment by extending indefinitely the temporary 2003 dividend and capital gains tax cuts.

Kerry plan
•Reduce the cost of doing business in the USA by cutting the corporate income tax from 35% to 33.25%.
•Stem the loss of U.S. jobs to overseas workers by ending tax breaks that make it more appealing to shift operations abroad, and offer a "corporate tax holiday" to encourage companies to shift overseas profits to the USA.
•Expand job and health care tax credits for manufacturers and small businesses that hire workers.
*Pledge to create 10 million new jobs in part by reforming the international tax system at an annual savings of $12 billion, applying that savings toward jobs creation- advocates the elimination of tax deferment on foreign income, closing tax loopholes by taxing companies on the overseas profits remaining after they paid taxes to foreign governments, and cutting the tax rate by 5 percent. Kerry will aim to "replace (the current tax code) with a simple system: companies will be taxed on their foreign subsidiaries profits just like they are taxed on their domestic profit," but not retroactively. Currently, American companies operating abroad do not have to pay U.S. taxes on foreign profits if they continue to invest the money abroad. In those cases, the companies have to pay only the taxes levied by the country in which they are operating.
* a one-year Multi-national Corporation "tax holiday," under which they could reinvest in the United States their built-up profits from foreign facilities at a temporary low tax rate of 10%,in addition to proposing a manufacturing "New Jobs Tax Credit" covering an employer's increased payroll costs for those that hired more workers. The credit would cover the employer's share of payroll taxes for the new workers.

Source: Bush and Kerry presidential campaigns




http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-0 ...

Candidates offer competing plans for job creation
By Peronet Despeignes, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — President Bush and Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry are aggressively selling tax-cuts as part of their plans for ending the nation's longest hiring slump since the Great Depression, but it's not clear that either can cure what ails the U.S. job market.

The centerpiece of President Bush's plan is making permanent the more than $1.3 trillion in temporary income-tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003. Most are set to phase out between now and 2010. Though most of the tax cuts were aimed at individuals, complexities of the tax code mean that many small businesses and corporations file under the rules governing individuals. Bush says tax cuts have lowered the cost of doing business in the USA and will eventually spur enough spending to force more hiring. Letting those tax rates go back up or even threatening to do so, he says, would only make the jobs slump worse.

"It's hard to run a business if you are unsure what the tax code is going to look like," he said Thursday in Nashua, N.H.

Kerry has offered a more targeted set of tax proposals: corporate income tax cuts, tax credits for companies that hire workers, a one-time low tax rate for companies that shift overseas income back to the USA, and an end to tax loopholes that Kerry says encourage the movement of jobs overseas. Kerry and his advisers say the package will make it cheaper for U.S. businesses to operate here and more expensive for them to shift work abroad.

Kerry's advisers say the package wouldn't increase the deficit, because revenue from the one-time tax rate and closing loopholes would pay for the tax cuts and credits. In contrast, they charge, Bush's tax cuts to extend the temporary tax cuts will inflate the deficit. Bush advisers counter that the stimulus to the economy and new revenue from the tax cuts will offset much of that.<snip>

[Thrill]

So in other words

Bush wants to use his same old policies from the last few yrs that haven't created any.

[Pale_Rider]

1. Link is mangled ...

... comes up document not found.

[papau]

7. USA's web site changed between AM amd PM! = new link

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-03-26-kerry-bush-issues_x.htm

[Sandpiper]

2. So in other words

The Bush plan is:

1)Extend indefinitely the tax cuts for the wealthy.

2)Hope some of it trickles down to the rest of us.

[fob]

3. Here is the FOB analysis...

bush* - 2.5 million jobs lost

Kerry - How many on his campaign staff? 100? It doesn't matter it's a POSITIVE NUMBER, let's call it 50

Summary:

bush* has to create 2,500,051 jobs to surpass Kerry and John is only the effing presumptive NOMINEE!!

Game.
Set.
Match.

Kerry.

[gWbush is Mabus]

4. kerry's plan is not so liberal

but hey, if it gets business people to vote for him,
so be it

[zbdent]

5. Kerry should declare trade sanctions on Bermuda

he,he,he.

[no name no slogan]

12. Better yet,

Impose heavy fines or tarrifs on the likes of Accenture and other "American" companies who are "headquartered" in Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, etc.

If they want the benefit of corporate American citizenship, then they should pay American taxes. Hell, I live and work in this country, and I pay my share. Why can't they?

[Beetwasher]

6. This is AWESOME

Just on it's surface. Bush's plan is two miniscule bullet points about tax cuts, that everyone now knows has failed miserably. Kerry's plan is, well, an ACTUAL PLAN. It's obvious at even just a glance.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

8. But still consists mainly of tax cuts, which is silly, because

the costs of hiring and keeping employees are already tax-deductible.

Yes, boys and girls, the money you spend on wages and benefits for your employees is deducted from your earnings along with all other costs of doing business to arrive at your taxable income.

[papau]

9. Tax deductible after fake accounting is worth 15cents - not 100 cents

like a dollar credit.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

10. But is this not just a modified version of the GWB approach?

The share of the tax burden borne by corporations is already far lower than it was in the booming 1950s and 1960s.

When the conservatives say that "your parents and grandparents paid a lower share of their income in taxes," they're correct. However, they leave out the other part of the equation, namely that the corporate share of the burden was much higher.

Some obervers have credited part of Japan's dominance in the auto industry in the 1970s and 1980s to that country's tax system. The corporate tax was so high that there was no incentive to show a profit, so companies plowed their earnings back into R&D and figured out how to make fuel-efficient cars that were both attractive and reliable.

[papau]

11. Tax incentives make CEO's jump - afraid the Board will say they left

money on the table.

Kerry's approach is the correct one.

A simple increase in the rate and folks learn my old talents/job - and Section 482 becomes a black hole for corporate profits, along with the 900 series and the royalty and loan games. And we are not even playing with leasing yet.

Indeed, Corporate tax payments would double - perhaps 3X - at Kerry's lower rate - simply by focusing the IRS on playing where the money is.