One of the worst things about working in Washington is that it’s so easy to get frustrated about the fact-free nature of political debates.
For instance, there’s now a big controversy about companies “re-domiciling” or “inverting” from the United States to lower-tax nations such as Ireland and Switzerland.
This should not be controversial. Unless, of course, you think businesses shouldn’t be allowed to move from California to Texas. Or from New York to Tennessee.
And even if you somehow think taxpayers don’t have the right to legally protect themselves from punitive taxation, there are two very stark facts that should guide the political debate.
First, the United States has the world’s highest corporate tax rate, which undermines job creation and competitiveness in America, regardless of whether there are inversions.
Second, the United States has the most punitive “worldwide” tax system, meaning the IRS gets to tax American-domiciled companies on income that is earned (and already subject to tax) in other nations.
This is why, as I explain in this video, that the politicians who are protesting against inversions are putting demagoguery above jobs.
One of the most important aspects of this debate, though, doesn’t involve the intricacies of corporate taxation. Instead, it’s a broader public finance point about whether it’s good public policy to disadvantage shareholders, workers, and consumers in order to give politicians more money to spend.
In my mind, that’s a no-brainer.
P.S. Kudos to Rand Paul for being one of the few politicians who is willing to publicly defend companies that engage in legal tax planning.
