Don't like tax laws? Change 'em

Don't like tax laws? Change 'em

Members of Congress have met the enemy, and it is them.

When members of a U.S. Senate investigating committee held a hearing this week, they anticipated delivering a public flogging to the Caterpillar corporation for not paying enough in taxes.

Unfortunately, Caterpillar witnesses declined to cooperate, rejecting suggestions of impropriety by stating emphatically that the company paid what the law said it owed. Sure, they acknowledged, Cat took advantage of complicated accounting moves that allowed it to pay a lower tax rate in Switzerland than it would have paid in the United States. But they argued that their action was legal and noted that it went unchallenged by the Internal Revenue Service.

The turn of events prompted U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat and one of the leaders of the planned inquisition, to state, "If Caterpillar is right, then our tax laws need even more reform than I thought they did."

Gee, maybe members of Congress aren't ineducable after all.

The same Congress that created these so-called tax loopholes — loopholes are the tax breaks others invoke — can always rewrite or repeal our tax laws.

Then major corporations like Cat, Google, Apple and every other corporation that does business on a worldwide scale wouldn't have the legal ability to shift profits from one country to another in order to pay reduced tax rates. Congress could even lower our corporate tax rates so they would be more competitive with those in other countries, reducing the incentive for the kind of accounting gamesmanship now in play.

It's no sin for individuals or businesses to arrange their affairs in ways that minimize their tax obligations. Or, to put it another way, it's not illegal for individuals and businesses to follow the rules set out by Congress when they do their taxes.

The Cat case is common. Companies have been able to shield more than $2 trillion in cash by channeling their most profitable operations through overseas subsidiaries. Some call it fraud. Others call it a sound business practice.

But until the IRS finds otherwise and the courts agree or Congress changes the law, it's legal and will continue.

Sections (2):Editorials, Opinion

Comments embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

asparagus wrote on April 03, 2014 at 11:04 pm

This is not surprising. Money seeks to preserve itself. As always. The market must be made FREE. This is one very valid use of government -- to keep markets free.

Huh wrote on April 05, 2014 at 3:04 am

I think you mean $2 Billion in profits. Since their market value isn't even $70 billion, there is no way they had $2 Trillion in profits.

Dan Corkery wrote on April 05, 2014 at 11:04 am
Profile Picture

Thank you for bringing this inaccuracy to our attention. The problem is, our editorial attributed an overall figure — $2 trillion in cash kept offshore by multinational companies  — to one company, Caterpillar. 

We have rephrased our editorial.


Dan Corkery

managing editor for administration