Biden finally managed to do something: he convinced much of the world to sign onto a 15% minimum corporate tax.
The purpose is to allow Democrats to raise taxes on U.S. corporations without fear that they will bolt for friendlier havens.
I'm not sure that will keep companies from leaving, if the tax hike is high enough; and the major challenge to the U.S. economy is not that corporations aren't paying their "fair share," as Biden likes to say (though he himself avoided $500,000 in taxes by filing as an S-corp rather than an individual), but rather that we are killing our own economic potential with red-green statist policies.
Moreover, Congress will have to raise current U.S. taxes on corporate profits abroad from 10.5% to 15% to comply with the new international agreement.
Regardless, this is a diplomatic achievement for the Biden administration, however dubious. Biden (and Treasury secretary Janet Yellen) set a policy and pursued it, bringing the rest of the world along. Some of the work had been done by previous (Democratic) administrations, but he still gets the credit.
So... well done? I like the idea of 15% taxes: it should not just be a minimum, but a maximum. We should set a 15% flat tax and get rid of most of the IRS. We might raise more revenue; we'd certainly have more economic growth. And we'd have a broader tax base: more Americans would take an interest in how tax dollars are spent (or misspent), and politicians would not be able to get away with profligate spending quite as easily as they do, and expect to keep doing.
My wife, who is an economist, points out that it does not matter how many countries signed onto the 15% minimum tax: all you need is one to offer less, and corporations will go there.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
