Whether a Cut in Corp Tax Rate be Beneficial Essay

The 20%/9% Bonds and Common Stock option does not generate as positive capital structure as 50%/50% option. Although EPS scores are the same for year nine, net income is reduced to 39,680 due to having to pay interest of 14,400 on bonds while the 50/50 option generates a net income of 49,049 and pays no interest on bonds and issues dividends. In year ten, both capital structures offer an EPS of .032 however the net income is 9,380 less than the 50/50 option. In years 11, 12, and 13, the 20%/9% Bonds and Common Stock option EPS and net income results decline while the EPS and net income results increase for the 50/50 option.

The debates on tax cuts are making their way to headlines of every radio station, newspaper, and television station in America. Today, tax cuts would only benefit the wealthy and wouldn’t really benefit the lower class. “The administration and it’s congressional alleys are proposing to sharply reduce taxation of the business income primarily benefiting

As said on npr.org by Danielle Kurtzleben “Donald Trump’s tax plan is indeed a large tax cut, but those cuts would largely benefit the highest earners. According to a recent analysis from the right-leaning Tax Foundation, the top 1 percent could see their after-tax incomes increase by up to 16 percent. Meanwhile, the bottom four quintiles would see their incomes grow by 1.9 percent or less.” Donald Trump is focused on making the rich richer and the middle class less fortunate than they already

“I love paying my income tax! This tax system is so easy to understand!” said no United States citizen, ever. No one has ever said this because it is highly unlikely that no one actually enjoys struggling with the complexity of the current income tax system in the United States. The concept of contributing to the good of the community, county, state, and nation through taxation is not new, nor is it generally opposed by American citizens. Most tax paying citizens do not take issue with paying for police and fire protection, roads, and national security with tax dollars. However, what they do take issue with is the fact that the current tax code is a complicated nightmare. It is a bureaucratic mess of rules, regulations, and perhaps even infringements upon personal rights. Because of the complexity of the current tax code, the United States should implement a flat tax system for personal and corporate income tax to ensure consistent and fair taxation and to render the tax code as more user-friendly.

This new tax plan brings a slew of new tax reforms. Despite the tax cuts, it seems as if high earners and corporations will walk away from this tax reform with the best outcome. people who make less than 30,000 will be hurt by this plan the New York Time says, “Americans earning

Mostly from the spending money of middle-class consumers. And where does the spending money of middle-class consumers come from? From middle-class incomes”(Ettlinger). Tax cuts would raise income levels, if these tax cuts were focused on the middle class, they would have more money available to spend. If the middle class had more money available to spend, it would add money into the economy and create jobs thus expanding the tax base which would bring in more revenue for the government and help citizens. Another simple fix to the federal tax plan would be to slightly raise the corporate tax rate. The corporate tax rate should be kept at a low level, as it gives businesses more money with which to raise their employees’ incomes and to create new jobs. However, raising it slightly would allow the government to bring in more revenue, “And with each percentage point reduction in the corporate rate representing $100 billion in revenue over a decade, a move to a 22.5% rate would generate another $250 billion in revenue while still substantially leveling the global playing field for U.S.

Many citizens of the United States voted for Donald Trump for reasons regarding inequality. During the 2016 Election, Trump planned to cut corporate taxes, “from a top rate of 35 percent to 15 percent; his plans to cut tax rates for the highest earners, from nearly 40 percent now to 33 percent at the top rate; and to reduce regulations on business” (The Washington Post). These were his

Did you know that 44 percent of the people in America do not pay any income taxes? This is approximately 66 million out of 151 million that now pay no income taxes. From 1950-1990, the percentage of people that owed no money for federal income taxes and paid no federal income taxes was 22 percent. This has now doubled and is putting our economy and country at its breaking point. Our current tax system penalizes those that work and save money. People who pay no taxes still get to enjoy the benefits. "A revolutionary change in our tax system is fundamental to re-energizing the American economy and restoring the American dream." (Moore) The United States income tax should be replaced with a consumption tax such as the flat tax to

In theory, cutting taxes helps the economy by putting more money into the pocket of consumers, which they will then spend. For income of individuals and families, Donald Trump is proposing simplified tax brackets with tax cuts across the board. Whereas the current income tax plan has 7 rates, stretching from 10% to 39.6% (more like 43.4%, due to the net investment income surtax), the President-Elect will pursue income tax rates of only 12, 25, and 33% and capital gains tax rates of 0, 15, and 20%. In addition, Trump has proposed eliminating the net investment income surtax and any Obamacare taxes, making 33% and 20% the true maximums for income and capital gains, respectively. Beyond income tax cuts, businesses will see a massive tax cut under Trump’s proposed policy. Corporations currently pay a 35% tax rate; going forward, all businesses (including income earned by an individual from a corporation) will be taxed at 15%, with most business deductions eliminated, in an effort to reduce the debt dependence of

This may sound like a tax plan that will relieve the financial burden on lower-income taxpayers, directly benefiting the poor, but in actuality, cutting taxes for all in a regressive manner gives substantially more money to the wealthiest taxpayers and a very small amount to lower income taxpayers. According to his plan, a typical American family of four will be able to keep at least $1, 600 more of

Policy makers have introduced a solution to the staggering proportion of taxes that Americans spend. The flat tax, based on an idea developed by Professors Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka of Stanford University to create a fair, simple, and pro-growth tax system (Mitchell 1, 11). There are four basic criteria that make up a flat tax. First is a single low rate on taxable income, the baseline for taxable income would be raised to a certain amount dictated by a personal exemption. Second is simplicity, all Americans would fill out the same postcard-sized form to pay their taxes. Third is the reduction or elimination of deductions, credits, and exemptions, depending

Furthermore, the clientele effect can impact the stock price because it assumes that the investors are attracted to the company for its policies and when these change the investors will react and adjust their stock accordingly (Moles & Terry, 2005). In addition to this, the issuance of debt and repurchase of stock could signal to investors that managers believe the stock in undervalued.

The United States is in a recession; it has been facing some of the worse economic times since the Great Depression in the 1930’s. One option to fix the economy is to change the corporate tax rate. To lower it or to raise it, that is the question economists have been speculating. America's high corporate tax rate and worldwide system of taxation discourages U.S. companies from sending their foreign-source revenue home, which makes U.S. companies defenseless to foreign acquisition from the international opponents (Camp). Corporations and United States citizens have been fighting for a tax reform, which would hopefully help the American economy; either by lowering the corporate tax, or by raising the tax.

Though bonds provide such safety, their yields are very low and have little potential for capital appreciation in the long-run for both the issuer and receiver. Besides, the low interest-rate of bonds makes the return on holding cash virtually non-existent (Voya & Scotia, 2009). Convertible bonds, however, offer a middle ground between the safety of bonds and the upside potential, and risk, of stocks. For this firm seeking income, higher-yielding convertibles bonds are the right options they can explore. This allows for the downside protection of a

For example, if the public thinks that the firm’s prospects are rosy but the managers see trouble ahead, these managers would view their debt-as well as their equity-as being overvalued. That is, the public might see the debt as nearly risk- free, whereas the mangers see a strong possibility of default.