Saturday, March 12, 2011
Tax Foundation: On April 1, U.S. Is #1 (World's Highest Corporate Tax Rate)
There is increasing recognition in Washington that the U.S. corporate tax rate is out of step with the lower tax rates of most industrialized and emerging nations. Indeed, 2011 marks the 20th year in which the U.S. statutory tax rate has been above the simple average of non-U.S. countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
It is now well known that with a combined federal and state corporate tax rate of 39.2%, the U.S. has the second-highest overall rate among OECD nations. Only Japan, with a combined rate of 39.5%, levies a higher rate.
As Figure 1 indicates, the simple average of non-U.S. OECD nations has fallen from 38% in 1992 (the first year in which it fell below the U.S. rate) to 25.5% today. Similarly, the weighted average—which accounts for country size—has fallen from 42.5% in 1992 to 30.1% today. The weighted average rate of non-U.S. countries fell below the U.S. rate in 1998. Thus, 2011 marks the twelfth straight year in which the U.S. has been above the weighted average rate.
These figures and rankings do not reflect the changes that have occurred this year or will take place later in the year. On January 1, 2011, Canada's national corporate tax rate was reduced from 18% to 16.5%, which gives the country an overall rate of 28%. On April 1, both Japan and the United Kingdom are scheduled to lower their rates as well. Japan is planning to reduce its national rate by 4.5 percentage points, which will bring its overall rate to below 35%. The U.K. rate will fall from 28% to 27% as a first step of a multi-year plan to lower the British rate to 24% by 2014.
After the scheduled rate cuts in Japan and Great Britain take effect, the simple average of non-U.S. OECD nations will drop to about 25% percent and the weighted average will hit 29%. This will leave the U.S. rate a full 10 percentage points higher than the weighted average of our major economic competitors.
Table 1: Corporate Tax Rates in OECD Countries
Country
2010 Rate
2010 Rank
2000 Rate
2000 Rank
Rate Change
Rank Change
Japan
39.54
1
40.87
3
-1.3
2
United States
39.2
2
39.3
6
-0.1
4
France
34.43
3
37.76
7
-3.3
4
Belgium
33.99
4
40.2
4
-6.2
0
Germany
30.2
5
52.0
1
-21.9
-4
Mexico
30
7
35
11
-5.0
4
Spain
30
9
35
13
-5.0
4
Australia
30
6
34
14
-4.0
8
New Zealand
30
8
33
16
-3.0
8
Canada
29.52
10
42.57
2
-13.1
-8
Luxembourg
28.59
11
37.45
8
-8.9
-3
United Kingdom
28
13
30
23
-2.0
10
Norway
28
12
28
26
0.0
14
Italy
27.5
14
37
9
-9.5
-5
Portugal
26.5
15
35.2
10
-8.7
-5
Sweden
26.3
16
28
27
-1.7
11
Finland
26
17
29
24
-3.0
7
Netherlands
25.5
18
35
12
-9.5
-6
Austria
25
19
34
15
-9.0
-4
Denmark
25
20
32
18
-7.0
-2
Korea
24.2
21
30.8
20
-6.6
-1
Greece
24
22
40
5
-16.0
-17
Switzerland
21.17
23
24.93
28
-3.8
5
Turkey
20
24
33
17
-13.0
-7
Czech Republic
19
25
31
19
-12.0
-6
Poland
19
27
30
22
-11.0
-5
Slovak Republic
19
28
29
25
-10.0
-3
Hungary
19
26
18
30
1.0
4
Chile
17
29
15
31
2.0
2
Iceland
15
30
30
21
-15.0
-9
Ireland
12.5
31
24
29
-11.5
-2
https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2011/03/tax-foundation-us.html
Comments
I eagerly anticipate a world where nations have to compete on tax friendliness..
The US, former champion of capitalism, is now the world's largest obstacle to capitalism.
But the widening delta between the US and OECD average will hasten the need for the US to become competitive. And not a moment too soon.
Posted by: Eagle | Mar 14, 2011 1:01:41 PM
If corporate tax rates in the US are irrelevant, and loopholes ensure that corporations pay much less, then why aren't the same lefto-socialists demanding that the US raise corporate tax rates?
Raise rates. As the OECD rates go down, the US should go in the opposite direction. That'll show'em.
Come on, I dare ya. I double dare ya. Raise the US corporate tax rate to 50%. Let's see the Homocrats sweep the 2012 elections then.
Posted by: Eagle | Mar 14, 2011 12:58:04 PM
You just have to love the Tax Foundation's selective use of OECD data. How about the fact that we (US) are fourth from the bottom in aggregate tax burden (federal, state and local combined) with only Turkey, Mexico and Chile coming in behind us? And as you contemplete the joys of living in any of those countries with their web of generous social servies, also consider having their militaries providing for your security.
Posted by: Bill | Mar 14, 2011 9:43:36 AM
""...let's be honest and set the rate at 0%, and then we won't be pretending anymore."
You think you're being sarcastic. But between the fact that nonprofit and Type S corporations pay no taxes by design, and the fact that Type C corps consider taxes to be a cost of doing business to be passed on to their customers, there's truth in jest. And yes, I know about the Price Elasticity counterargument. I don't buy it.
Posted by: John Stephens | Mar 13, 2011 10:44:23 PM"
Friend as an owner of an S Corporation trust me I do pay taxes on the business income. Pocket A or pocket B is besides the point. The taxes get paid. As for C corporations, they pass their tax payments on to the shareholders. Why do people persist in the theory of of corporations not paying taxes but rather passing it on to the customers? First whatever taxable income there is is paid by the shareholders and second it isn't always possible to pass 100% of all costs to the customers, they do have choices of where to buy.
Speaking of non profits, why are they even allowed to exist?
Posted by: cubanbob | Mar 14, 2011 9:22:14 AM
"corporations don't pay taxes you the consumer do as they are added to the cost of the product or service being provided."
This is just not true. The impact of taxes is far worse than just "adding" the taxes to the price of goods sold. It has a dampening impact on the economy. People only look at half of Keynes. One tenant - the one that is likely true - is that to slow down an overheated economy the government can raise taxes. Libs believe that but not the corollary.
Posted by: EconRon | Mar 14, 2011 5:37:50 AM
What a brilliant collection of comments. You've convinced me that corporate taxes don't really exist, because they merely pass all such costs into their customers and suffer little or no loss. Even though taxes are calculated in part through profit, big companies just take that 40% and tack it onto their prices for the next year (to make up the difference you see) which leads to even GREATER profits (from the higher prices), resulting in more taxes, and another round of hiked prices, ad infinitum. I guess they can do this because all corporate-dominated industries are oligopolies and the poor, poor consumer just gets screwed harder and harder.
When companies exit states like Illinois and New Jersey for states like Texas and South Carolina, it's because they like the weather better. When they engage in long term tax and business planning, it's clearly just for show.
Stupid.
Posted by: df82 | Mar 13, 2011 8:22:06 PM
Let's not forget that most of these countries also have territorial tax systems. Not only does the current system lead to US companies performing all sorts of legal gymnastics to lower their effective tax rates but it provides a huge disincentive to bringing their overseas earnings home lest they get hit with a huge US tax bill.
Posted by: Red | Mar 13, 2011 8:09:18 PM
I don't get yahoo's comment. If they're tax exempt, then they don't have a stake in the outcome affecting their judgment. It's those who pay no taxes and want others to pay higher taxes that you have to look out for.
Posted by: Neil | Mar 13, 2011 8:03:41 PM
@Jeffrey, Let's be honest, corporations don't pay taxes you the consumer do as they are added to the cost of the product or service being provided.
Posted by: Mike | Mar 13, 2011 7:57:48 PM
"...let's be honest and set the rate at 0%, and then we won't be pretending anymore."
You think you're being sarcastic. But between the fact that nonprofit and Type S corporations pay no taxes by design, and the fact that Type C corps consider taxes to be a cost of doing business to be passed on to their customers, there's truth in jest. And yes, I know about the Price Elasticity counterargument. I don't buy it.
Posted by: John Stephens | Mar 13, 2011 7:44:23 PM
Corporations do not actually pay taxes. They may collect taxes and pass them on. But corporations do not actually pay taxes. Investors, employees, customers, and suppliers feel the impact, however. The only beneficiary of income taxes on corporations are accountants and lawyers. Oh congresscriters, also.
Posted by: EconRob | Mar 13, 2011 7:44:19 PM
Rate may be high. How much are U.S. corporations actually paying? Oh. Nothing, eh? Well, heck, let's be honest and set the rate at 0%, and then we won't be pretending anymore.
Posted by: Jeffrey Killeen | Mar 13, 2011 11:02:20 AM
I would add that ALL the countries in this list have either stayed the same or (mostly) dropped.
It is not that the US ever raised rates, but rather that they failed to keep up with the pack.
Sort of like the US auto industry being outcompeted.
What happens to GM happens to America.
Posted by: Eagle | Mar 14, 2011 4:27:00 PM