Who among us – individuals or businesses – doesn’t try to reduce our taxes, to avoid paying more if less will suffice?
If a Californian or New Yorker, after earning high wages within those states, moves to Texas or Nevada to reduce their tax burden, does that make them un-American? Have they violated some societal rule by taking advantage of benefits that another locale offers?
Except for scale, isn’t that what large companies do as well?
One thing our stalemated government (executive and legislative branches) agree on is that the tax code must be revised. Yet, other than giving speeches, nothing happens.
Instead of turning off the microphones, rolling up their sleeves, locking themselves in a room and getting something done, they accuse, insult and blame others for making a logical decision.
Immoral, unpatriotic, these public protectors rant. Of course, the states in which they are elected regularly offer tax advantages to companies to establish operations – can you say Tesla?
It’s acceptable to steal the business from another state, but it isn’t OK for businesses to move to other nations for the same reasons.
The movement of American companies overseas may be a good thing. It might make politicians understand that to tax has a price, not just on the taxpayer, but on the tax collector.
Money flows where it is treated the best. While there are advantages that our country may provide – although a modern infrastructure, a responsive government, and good educational systems aren’t among them – the ever increasing grope of our federal government has put too high a price on proclaimed societal benefits, making cheaper environments more attractive.
After all, who spends your money more wisely, you or your government?
So to the president specifically, and to the legislators collectively, a message: If it is un-American to seek to reduce one’s tax payment by moving to another jurisdiction, it is equally un-American to retain the system which provides the incentive to do so.
Shut up and get to work, not by glorious speeches for campaign donations, not by penalizing those who wish to retain more of the assets they earn instead of giving it to a government who routinely wastes it, not by spending revenue courting for votes instead of solving problems we face, but by implementing a tax code that makes sense, and in doing so creates the incentive to remain, not leave.
Or, are those who shop on sales tax holidays, or cross borders into neighboring countries to pay less for the same goods, traitors to our country?
It’s tougher to deal with the problem than to talk about it. But the results benefit all.