this amendment is bad policy from top to bottom. If enacted, it would hurt U.S. companies and destroy jobs. It is, I am afraid, motivated more by political considerations than anything else. Under generally accepted tax principles in the United States and around the world, income is taxed when it is realized by a taxpayer. When income is earned but not received until some future date--say, for example, income in a pension plan or an individual retirement account-- then taxation is normally deferred. Eliminating or even limiting deferrals would put American companies at a competitive disadvantage in the global marketplace. This amendment does not--as it purports to do--eliminate a privilege; rather, it imposes a penalty, and a severe one at that. It will not increase revenues for the U.S. Treasury. It will, however, hurt American companies that are trying both to run their day-to-day operations and to compete with foreign businesses. What does this amendment do? It assumes that allowing U.S. multinationals to defer taxes on the income of their foreign subsidiaries is a tax break. That is a false assumption, because deferring only means that taxes are not due until the time that income has actually been received, or in the case of multinationals, repatriated back to the U.S. parent company. This amendment not only taxes income before it is realized, it carries with it the potential to tax income that is never realized at all.
Editor's note · Context
Opposing an amendment related to tax policy and its impact on U.S. companies.
Share
More from T. Gorton
Last Friday, Oregon governor John Kitzhaber announced his support for a radical Clinton-Gore administration proposal to begin dismantling the Columbia-Snake hydroelectric system by removing four hydroelectric dams in southeastern…
this is an appropriate time to bring my colleagues up to speed on the continuing saga that is the Microsoft anti-trust trial. Since I last came to the floor to discuss this issue, the industry, of which Microsoft is a part, has once again…
I asked in the letter that the Vice President, in his exalted position in this administration, do his very best to see to it that the State Department ends this arbitrary action and promptly reimburses the region with that entire $5…
It is clear from my friend's statement that he knows much about the sea turtle conservation project, and I share his enthusiasm for these important efforts to protect the Kemp's Ridley sea turtle. While I am keenly aware of the fiscal…





