Connecticut

[apeman]

Is it your contention that tax give-aways do not fall under the descriptor "tax policy"?

Not unless all government actions are considered "tax policy".

I didn't get a "tax break" when I got subsidized student loans. The corn subsidy that's ruining our food supply is not "tax policy".

Simple yes or no: do tax give-aways constitute tax policy?

[SuburbanFarmer]

Is it your contention that tax give-aways do not fall under the descriptor "tax policy"?

Not unless all government actions are considered "tax policy".

I didn't get a "tax break" when I got subsidized student loans. The corn subsidy that's ruining our food supply is not "tax policy".

Simple yes or no: do tax give-aways constitute tax policy?

Define "tax give-away".

If you're talking about giving a corporation an "extra special incentive" to stay in your state, then no. If you're giving them an "extra special tax break", then no. It's not policy.

If you're referring to a built-in subsidy for an industry, then yes. It's applied across the board, as part of the tax code. Still disgusting and wrong, but technically, it is "policy".

And again, it has ab.so.lute.ly. nothing. to do with the tax rates.

[apeman]

What if I told you that this had almost nothing to do with tax policy?

POLICY, hmmm

And again, it has ab.so.lute.ly. nothing. to do with the tax rates.

RATES, hmmmm

[SuburbanFarmer]

What if I told you that this had almost nothing to do with tax policy?

POLICY, hmmm

And again, it has ab.so.lute.ly. nothing. to do with the tax rates.

RATES, hmmmm

Keep going, Mr. Pedantic of Pedantiburg, M.D. of Pedantistry.

[apeman]

What if I told you that this had almost nothing to do with tax policy?

POLICY, hmmm

And again, it has ab.so.lute.ly. nothing. to do with the tax rates.

RATES, hmmmm

Keep going, Mr. Pedantic of Pedantiburg, M.D. of Pedantistry.

From the guy who says that "tax policy" has "almost nothing" to do with companies relocating to other states, then cites sources showing that tax policy does in fact have something to do with relocation, then argues that tax give-aways do not qualify as "tax policy" if they don't apply across the board.

What if I told you that this had almost nothing to do with tax policy?

[SuburbanFarmer]

POLICY, hmmm



RATES, hmmmm

Keep going, Mr. Pedantic of Pedantiburg, M.D. of Pedantistry.

From the guy who says that "tax policy" has "almost nothing" to do with companies relocating to other states, then cites sources showing that tax policy does in fact have something to do with relocation, then argues that tax give-aways do not qualify as "tax policy" if they don't apply across the board.

What if I told you that this had almost nothing to do with tax policy?

You really want to pretend that handing GE millions of dollars just for the privilege of hosting their HQ is part of tax policy? Cool, man.

I think you just want to play at pedantistry.

[apeman]

I do actually contend that State's practice of using tax incentives and tax give-aways, even on a case-by-case basis, is part of their tax policies.

But this ends here, not worth it, I already understand why corps relocate, and never expected that this debate was solely based upon a contention that a State's use of tax incentives and tax give-aways to lure corps is not part of their tax policy.

So it ends with us in agreement that a State's use of case-by-case tax arrangements has something to do with why corps relocate, which no one would have argued with, ever.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I do actually contend that State's practice of using tax incentives and tax give-aways, even on a case-by-case basis, is part of their tax policies.

But this ends here, not worth it, I already understand why corps relocate, and never expected that this debate was solely based upon a contention that a State's use of tax incentives and tax give-aways to lure corps is not part of their tax policy.

So it ends with us in agreement that a State's use of case-by-case tax arrangements has something to do with why corps relocate, which no one would have argued with, ever.

Of course, with the exception of 90% of the public, who think that lowering the various corporate tax rates will have some effect on where corporations move. Most people are completely unaware of the 'super-special-arrangements' that are made constantly by states and cities across the country. That's what I was shedding light on.

If you believe that one-shot tax incentives and give-aways are part of "tax policy", then so is everything else that the government does. It's all tax money, after all.

Common understanding of the term Tax Policy would imply the rates and exemptions, as written in the Tax Code. Not "whatever we wanna do with taxes, fuck you, we're in charge". But yes, by default, anything that's done with tax dollars can also be called "tax policy".

[apeman]

Unbelievable

[Alexander PhiAlipson]

Unbelievable

You're trying to communicate with a guy who doesn't know what a dinner party is.
Yesterday he looked up the word pedantic, and he's already misusing it.
I'm hoping that today he learned that the first Indian to meet the Pilgrims asked them for a beer.