GOP tax cut plan sets 15.5% repatriation rate on offshore cash; 8% if invested in plants and equipment

“The top tax rate that U.S. companies would pay on an estimated $3.1 trillion in earnings they’ve stockpiled overseas crept up to 15.5 percent in the final version of the GOP tax bill released Friday,” Lynnley Browning reports for Bloomberg.

“President Donald Trump had initially called for a top rate around 10 percent for companies’ offshore profits, but as GOP lawmakers searched for revenue to offset the cost of other tax cuts, one of the sources they settled on was multinationals’ offshore cash,” Browning reports. “Under the GOP tax plan that’s headed for votes in the House and Senate next week, earnings that companies hold offshore as cash and cash equivalents would be taxed at 15.5 percent. Income invested in less-liquid assets — including plants and equipment — would be taxed at 8 percent. Both taxes would be mandatory, not optional.”

Browning reports, “Under current law, companies can defer paying U.S. income taxes on their foreign earnings at the corporate rate of 35 percent until they return, or ‘repatriate,’ them to the U.S. The deferral provision has led companies to stockpile those earnings overseas.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Expect investment in plants and equipment, obviously.

As we wrote yesterday, “We’d bet large multinationals would take a bit of a hit on repatriation in exchange for finally moving to a territorial system.”

SEE ALSO:
GOP eyes taking bigger bite from Apple, others holding cash overseas to seal President Trump’s tax cuts – December 15, 2017
Apple could be biggest beneficiary of Republican tax reform plans, saving at least $47 billion – December 6, 2017
Dow soars 203 points higher to record as Wall Street cheers U.S. Senate passage of major tax bill – December 4, 2017
Oracle joins Apple in support of President Trump’s tax repatriation plan – November 7, 2017
President Trump’s tax cuts could be YUGE for Apple – September 28, 2017
GOP tax plan calls for cutting the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent – September 27, 2017
Goldman Sachs sees $1 trillion in U.S. tax cuts coming – September 20, 2017
Apple will eventually bring billions of dollars back to the U.S. under President Trump’s tax reform plan – July 21, 2017
President Trump’s tax reform plan includes deep cuts in corporate taxes – April 26, 2017
Apple could be primed for profit explosion under President Trump’s big tax cut – April 26, 2017

79 Comments

  1. This is such great news for Apple – any international business, to push money back into the US, build and employe folks!

    Less government, more liberty! Bing!

    Businesses like Apple can get out of debt, and become more stable and stronger than ever before.

    And no, my comments have to do nothing with the GOP or Trump, it’s basic economic math – I didn’t vote for either of baboons on the ballot.

    1. This is at the wrong point of the business cycle. I am always in favour of lower taxes – but this done this way, at this point, will cause overheating of the economy, an unnecessary increase in inflation when the business cycle is still close to peak, higher interest rates and a dollar surge.

      1. … we should do nothing? It’s always the wrong time for some aspect of anything. Just trying to get these imbecile politicians to accomplish something is a crapshoot, so let’s just get it done now, if possible.

        1. At this stage, there should not be such big, unfunded tax cuts. It is not a matter of politics but economics. An increase in inflation as this point in the business cycle will result in increased interest rates and problems with global liquidity. I am for low taxes – but this will be defeating by overheating the economy.

          1. This isn’t going to overheat the economy, it’s going to crash it.

            This is going to turn into a huge round of profit-taking, which is going to end up putting us into a recession. It will do nothing good for anyone not in the 1%.

            The right time to do something like this is, of course, never. The tax cuts that benefit the economy are always at the bottom, never at the top. And cutting the corporate tax rate discourages investment by redirecting investment (which is already not taxed) to profit-taking (taxed).

            1. I don’t think that you are right. These tax cuts will result in short-term increased wealth for all the shareholders of these companies – not just the 1% that make up the executives for on telephone number salaries. However, increased inflation, as this point of the business cycle, will require increases in interest rates. The effects of increased inflation will usually affect the poor the most, as they are likely to be on welfare (whose increases lag inflation) or low paid, precarious jobs with low bargaining power for increases.

              What is apparent, however, is that people see tax cuts in religious rather than economic terms. The people above who have criticised me and sIt that they need tax cuts now see tax cuts in almost religious terms. Ideologically, I am for low taxes as a means of stimulating growth and economic freedom – but I do not treat low taxes as an article of faith. I would like to see a simplification of taxes (complexity is as inefficient as high tax rates) but large tax cuts now whilst the economy is growing will lead to overheating, higher interest rates and a dollar surge.

          2. Here is what is even crazier, the other governments for some reason are stupid. Now, they are just too dumb to lower their tax rates. Here is what is even funnier , the CEOs are on the phones right now talking to those other governments about lowering the tax rates where that money is right now. The republican unwashed masses are idiots. After all, why bring money to the USA when that money was made overseas. Makes more sense to expand in those oversea markets. What the repugnuts don’t get but the CEOs get, is, HANDS ARE HANDS. Ask trump who makes his products in Mexico. Stupid repugnuts. Hell they don’t even know the name of the Democratic Party. Go wash up, you unwashed masses, start with your ears. There is not enough soap in the world to wash your minds out. There a word for you that is very descriptive, SUCKERS.

            WHAT KILLS ME TOO IS HOW YOU SUPPORT A TRAITOR, trump, OVER YOUR OWN COUNTRY. HE AND HIS KLAN ARE IN DEEP WITH THE russians. America first, what a joke. trump is giving the russians a classified information.

            1. Man, you really have Russian bogeymen on the brain. Oh, and I love your condescending negative stereotypes of Republicans.

              If the Democrats are so superior running government, where was 3% GDP growth the last eight years? Noticed how many manufacturing jobs were created under President Trump and the stock market record run just to name two positive economic indicators. Guess not.

              MAGA! … 🇺🇸👍🏻🇺🇸👍🏻🇺🇸

            2. Governments are people in power. Those people ALWAYS want to spend more. More for their staff, family, elective base, so their status goes up as someone who “delivers.”

              Unfortunately, you can actually kill the Golden Goose. Tax enough and the Geese actually fly to lower tax venues. Then there is less money for the people in power to spend. That leads to deficits, inflation and unemployment.

              I would hope WDC would stop trying to kill the Golden Goose and figure out how to FEED the Golden Goose, which is business, which employees everyone, one way or another.

      2. Give examples of when this happened? Nice left talking points that makes no sense whatsoever… if inflation occurs, how is that curbed? Higher interest rates. Study the 80’s son.

        1. Suggest you go bone up on Keynesian Economics, as well as to note that the longest that the US Economy has ever gone without a recession is only 120 months (and we’re currently in Month #101).

          Oh, and bone up on “Stagflation” from the 1970s…the interest rates then were even higher than in the 1980s.

          1. Yes, John Keynes. He was a socialist/communist, who’s policies only helped empower the state, and did nothing to expand individual liberties.

            Two Words: Milton Friedman

            1. Friedman? Please.

              Friedman merely noted that for-profit businesses don’t have any societal obligations as they’re ultimately beholden to just their Stockholders. And while this can be argued as providing for more total economic gain vs systems with more factors, the flaw that it contains is the requirement that Enterprise is able to successfully resist engaging in fraud or deception … which also by necessity has to also include anti-competitive measures performed through political lobbying … and we all know that that hasn’t happened.

              And “socialist/communist”? Nope, you don’t understand Keynes … and you’re willing to use deliberately malicious terms to try to “win”, instead of facts.

              Keynes was looking beyond the Adam Smith invisible hand of corporate self interests to understand & apply government policies which would be in effect minimally interventional while understanding how government policy can moderate economic cycles to provide for better economic stability to the non-investor class. That’s not how to regulate “Enterprise” inasmuch it is to how to adjust Government Policies (especially short term spending in reaction to recessions) to minimize its cyclic adversities on the citizens.

              And the outcome of this can be seen: Friedman was the architect of Ronald Reagan’s “Trickle Down” – – which has never done what it claimed (namely, to be a benefit the middle class). Instead, it did what it never publicly admitted, was which to make the .1% even richer … and we’ve had a systematic destruction of the Middle Class as a result.

              After the 2008 melt-down, the pendulum swung and the field has come back to Keynes. And more recently, the current administration of Anti-Science hacks are in political control and are trying try to ram through a big payoff to their .1% investors, with the most onerous parts of this being that it isn’t revenue-neutral, and that the “Haves” get permanent code changes, whereas the “Have-Nots” (which is clearly the entire Middle Class” have seven years of modest cuts before they get screwed – – which they’ll blame on whoever the Administration is at the time, not this one.

              Bottom line is that if you don’t have $3M+ in savings by the time you retire — you’re never going to be able to afford to retire.

          2. Basically all Keynes said was: when consumer demand is weak, the government can pick up the slack through additional spending. It is an emergency measure to combat recession. That’s all.

            1. Yes, and the second part of Keynes is that when the economy has recovered, the Gov’t Policy should be to go into a budget surplus, to pay off the deficit, so as to have ammunition in store for the next recession.

              Thus, we should be running a budget surplus right now … not increasing our Deficit even further. That’s why this entire tax bill is so profoundly wrong.

    2. Right on, Bobby.

      Wow, judging by many posts the Left totally has their panties in a bunch for two reasons.

      1) Less money to grow the government and give away to their voting blocs that Obama excelled at.

      2) Fear that tax cuts will WORK and make their onerous policies and political beliefs IRRELEVANT.

      Fingers crossed …

      1. No one is arguing for higher taxes, least of all me. The issue is the cutting of taxes so rapidly when the economy is already at a point where asset prices look inflated and interest rates are rising. Overheating the economy will result in overheating, greater increases in interest rates, a dollar surge, a global liquidity crisis and a domestic recession.

        The issue is not cutting taxes but when it is appropriate to cut. It is not at the point when there are already inflationary pressures and a potential bubble in asset prices.

    1. They shouldn’t argue against it. Great idea and an improvement over the original version which didn’t offer an “incentive” to actually spend it within the US. I like this proposal much better. America needs to become a jobs machine again. Any and all jobs are good adds.

    2. You are all misreading the article and the bill.

      The lower tax rate does not apply to investments in non-liquid assets like plants and equipment in the United States. It applies to fixed assets that remain overseas. The lower rate is a recognition that such assets cannot be returned to the US like the liquid assets taxed at 15.5% (whether they are actually returned or not).

      Applying a lower tax rate to repatriated funds that are invested in infrastructure rather than just being handed back to the investors as dividends, buybacks, and executive compensation is a really excellent idea that nobody could argue against. Unfortunately, that is not a feature of this tax bill.

      The bill has no incentive to spend the funds within the US. There isn’t even an incentive to bring the funds home, since they will be taxed at the same rate (15.5 or 8%) whether they are returned or not.

      1. Thanks for pointing this out.

        This brings up another issue. For large multinationals based in the US, the bill could result in a huge incentive to move out of the US.

        Example:
        If a company has $10 Billion in another country waiting to be repatriated they have the choice of staying in the US and paying $800 million ~ $1.55 Billion to do so, or move their base to the other country to not be subject to US taxes. It’s important to note that they’ve already paid taxes in that other country, so it becomes an issue of whether the US tax or the cost of being based abroad is greater.

        This rushed through plan is a short term cash grab designed to offset the tax revenue loss over the next 10 years so the bill could be passed. Long term, it screws everyone.

        Massively increasing the deficit this way isn’t conservative ideology and violates the basic principles of the Republican party!

        1. “Massively increasing the deficit this way isn’t conservative ideology and violates the basic principles of the Republican party!”

          Yeah right leftist, you know all about the basic principles of “conservative ideology” and NOW care about the debt?

          1.5 trillion over 10 years is chump change compared to Obama nearly doubling the national debt in eight years. Sorry, but I don’t remember your ALARMING concern back then.

          JFK and Reagan proved tax cuts indeed work, not only to fill government coffers after dynamic scoring and also reduce the debt.

          Lowering one of the highest corporate tax rates on the planet will be YUGE! …

          1. Well, perhaps you forget that Obama was stuck with having to bail the country out after the Great Recession ? That was the one in 2008 that almost broke the world financial system. The one his predecessors were responsible for. He did that using Keynesian economics: basically government spending.

            1. Because of the feel good Dodd-Frank bill the housing lenders caused the Great Recession by exorbitant unqualified loans in the housing market that were unsustainable.

              Went on for many years and came to a head the last few months of Dubya’s presidency. Hardly his fault, but the administration could have done much more.

              “He did that using Keynesian economics: basically government spending.”

              I’ll say, almost double the national debt in eight years.

              Did it make healthcare cheaper? No way.

              Did it get infrastructure like airports, roads and bridges sparkling upgraded? Spotty.

              Did it make race relations better? Hell no.

              Did it make our education system the best in the world? No way, dead last in test scores among the G8 nations and we spend twice as much. But the silver lining is the Democrat run teachers unions everywhere are living higher on the hog than ever before.

              Did it lift more people out of poverty and decline the welfare rolls? Not when they both reached record levels.

              I could go on … 😑

          2. LOL, I’ve been a Republican since I was first able to vote in 1984 (for Ronald Reagan).

            You seem to be confused about the difference between debt and deficit. Obama actually lowered the deficit. He inherited a deficit of $1.413 Trillion (due to the recession), and then brought it down over the years with help from a GOP controlled House and Senate that was at the time, properly concerned about the deficit:
            1.413 trillion
            1.294 trillion
            1.295 trillion
            1.087 trillion
            679 billion
            485 billion
            438 billion
            585 billion

            Saying the Obama doubled the debt in 8 years, is flawed logic when overall, he and the GOP controlled Congress reduced the deficit (just like Clinton and the GOP Congress).

            I wasn’t born yet, so couldn’t approve of the JFK tax cuts, but in retrospect can say it was a good move, and I was for the Reagan tax cuts as well as others. The big difference between previous tax cuts and this one? Those were all projected to be revenue neutral, including the Reagan tax cut which turned out not to be, and resulting in Bush Sr having to raise taxes and break his promise.

            “Lowering one of the highest corporate tax rates on the planet will be YUGE!”

            First, EFFECTIVE tax rates for corporations are nowhere near the highest in the world. Secondly, we’re not in a recession. Offering a stimulus tax package to boost the economy at the expense of debt makes sense, but when the economy is healthy and growing, corporations aren’t going to utilize that money in a way that effectively grows the economy.

            The bottom line is that as a real conservative and a Republican, I’ve always been against deficits as per the definition of conservatism and as part of the Republican platform.

            1. You must have missed this part:
              Saying the Obama doubled the debt in 8 years, is flawed logic when overall, he and the GOP controlled Congress reduced the deficit (just like Clinton and the GOP Congress).

              The point being that you can’t reduce the debt unless you have a negative deficit (surplus). If Obama and the GOP Congress had kept the deficit level he inherited when he took office, he would’ve massively increased the debt far more than double.

              You can’t go from a $1.413 Trillion deficit to a surplus overnight. The fact that the deficit was reduced as much as it was is incredible considering he (and the GOP Congress) also inherited the war(s) as well as the worst recession since the Great Depression.

              To put things in perspective, Obama and the GOP Congress inherited a deficit that was twice the level of the historic high. Despite inheriting the war(s) and recession, we ended up with the biggest improvement on record in unemployment and not only the biggest improvement in the deficit but one that got us below the historic average since 1966.

              The deficit will be higher in Trump’s first year, and is projected to grow from there… so guess what’s going to happen to the debt?

      2. “You are all misreading the article and the bill.”

        Of course we are self described “straight white male conservative” on a daily basis arguing the Democratic Party line and portraying, subtlety of course, Republicans are clueless.

        It’s way old …

        1. GeoB,

          The comments assumed that the tax bill assesses repatriated assets at 15.5%, but drops that rate to 8% if the money is invested in US infrastructure. It doesn’t say that.

          I said that it taxes overseas liquid assets at 15.5%, whether they are repatriated or not, and non-liquid assets that cannot be repatriated at 8%. The bill does say that.

          The comments were mistaken. Their party affiliation or mine has nothing to do with what the tax bill actually says. Neither the Democratic Party line nor that of my own party allows anyone to truthfully portray the bill as doing something that it simply does not do.

          Wishful thinking on your part is not going to put something into this bill that is not in the text. No matter how many times you (or whoever) keeps saying that America has one of the highest tax rates on the planet, it is not going to change the fact that the US ranks #143 in the world in total taxation as a percentage of GDP.

          I do agree, however, that all these constant ad hominem attacks that are NEVER backed up with actual facts are “way old.”

          1. “I do agree, however, that all these constant ad hominem attacks that are NEVER backed up with actual facts are “way old.”

            You mean attacks like making up FAKE QUOTES to denigrate a person? Or, you LIE?

            Guess in your world fair and balanced doesn’t work BOTH ways. Not a surprise, fake conservative …

          2. The quote was satire, all mine and obviously unappreciated. If you were offended, sorry. I doubt anyone with a sense of irony was offended.

            The sentiment, however, was all yours. You had just posted the same (to be kind) “alternate fact” three times running. Clearly, you do think that you are entitled to your own facts and you do think that only opinions supported by those untruths are valid.

            “Fair and balanced” does not require equal treatment for the truth and for lies. I’m perfectly willing to tolerate different opinions… but not when you assert a “fact” that I know is untrue.

            1. Note: Apparently I am now “Mr. If” because GeoB disagrees with the following, “If the UK and US governments had not intervened, British Telecom and the Bell System would still be monopolies.” He did not offer a theory of why that is a fantasy or how else competition might have been brought about.

              This was in the context of a discussion where GeoB held out the “British Business Model,” where infrastructure owners and ISPs are rigidly regulated as common carriers, as an example of free market competition without government intervention.

              Yes, GeoB’s facts, or at least that one, are untrue.

  2. I’m sure all you US dwellers are pleased as punch that Apple can now repatriate all that EU cash horde that avoided paying any corporation tax in the countries where the profits were generated. Very fair treatment for a region that has generously contributed $170B to a US tax grab.
    Triumphant xenophobia comments sure to follow from the usual suspects below…

    1. MacDailyNews Take: The EU’s retroactive tax grab is a farce.

      Anyone who decides to set up a business in a European Union member country today is insane.

      ….says it all about this alt-right site.
      Whereas the GOP’s retroactive tax grab is just dandy.
      As you often add – irony desert indeed.

    2. It is up to the individual governments to determine how they wish to tax business revenue in their country. The point is that multinationals have used tax havens in Europe to avoid paying tax in the countries where the revenue was generated. If they didn’t do that then the repatriation would not be such an attractive proposition.
      I don’t agree with the tax proposals since it is just designed to reduce taxation on the wealthy and corporations. The majority of the US population also do not agree with it either.
      Two wrongs don’t make a right.

      1. Ireland isn’t a “Tax Haven” for Apple — Ireland is where it has had a major local presence and local workforce for decades…

        All the products come out of there for the whole of Europe, and local Apple Stores, such as those in UK (most physical Apple Stores in any Eurpoean country) pay wholesale prices for all products, just as do Apple resellers, to the corporation in Ireland from where the products are supplied.

        Not only that, but their is only one online Store for all of Europe (though multilingual website pages). When I order an Apple product online here in Netherlands, where does it come from… yep, from Ireland.

      1. There is no confusion. The $170B in Eire eligible to be repatriated, is the sum total of Apple’s profits from across the EU area which so far have been taxed at a rate of 0.002% of their value due to the use of the Double Dutch sandwich tax avoidance scheme used and the sweet deal Eire granted Apple. Even the US Senate agrees – they found Apple paid only 2% in corporation tax on its foreign earnings in 2014. Corporation taxes are levied by countries to allow spending on infrastructure, health, services…you name it…it’s the tax on businesses that use that infrastructure, without which they could not do business. If all that money is repatriated, then effectively the US treasury is benefitting from profits in the EU that have not been taxed in the countries where they were generated. ie the US is collecting EU corporation tax and keeping it. This is money that would ordinarily have been put back into circulation in the countries where Apple operates but now it will be the US that benefits. We are subsidizing ‘your’ tax burden so it does have the power to change the levels of taxation in other countries. That’s what a subsidy does.
        Understand, I don’t blame Apple, it’s legal off shore stuff but it really pisses me off that Apple and many other large corporations are able to use the same mechanisms to cream billions out of Europe and not pay the corporation tax that all domestic companies have to stump up. It’s not a level playing field. That the majority of MDN readers are mindlessly cheering this potential windfall at ‘my’ expense, makes it really hard to swallow.

  3. 15% is redicolously hug to Pyeush on money they already paid a ton of taxes on in Europe. I expect they will not bother bring back more than some token amount at this stupid rate. Again, they paid full taxes on this money in Europe. They can continue to leave it there and….wait for it…not pay any taxes.

    Trump blew it by not doing what bush did. Make the rate so low that fluxuuations in currency could eclipse the rate. Ie less than 5%.

    1. Zombie,

      They can’t leave the cash in Europe and not pay any taxes. They will have to pay 15.5% on liquid assets and 8% on non-liquid assets whether the money comes back to America or not. All this does is end the option of deferring the US taxation until the income is repatriated.

      1. You seem up to speed here. What’s the incentive, then, for US corps to repatriate at all…?

        Or is it just the notion that since they’re no long DIS-incentivized from doing so, they will in particular cases as long as an investment opportunity makes sense….???

        Meanwhile, does the math about “holding the deficit down,” (which is way fuzzy since sponsors have already signalled they’ll extend the middle class rate cuts – which were temporary to get the bill eligible for the “reconciliation” no 60 votes needed provision) also include a one time bonanza from collecting this levy on all the built-up overseas cash hoards…??

        1. Yes, the main effect is to remove the disincentive, since the cash hoard will be taxed at 15.5% even if it stays overseas. There will be no penalty at all on moving the post-tax money to the US, so it is now available for domestic investment (or reducing debt).

          And yes, there will be a huge one-time boost in tax collections to offset the tax cuts and limit the deficit.

          1. Yes. One way that this will affect Apple is that they will no longer have to do the silly trick of borrowing money to pay dividends. I also believe that for years Apple has been setting aside income to cover a tax liability such as this. That was money that would have otherwise been considered profit. So it may turn out to be some sudden boon to Apple as that money can now be applied.

  4. Investing in equipment and plants might, but doesn’t necessarily mean, new jobs – corporations could choose to re-tool with robots and downsize their workforce.

    It will take a while to see if the results are a benefit or not to the middle class (the heartbeat of the economy). Despite ideological tendencies on the right and left to see everything as black or white (e.g. government/regulation/tax is always bad or corporations are only and always ruled by greed), reality is usually more complex, and requires wisdom with common sense to navigate. Unfortunately, common sense is none too common…

    1. The discount for equipment and plants is for anywhere. There’s no requirement, nor incentive, to repatriate.

      In a nutshell, all that off shore profit is being taxed whether it stays there or not. 15.5% for cash, 8% for equipment. That’s it. That’s the whole story on that part of the bill.

      1. Exactly. The tax is the same whether anything comes back to America or not. There is no incentive to actually repatriate, although the bill does remove the existing disincentive.

        The lower rate applies only to already existing infrastructure, not to future infrastructure bought with the post-tax cash. There is no incentive to invest in plants or equipment, and no disincentive to using the money for debt reduction, stock buybacks, higher dividends, and increased executive compensation.

    1. There’s that russian propaganda again. Everybody knows republicans are for the aiding the rich, and big business. They have never given a tinkers doggone about deficits. Deficits political speak of the 80s is just that, a talking point, talk that suckers the narrow minded in to what is a small group bent on controlling the world, the rich, wealthy, and criminal.

      By now we all know trump is a consistent liar. You can’t think trump and not think lie.

      Simplification of the tax code, you don’t get it? That means whatever is in the code where I (the rich) pay less taxes. See it would be different if the republicans had proposed let’s say three brackets and removed all deduction. All. so let’s say 10, 17, 25, all money coming in no manner the source is income. businesses no deductions, family, no deductions, house, no deductions, profit, don’t need to know it, no deductions. Soc. Sec. is a program that if you are working you pay into, plus it is an insurance anyway. Stop whinning about it. kill all business subsides, kill all social programs, no deductions for donations. kill all road and bridge and infrastructure programs, make all roads toll roads, you don’t use it you don’t pay for it. Outlaw sales tax.

      But they didn’t do that, because they want to pick the winners and losers. And they want suckers to keep giving them money. There is no way in hell a politician should be a millionaire just from being in the senate for 20 plus years and that was the main source of income. The jobs doesn’t pay that much. What about the food program for the poor, forget them. Let the farmers sell less, and the middle man sell less, the prices will come down. End defense spending on a national level let the states field an army, navy, air force… more competition better prices, hold new group of startups.

      That’s what the russians want.

    2. Botshit- you are truly a dumbass Trumptard.
      Hope you enjoy a long life with no health insurance now that Dotard and the GOP (“Grab.Our.Pussies”) has dismantled the “Muslim Usurpers” ACA healthcare program.

            1. Let’s hope you can keep that russian money coming in cause trump cheats workers out the their hard earned money, he cheats American banks too. trump is just a crook, that why he likes the crooks of the world. He loves drug dealers, mob guys. etc. trump is just a loud mouth crook. He is such a weak man. Well, here we go, roaring 20’s , then sock market crash. History repeats itself.

  5. Most companies with overseas cash will simply not spend US generated income on plants and equipment, but instead use their overseas cash. This will likely result in little new investment, but instead a means of taking advantage of a new tax loophole.

    1. Based on his conversations with other corporate executives, Warren Buffett (hardly a “clueless libtard”) estimates that perhaps 20% of the overseas cash will be invested in US infrastructure such as plants and equipment or in increasing wages for line employees. The rest will either remain overseas or be used for debt reduction, stock buybacks, increased dividends, executive compensation, or the like.

Leave a Reply to listcatcher Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.