frame

Formal Debate for Joecalvary: Should businesses have corporate taxes from the government?

Opening Argument

Position: For
Formal debate with Joecalvary, so please let him accept. I will be holding the position for corporate taxes and Joecalvary will be in the position against corporate taxes. 
joecavalryagsrnorthsouthkoreaMax_Air29yolostide
  1. Should businesses have to pay corporate taxes?

    7 votes
    1. Yes
      100.00%
    2. No
        0.00%

Debra AI Prediction

For
Predicted To Win
56%
Likely
44%
Unlikely

Details +


Points For:

15


Points Against:

14



Votes: 2

Debate Type: Lincoln-Douglas Debate


Opponent: joecavalry

Time Per Round: 48 Hours Per Round

Affirmative Constructive

Cross Examination - Affirmative

Negative Constructive

Cross Examination - Negative

First Affirmative Rebuttal

The Negative Rebuttal

The Second Affirmative Rebuttal

Voting


Arguments

  • Affirmative Constructive | Position: For
    Thank you for accepting the debate and I hope that it will work out on timing. To begin, corporate taxes are a necessary part of the economy, so as to provide extra money for the government to use and to keep companies from total global monopoly. The current corporate tax rate is 35%, which may seem like a lot, but I assure you that it is not. Say that I have Company (A) who makes 5 billion a year off of selling furniture. A tax would reduce their amount to 3.25 billion, but that is still 3.25 billion dollars of profit and 1.75 billion for the government to use to push programs and social benefits. Now take Company (B) who makes 200k a year, a 35% tax might harm the business, in part because they are not a corporation and don't have money to throw around. A corporation like Google makes much more than Company B, and so Company B must be taxed otherwise. Note here that I don't condone corporate taxes for all businesses, but I condone it for corporations.

    One point that my opponent might bring to the table is that taxes will fall on the worker's pay and quality of working.This is a great point, but it only affects domestic workers, and may have strings attached. According to https://taxfoundation.org/case-not-eliminating-corporate-income-tax/ , in that the corporate tax is designed to "Raise revenue from foreign shareholders but not from US shareholders". However, the situation is more complex when dealing with employees than you might think. There are trade unions and strikes which can happen if a company goes to far out of their way to dock worker's pay, and this is an original reason for why workers got higher pay in the first place. Take the quote above; a corporate tax ensures that the company has a worldwide influence, but to also deal with issues in the home country by managing its intake of cash. It also might be hard for companies to switch investments from one country to the other, which can take a lot of time and resources from a business, so by keeping the business on toes, the income and taxing works better for the economy.

    That is not to say also that I am fine with a high corporate tax. I believe a 15% tax would give the business more mobility while still giving money to the government. This would also ensure that shareholders can take more capital value and workers can have increased job. Case in hand though, a corporate tax is necessary to keep a company in line and responsible for their workers. 
    joecavalry
  • Cross Examination - Negative | Position: For
    joecavalryjoecavalry 258 Pts
    edited December 2017
    Corporations should have increased profit and decrease taxes from the government. 

    Lower corporate taxes may bring more corporations and businesses into the US due to the United States becoming a global competitor for low corporate tax rates.

    The 35% corporate tax rate is too high and may cause corporations to go off shore and to other countries instead of staying on shore in the United States.
    agsrWilliamSchulz
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • Cross Examination - Negative | Position: For
    joecavalryjoecavalry 258 Pts
    edited December 2017
    @WilliamShulz, firstly I would like to thank you for creating this Debate and accept your Debate invitation. 

    Corporate taxes need to be lowered to increase onshore corporations, businesses, and small businesses. 

    Currently, corporations have been leaving the United States due to a high tax rate which is over 35%. Companies may not be able to invest in their business, hire more employees, the economy, etc. due to less profit, because of the extremely high tax rate. For the US economy to grow, the corporate tax rate must be lowered to about 20%-25% making it a global competitor for businesses to be created and excel.

    Sources -
    1)
    https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/corporatetax.asp
    2) http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-details-corporate-tax-rate-brackets-2017-12
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • Cross Examination - Negative | Position: For
    Here are some questions that you may/ may not answer in your next argument, but answering them improves your argument.

    1. Would you condone a different tax level for corporations based on the size and number of workers?
    2. If we lower corporate taxes, will the companies also find a way to establish a global monopoly or mistreat workers with more money at their disposal?
    3. Would lower taxes be more beneficial for foreign business or domestic manufacturing?
    4. Wouldn't a higher tax rate ensure that one corporation doesn't become so powerful so as to affect the way politicians act in government?

    Thanks for your time, I will be posting my Rebuttal shortly thereafter.
  • First Affirmative Rebuttal | Position: For
    Okay, here is a quick rebuttal to your points that you brought up in your constructive.

    "Corporate taxes need to be lowered to increase onshore corporations, businesses, and small businesses."

    The problem here is that small businesses and regular businesses are not corporations! According to dictionary.com, an association of individuals, created by law or under authority of law,having a continuous existence independent of the existences of its members, and powers and liabilities distinct from those of its members. (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/corporation

    Lets try to break down this quote a bit so as to see why corporations are different. The above statement shows that the company can still exist if its employees are gone and it has powers distinct in the legal system that members don't have. In a small business, if you lose an employee, that can really harm the business, and small businesses do not have the power to shape the legal system (except via Supreme Court) The same applies to a normal business, but corporations have the power to shape elections and cause big changes in our economy. There is a reason Honda is a corporation and not Frank's Pizza Shoppe. 

    Plus, most corporations are onshore and domestic, but they have enough influence to affect foreign affairs. For instance, Google is American, but got in a lawsuit with Europe for posting their billboards too high in public areas, forcing a pay-up of over 2 Bn. dollars.

    "Currently, corporations have been leaving the United States due to a high tax rate which is over 35%. Companies may not be able to invest in their business, hire more employees, the economy, etc. due to less profit, because of the extremely high tax rate. For the US economy to grow, the corporate tax rate must be lowered to about 20%-25% making it a global competitor for businesses to be created and excel."

    On the contrary, corporations can do everything which you say they can't. If a corporation can give 50 million dollars to an election, then they can invest, hire, and make just as much profit. Corporations still make billions, and a tax cut for them only makes them more powerful and harder for small businesses to compete with, which you say would be increased under lower taxes. The truth is, when a corporation has to pay less money, that's more money that they can do whatever with, such as claim a monopoly, or break trade unions, high taxes make it harder for one corporation to claim a monopoly, and keeps small businesses competitive. 

    Thank you for your time.

  • The Negative Rebuttal | Position: Against
    Corporations and businesses wouldn’t be able to create or obtain any monopolies, that includes global, national, etc., because of tax reform. 

    Tax reform would help the comeporations invest more into their company, employees, the US economy, etc. 

    Small businesses and other business may also get a huge tax cuts witch may help them compete with large corporations. 

    The current tax rate is currently extremely high and doesn’t allow corporations to invest into their companies, etc. Companies may also be going off shore instead of staying in the US and investing more into the US economy.
    DebateIslander and a DebateIsland.com lover. 
  • The Second Affirmative Rebuttal | Position: For
    Thanks for your arguments and thanks for the debate! Here is my final rebuttal.

    "Corporations and businesses wouldn’t be able to create or obtain any monopolies, that includes global, national, etc., because of tax reform." 

    This is most certainly not a bad thing, as it leaves room for other competitors to challenge the business. Although in some areas of commerce, it is good to have a monopoly, such as electronics, other areas like food and clothing should not have worldwide dominance.

    "Tax reform would help the corporations invest more into their company, employees, the US economy, etc."

    No, history has shown that corporations never invest in the employees or economy. According to the New York Times, ( http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/business/10capital.html) a company like Vista spend $450,000 on new technology and only $160,000 on two new workers. Here is another quote from an economist, “Firms are just responding to incentives,” said Dean Maki, chief United States economist at Barclays Capital. “And capital has gotten much cheaper relative to labor.” This should instantly show that corporations and companies alike will NOT spend their money on employees and spend it rather on technology in order to remain competitive. This is something I see and understand, but that does not excuse the lack of employee benefits, it throws them under the bus, and makes them "figurative" slaves of a work block. No amount of tax increase will make corporations pay more for employees, but a tax cut only increases the money that the corporation can spend on themselves.

    "Small businesses and other business may also get a huge tax cuts witch may help them compete with large corporations."

    Until you consider the fact that businesses are in different tax brackets than corporations which are significantly larger and more influential. Also, your first statement, you said that corporations wouldn't get monopolies, but that is most certainly what happens under a tax cut, more money to squash out competition, and small businesses go under the bus yet again. Again, take corporation A, who under a tax cut of 15% gets an extra 1.2 Bn. dollars a year, and take Company B, who gets 250,000 K off of the tax cut. Who has more money to eliminate competition, obviously Corporation A, no question. In this way, there would be monopolies and in the long run, small businesses would only be able to compete locally.


    "The current tax rate is currently extremely high and doesn’t allow corporations to invest into their companies, etc. Companies may also be going off shore instead of staying in the US and investing more into the US economy."

    Look at my First Rebuttal statements, and you will find that corporations are in fact on shore but they are investing in foreign affairs to increase their influence. Also, take my election and economy statement, corporations love getting involved legally to sway elections, court cases, and other legal events, so a tax cut is the result of companies and corporations being suck ups to the government and getting something they really never needed more of, money.

    This is why I urge you voters, to vote for corporate taxes, as lower taxes only digs a hole that only dampens and worsens with time.

    Thank you for your time.


  • Vote
    Persuasive Argument (For): 3 Points
    Evidence And Sources (For): 1 Points
    Conduct (For): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (For): 2 Points
    Persuasive Argument (Against): 2 Points
    Evidence And Sources (Against): 2 Points
    Conduct (Against): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (Against): 2 Points

    Total Points (For): 8 Points

    Total Points (Against): 8 Points

    Explanation: Great Debate @joecavalry and @WilliamSchulz . I believe that For should have a little bit more evidence and sources, but had very persuasive arguments. Against should have more persuasive arguments. 
  • Vote
    Persuasive Argument (For): 2 Points
    Evidence And Sources (For): 1 Points
    Conduct (For): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (For): 2 Points
    Persuasive Argument (Against): 1 Points
    Evidence And Sources (Against): 1 Points
    Conduct (Against): 2 Points
    Spelling And Grammar (Against): 2 Points

    Total Points (For): 7 Points

    Total Points (Against): 6 Points

    Explanation: Good Debate! Both sides should improve their arguments and how persuasive they are. Also, should include more evidence and sources.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Website!

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch