Rewrite Tax Code to Help Companies Compete: Wyden

REPLAY VIDEO
Your next video will start in
Pause

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments

  • VIDEO TEXT

May 15 (Bloomberg) -- Senator Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon, speaks with Erik Schatzker and explains his bi-partisan plan to lower the corporate tax rate. He outlines steps needed in order to prevent U.S. companies from avoiding tax payments on foreign profits and to spur research, development and job growth via a two-year tax credit. He speaks on Bloomberg Television’s “Market Makers.”

Street journal and elsewhere saying congress must close this in version -- in version tax loophole.

You also say it is not just a matter of morality, but patriotism.

Why?

In effect, we all understand the businesses have to be competitive and they are competing in tough global markets.

I suggested two steps.

First, i have written the only bipartisan tax reform bill in decades, with the number of colleagues, that has the lowest corporate rate on offer, 24%. that is obviously needed because we have the dubious honor of having the highest tax rate in america and that takes a toll on our competitiveness.

With respect to inversion, we ought to freeze the linebackers as it is sometimes described in tax lingo.

I have propose that as well.

I would like to play with you an interview from this morning with john chambers.

He is an outspoken advocate of corporate tax or form.

We specifically talked about in version.

-- inversion.

We are $45 billion overseas we want to bring back to america to invest in america.

We are losing a huge opportunity to stimulate the economy.

We see companies look at other options in terms of where they see their growth.

That is not good for our country.

If you are the ceo of an american public company, wouldn't you be thinking along the same lines?

Wouldn't you be thinking i have a duty to shareholders to earn as much as possible for them now ? i have talked specifically to john chambers about this.

To me, the bottom line is congress should get off the dime and get serious about bipartisan tax reform that ensures that his company and all americans are competitive in the use tough mobile markets.

-- in the tough global market.

I have written the only bipartisan federal income tax reform proposal in the senate in three decades with a number of colleagues and we have the lowest corporate rate on offer and i think john chambers is saying he needs that to be competitive in tough global markets.

What is the best way to deal with that?

A bill that deals with inversion alone?

Appeal that deals with inversion and overseas profits?

Or an amendment to the aspire act that's already on the floor?

Or tax reform that we know is not going to happen tomorrow.

The first thing is to pass the expire act, which are so -- which is to renew these temporary tax revisions that are so important.

If you don't renew the provisions, the research and development credit, in effect, today the senate will be voting to raise taxes on innovation.

That was the point.

We need my expire act to deal with these extenders.

Once we get done with those extenders, remove on the corporate tax or form.

I think that was one aspect of your question.

I do think in version needs to be addressed.

That is what i wrote about in the wall street journal last week.

There remain a number of questions about the expire act.

Let's answer them if we can.

In reference specifically to the r&d tax credit, i can understand why you would think about that.

But the act also includes provisions that some people think are important, that tax breaks to puerto rican rum runners, which is essentially a gift to bacardi, tax breaks to hollywood producers and others.

How can you vote for those when you say the tax code is something you want to clean up?

Recharge -- research and development is the centerpiece when middle-class people are looking for new jobs, looking to start new businesses.

It is the key to innovation.

But the nature of the tax though is that of course it contains provisions you don't care for and provisions you do.

We have so many people underwater with respect to their mortgages.

If we do not pass this, they will get hit with a big tax hike when their lender gives them a break on their mortgage.

We don't want to hit students again.

We don't want to make it harder for employers to hire veterans.

We don't want to discourage innovation.

A number of the provisions are not my first choice.

That is why it is important to enact legislation that is so important that would prevent an immediate tax increase that will harm our ability to grow and then move onto comprehensive tax reform which i have proposed in a bipartisan way to deal with the issues we are talking about.

Senator, if we must hold our noses in order to pass the important provisions of the expire act, why is it only for two years, and two years retroactively at that?

You know how much american business owners would appreciate tax policy certainty.

First of all, temporary provisions are just that.

He called the bill the expire act because it actually does expire.

We will use it between now and the end of 2015 to pass comprehensive tax reform.

My concern about the approach being used in the house is that if you're going to make something permanent, you have to find a way to pay for it, and as far as i can tell that is not being done in the house.

Is it being done in the senate?

As far as i can understand, this is a package of tax breaks for american corporations that is not being paid for.

It's not being revenue neutral.

Whatever happened to fiscal responsibility?

Is story ugly, -- his story ugly -- historically, we have said you have to pay completely for comprehensive reform, but that was a big factor in us coming together and saying this is going to be for two years only.

Before we run.

To you believe tax reform needs to be revenue neutral?

I have always felt that the right kind of tax reform, the kind of pro-growth comprehensive tax reform i am talking about is going to create jobs.

Jobs create revenue.

I think some of this is kind of washington beltway talk.

The reality is progrowth tax reform is going to generate revenue and be good for our country.

That is ron wyden of oregon, chairman of the senate finance committee.

?

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.

Advertisement

BTV Channel Finder

Channel_finder_loader

ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change