Zohran Mamdani

[Sarin]

Reference required. I have had a look, these economists sure like obfuscating their data but I think this is saying that increasing corporate tax rate increases tax revenue.

Table 9 Fixed-effects regressions with aggregate base measures
Dependent variable: corporate tax revenue/GDP
Corporate tax rate 0.206***

Table 10 Fixed-effects regressions with individual base measures
Dependent variable: corporate tax revenue/GDP
Corporate tax rate 0.180**

Once we account for the simultaneity of changes to corporate tax rates or corporate tax bases by including our 12 new tax base measures in the estimating equation, the estimated tax effects are even more attenuated and the implied revenue-maximizing corporate tax rates generally are more precisely estimated

Despite their limitations, our extensive margin measures of changes to the corporate tax base provide an informative step toward a better understanding of the interaction between corporate tax rate and tax base changes, and their implications for understanding the determinants of corporate tax revenues

They do like to obfuscate. In the end, all they say is:

We find only weak evidence that several types of tax policies that affect the definition or enforcement of the corporate tax base are related to changes in corporate tax revenues.

The study wasn't aimed at simple corporate tax rate-tax base relation, but at whole array of tax corporate tax measures and incentives. And found that it's a big mess with no clear indication of optimal approach.

On the other hand, something relatively more recent than a 2016 study with data that's now 20+ years old. Norway tax hike, where relatively modest wealth tax adjustment resulted in massive wealth exodus that cut the tax revenue by massive amount:

Norway's Tax Experiment: A Costly Exodus - IMGlobal Wealth

Norway raised its wealth tax aiming for fairness—but the outcome sparked a surprising exodus. What happens when high earners pack up? The real cost may be more than expected.

imglobalwealth.com

What is behind Norway’s wealth tax exodus? - Tax Natives

Norway's wealth tax exodus: Norway has seen a rise in its billionaires leaving the country in response to increased taxes, it is reported.

taxnatives.com

Super-rich abandoning Norway at record rate as wealth tax rises slightly

Flood moving abroad has come as a shock and is costing tens of millions in lost tax receipts

www.theguardian.com

These days, wealth is less about physical assets and more about shares, stocks and so on...and this is all easily moved from country to country. Same with corporations, their tax mobility is greater than ever.

Mamdani is a typical armchair socialist. He wants the world to behave like he wants, so he thinks he can simply order the world to be that way. Not realizing that the people who want it differently have options of their own and will react.
And as the history of the 20th century shows, when that happens, socialists like that take it a step further and try to force the world to bend their way. Of course, Mamdani isn't in the position to use such force...yet.

 

[Thera32]

These days, wealth is less about physical assets and more about shares, stocks and so on...and this is all easily moved from country to country. Same with corporations, their tax mobility is greater than ever.

Mamdani is a typical armchair socialist. He wants the world to behave like he wants, so he thinks he can simply order the world to be that way. Not realizing that the people who want it differently have options of their own and will react.
And as the history of the 20th century shows, when that happens, socialists like that take it a step further and try to force the world to bend their way. Of course, Mamdani isn't in the position to use such force...yet.

I think that sadly we are at a race to the lowest corporate tax location, countries are more and more turning into nation's for corporation's profit first and citizen's after that, unless comprehensive unified action is actually taken it's going to collapse the whole system at some point. Violently probably, you know, French revolution copy against mostly rich and politically powerful.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

If you will, care to explain why you would call me a 'bigot'?

What elements in the worst blend of awful did you mean?

Enjoy the freedom of speech while you can.
It'll soon disappear under people like Mamdani.

ICE should deport him, amiright?

High five!

 

[Thera32]

ICE should deport him, amiright?

High five!

Considering how hard trumpist are trying to deport Mamdani because they don't agree with him, Theov should worry about the people trying to violate freedom of speech now, instead of worrying about future event's, probably just an effect of american culture of partisan fearmongering.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Trumpies are bananapeanutbuttersandwichinsane

 

[Hygro]

Do you still trust Bernie Sanders? Either the DNC has some leverage on him, or he just folds easily.

Mostly yeah. I've never been fully bought in, no. Really disliked him 22 years ago in the run up to Iraq he was the worst voice of the antiwar crowd. I voted for Clinton in 2016, for him in 2020. Overall I am a fan now and I think he was the choice for 2016 as well. I agree with so much of him in so many issues and he's stood for them pretty consistently but he's always got a little "I have to be different to be heard" in him that means he's not a reliable team player. It's a shame because the DNC is also not a reliable team player, I mean team? yes, player? no. Whoever runs the Democrat subreddit is literally deleting Mamdani posts under the "no democratic socialists" rule, and it's like, whose f*ing team are they even on?

 

[danjuno]

Mostly yeah. I've never been fully bought in, no. Really disliked him 22 years ago in the run up to Iraq he was the worst voice of the antiwar crowd. I voted for Clinton in 2016, for him in 2020. Overall I am a fan now and I think he was the choice for 2016 as well. I agree with so much of him in so many issues and he's stood for them pretty consistently but he's always got a little "I have to be different to be heard" in him that means he's not a reliable team player. It's a shame because the DNC is also not a reliable team player, I mean team? yes, player? no. Whoever runs the Democrat subreddit is literally deleting Mamdani posts under the "no democratic socialists" rule, and it's like, whose f*ing team are they even on?

Yeah, not talking about non-party members is one thing, but banning people from discussing your nominee for mayor of the largest city in the country is insane.

 

[amadeus]

Little reminder that corporate income taxes in the US were in the 60's over twice as they are now.

That really wasn’t my point at all, it was just an example of something that is overlooked by people who say they want to copy European systems. I don’t think it is done intentionally, but I think they have blind spots about how things work in other countries.

 

[Arwon]

They do like to obfuscate. In the end, all they say is:


The study wasn't aimed at simple corporate tax rate-tax base relation, but at whole array of tax corporate tax measures and incentives. And found that it's a big mess with no clear indication of optimal approach.

On the other hand, something relatively more recent than a 2016 study with data that's now 20+ years old. Norway tax hike, where relatively modest wealth tax adjustment resulted in massive wealth exodus that cut the tax revenue by massive amount:

Norway's Tax Experiment: A Costly Exodus - IMGlobal Wealth

Norway raised its wealth tax aiming for fairness—but the outcome sparked a surprising exodus. What happens when high earners pack up? The real cost may be more than expected.

imglobalwealth.com

What is behind Norway’s wealth tax exodus? - Tax Natives

Norway's wealth tax exodus: Norway has seen a rise in its billionaires leaving the country in response to increased taxes, it is reported.

taxnatives.com

Super-rich abandoning Norway at record rate as wealth tax rises slightly

Flood moving abroad has come as a shock and is costing tens of millions in lost tax receipts

www.theguardian.com

These days, wealth is less about physical assets and more about shares, stocks and so on...and this is all easily moved from country to country. Same with corporations, their tax mobility is greater than ever.

Mamdani is a typical armchair socialist. He wants the world to behave like he wants, so he thinks he can simply order the world to be that way. Not realizing that the people who want it differently have options of their own and will react.
And as the history of the 20th century shows, when that happens, socialists like that take it a step further and try to force the world to bend their way. Of course, Mamdani isn't in the position to use such force...yet.

You uh, suddenly started talking about wealth taxes instead of corporate income tax

 

[Theov]

What elements in the worst blend of awful did you mean?


ICE should deport him, amiright?

High five!

So first you call me a bigot and then ask me what I mean.
Bad form.

Then you strawman me, saying I think he should be deported. (I don't think that - why would I?)
Again, bad form.

 

[Sarin]

You uh, suddenly started talking about wealth taxes instead of corporate income tax

Sure, but the principle is the same. Besides, doesn't Mamdani also want to establish wealth tax?

 

[Samson]

Sure, but the principle is the same. Besides, doesn't Mamdani also want to establish wealth tax?

The principle we are talking about is:

Best example is his intended 4% corporate tax hike. Sounds good...but in practice, every time someone tried this, it resulted in even less tax revenue than before

You choose the specific example, and claimed that the evidence was that 100% of the time Corporate tax rate increases caused reduction in corporate tax revenue. My reference shows the opposite, across a large number of countries.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So first you call me a bigot and then ask me what I mean.

Muslim armchair socialist in charge of NY. I'll have a big bucket of popcorn with that. And I don't even like popcorn.

"It's the worst blend of awful."

I'm sure you meant the blend of armchair and NY

Then you strawman me, saying I think he should be deported. (I don't think that - why would I?)
Again, bad form.

I didn't say you think he should be deported. I said he should be deported and waited for a high 5
Bad form

 

[Theov]

"It's the worst blend of awful."

I'm sure you meant the blend of armchair and NY

We'll see how NY ends up.
I've said how I feel about it.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

 

[Sarin]

The principle we are talking about is:

You choose the specific example, and claimed that the evidence was that 100% of the time Corporate tax rate increases caused reduction in corporate tax revenue. My reference shows the opposite, across a large number of countries.

Your reference uses pretty ancient data set, have you even checked it?
Modern world is kinda different than 1980's.

 

[Samson]

Your reference uses pretty ancient data set, have you even checked it?
Modern world is kinda different than 1980's.

It was the best I could find in the first page of google scholar results. You made the claim, have you checked it?

 

[Sarin]

It was the best I could find in the first page of google scholar results. You made the claim, have you checked it?

As you've noticed, corporate tax increases are quite rare. In fact, in the study you cite, only four out of 30 countries exhibited corporate tax increase, for three of them it resulted in revenue increase, one decrease.
But it's all old data. 1980's were a different time. The closest I could recall from recent times was the Norwegian experiment, which was wealth tax. But it showed quite well the principle of it.

 

[Samson]

As you've noticed, corporate tax increases are quite rare. In fact, in the study you cite, only four out of 30 countries exhibited corporate tax increase, for three of them it resulted in revenue increase, one decrease.
But it's all old data. 1980's were a different time. The closest I could recall from recent times was the Norwegian experiment, which was wealth tax. But it showed quite well the principle of it.

If your claim is "every time someone tried this, it resulted in even less tax revenue than before" then that does not at all show the principle of it. The thing about such a claim is that it need only one counter example. A more reasonable claim would be something about the frequency or magnitude of the change, which again my data seems to be closer tan your to relevant evidence.

I am certainly not claiming my data is great, it was literally a 5 minute google. But yours is worse.

 

[Sarin]

If your claim is "every time someone tried this, it resulted in even less tax revenue than before" then that does not at all show the principle of it. The thing about such a claim is that it need only one counter example. A more reasonable claim would be something about the frequency or magnitude of the change, which again my data seems to be closer tan your to relevant evidence.

I am certainly not claiming my data is great, it was literally a 5 minute google. But yours is worse.

I'd love to say this will be conclusively resolved with empirical data soon, but after some checking it seems like Mamdani just doesn't have a chance to push the tax changes through.....