Corporate tax inversions: Prevent more Mylans
As U.S. corporations increasingly flee uncompetitive U.S. tax rates through deals that base them overseas, the Obama White House and some congressional Democrats propose banning such moves. But what's needed is comprehensive tax reform that lowers rates, encouraging activity, increasing tax revenue and keeping U.S. firms at home.
In what's known as a “corporate tax inversion,” generic drug giant Mylan Inc. is acquiring, for $5.3 billion in stock, Abbott Laboratories' overseas generic business based in the Netherlands — and reorganizing as a corporation based there. Mylan will keep its Cecil headquarters and pay U.S. taxes on domestic profits but not on what it makes abroad.
CEO Heather Bresch expects lower Dutch taxes to cut Mylan's effective tax rate from 25 percent to 21 percent in the deal's first year, to the high teens in three to five years. She says competitors' similar moves forced Mylan to join the ranks of corporate tax exiles.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., has proposed a two-year moratorium on tax inversion deals. His brother, Rep. Sander M. Levin of Michigan, the House Ways and Means Committee's ranking Democrat, says the issue “cannot wait for comprehensive tax reform” — yet comprehensive reform is the issue.
Ms. Bresch's father, U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., says corporate tax inversions are symptoms of a larger problem for U.S. firms' global competitiveness that requires comprehensive tax reform. Without it, there will be even more former U.S. companies — and even less tax revenue.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- The Thursday wrap
- Obama’s Cuba deal: More appeasement
- Season of giving: A deserving recipient
- Sunday pops
- An NLRB ambush