七點多醒
買羊奶豆漿蕃茄汁
去取報稅表紫騰廬木漣.....商務11點才開
brunch CNN訪問美國去義大利留學生的兇嫌要在追回重審
近1245麥當勞 自由日報 今天似乎賣得很好
晚九點多山外談馮與王昇關係 他與老師成情仇他......小兒子乖巧.....加拿大的癌症故事.....
晚上七點多跟家禔談許多出書的一致性問題與注解的許多問題.....
今天有位小朋友要出書了. 他坦誠說中的羅馬數字看不懂. 我簡單教他些規則. 在網路上找到這一資源. 給有些朋友參考: 下次看到電影等版權年份就知道MMIX表示2009年.....
羅馬數字MCMLX代表?----從旅遊學數學 - ht045 - 痞客邦PIXNET
ht045.pixnet.net/.../
有些大建築在其牆面上會留下建造的年代。在歐美通常用西元年代，
不出國，偶爾能看到羅馬數字的地方，是有些大鐘的鐘面上。我們
1是I，2是兩個I：II，3是三個I：III。4照理說應該
羅馬數字MCMLX代表?----從旅遊學數學 - ht045 - 痞客邦PIXNET
ht045.pixnet.net/.../
有些大建築在其牆面上會留下建造的年代。在歐美通常用西元年代，
不出國，偶爾能看到羅馬數字的地方，是有些大鐘的鐘面上。我們
1是I，2是兩個I：II，3是三個I：III。4照理說應該
東海的人與書 (XIII)：郎咸平，高承恕 ，陳介玄 ，趙剛，馬凱
Hanching Chung 東海的人與書 (XII)：陳勝年, 溫肇東, 李明賢, 鍾清章 http://hcpeople.blogspot.tw/2013/05/xii.html
東海的人與書 (XI)：林載爵，周質平，吳福助，游明國，薛順雄
書已收到. 看一下.小問題仍相當多你明日有空可才此一趟
序言之一: Thomas
Corbett《有效產出會計》(Throughput Accounting ) ，許家禔譯，2013
鍾漢清
限制理論 (The Theory of Constraints, TOC) 可以用簡單的話說明：系統的能力是最弱的一環所決定的；或系統的容量是依其瓶頸 (bottle-neck) 過程的容量所定。本書引用W. Edwards Deming名著 《新經濟學：產學官一體適用》的「追求整體的最佳化」，參見第140頁，相當得體。
這種限制理論，例子頗多：人之所以會死，常常只是其某一主要器官壞死了…人難免一死，這是人生諸多限制之一 (另外的限制，如每人都無法成為「完人」等)。又譬如說，致命的弱點 (heel of Achilles或Achilles' heel)，據說古希臘名將Achilles全身刀槍不入，唯一的致命的弱點在其腳跟。因為他的天神母親在他嬰兒時，提著他的腳跟，將他全身浸泡過冥河之靈藥，如此身體可刀槍不入，不過，所抓住的腳跟未浸到藥，成為他的致命處。或者：李敖先生的經驗談，他以為美女最美∕(對他而言) 最敏感的地方 (TOC)，是在她的膝 (knees)。
用Russell Ackoff 的說法就是：…… 「發展」意指在對自己及他人的需求和渴望上，更為清楚、更有能力成全之。只有在所有利害關係人同時得以發展時，組織本身才得以發展。這猶如由一隊馬匹來拉馬車時，車速不會比跑最慢的那匹更快。117基本上，Herbert A. Simon的「有限理性論」是人在資訊處理、記憶、注意力、習慣等方面的限制理論。這一理論提醒我們，打通環節時要牢記的各種理性上的限制，例如要遠離「地心引力」作用，就要克服它。
最後談點公司如何善用本書的理論。我過去在竹北飛利浦公司任職時，我們部門負責各工廠的標準成本的計算和投資決策的分析。黑白電視機的映像管廠的簡單模型，類似本書第64頁的XYZ工廠，還加上各部門的不同良率考量。我們所運用的決策思維，與本書的TOC的說法類似。換句話說，本書的核心思想是通用的。談它的應用推廣，首先是相關的人要有本文和本書提到的諸前賢的系統觀念，包括如何在全組織中進行轉型的耐心和知識的應用。
High & Low FinanceApple’s Move Keeps Profit Out of Reach of TaxesBy FLOYD NORRIS May 07, 2013蘋果是怎樣合法避稅的FLOYD NORRIS 報導 2013年05月07日Why would a company with billions of dollars in the bank — and no plans for a large investment — decide to borrow billions more?一家擁有數百億美元現金、但沒有大規模投資計劃的公司，為什麼會決定再藉數百億美元的錢呢？A decade ago, that was a question some short-sellers were asking about Parmalat, the Italian food company that had seemed to be coining money.10年前，這是一些做空者對意大利食品公司帕瑪拉特(Parmalat)提出的問題，這家公司似乎很能賺錢。It turned out that the answer was not a happy one: The cash was not real. The auditors had been fooled. A huge fraud was being perpetrated.事實證明，答案不令人愉快：那些錢不是真的。審計員們上當了。那是一場巨大的騙局。Lucas Jackson/Reuters中央車站的一家蘋果零售店。蘋果公司共借款170億美元（約合1049億元人民幣），它所發行的債券成了歷史上數額最大的企業債券。Now it is a question that could be asked about Apple. Its March 30 balance sheet shows $145 billion in cash and marketable securities. But this week it borrowed $17 billion in the largest corporate bond offering ever.如今，這個問題可能對蘋果公司(Apple)提出。蘋果3月30日的資產負債表顯示，公司擁有1450億美元（約合8295億元人民幣）的現金和有價證券。但蘋果在本週通過發行債券借了170億美元，這是有史以來最大規模的公司債券。The answer for Apple is a more comforting one for investors, if not for those of us who pay taxes. The cash is real. But Apple has been a pioneer in tactics to avoid paying taxes to Uncle Sam. To distribute the cash to its owners would force it to pay taxes. So it borrows instead to buy back shares and increase its stock dividend.就蘋果來說，問題的答案頗令投資者放心，但對於我們這些納稅人來說，卻不是安慰。蘋果的現金是真的，但這家公司是設法逃避向山姆大叔納稅的先驅。把現金分給股東將會迫使公司納稅。所以，蘋果選擇用發行債券的辦法來回購股份、增加股票分紅。The borrowings were at incredibly low interest rates, as low as 0.51 percent for three-year notes and topping out at 3.88 percent for 30-year bonds. And those interest payments will be tax-deductible.此次發行債券的利率非常低，最低的是三年期的，只有0.51%，最高的是30年期的，為3.88%。而且，公司支付利息的開支可以在稅前扣除。Isn't that nice of the government? Borrow money to avoid paying taxes, and reduce your tax bill even further.這個政府可真夠好的。讓你通過借錢避免繳納賦稅，還可以進一步降低你的稅額。Could this become the incident that brings on public outrage over our inequitable corporate tax system? Some companies actually pay something close to the nominal 35 percent United States corporate income tax rate. Those unfortunate companies tend to be in businesses like retailing. But companies with a lot of intellectual property — notably technology and pharmaceutical companies — get away with paying a fraction of that amount, if they pay any taxes at all.這會成為引起公眾對我們不公平的公司稅制憤怒的事件嗎？有些公司的確繳納了接近名義上的公司所得稅率35%的賦稅。這些不幸的公司多屬零售等行業。但擁有很多知識產權的公司——尤其是技術和製藥公司——能僥倖躲避大部分賦稅，如果不是全部賦稅的話。Anger at such tax avoidance — we're talking about presumably legal tax strategies, by the way — has been boiling in Europe, particularly in Britain.在歐洲，特別是英國，人們對此類避稅行為的憤怒正在增長。順便說一句，我們說的是大概合法的避稅策略。It got so bad that late last year Starbucks promised to pay an extra £10 million — about $16 million — in 2013 and 2014 above what it would normally have had to pay in British income taxes. What it would normally have paid is zero, because Starbucks claims its British subsidiary loses money. Of course, that subsidiary pays a lot for coffee sold to it by a profitable Starbucks subsidiary in Switzerland, and pays a large royalty for the right to use the company's intellectual property to another subsidiary in the Netherlands. Starbucks said it understood that its customers were angry that it paid no taxes in Britain.憤怒程度之高導致星巴克(Starbucks)在去年晚些時候承諾將在2013和2014年額外繳納1000萬英鎊（約合9600萬元人民幣）的稅款，高於其在英國必須正常繳納的所得稅。星巴克在英國的正常稅額為零，因為該公司宣稱其英國分公司賠錢。當然，星巴克的英國分公司向盈利的星巴克瑞士分公司支付大筆購買咖啡的錢，還向星巴克荷蘭分公司支付巨額使用費，來獲取公司知識產權的使用權。星巴克表示，該公司知道消費者因星巴克在英國不納稅而感到憤怒。Starbucks could get away with paying no taxes in Britain, and Apple can get away with paying little in the United States relative to the profits it makes, thanks to what Edward D. Kleinbard, a law professor at the University of Southern California and a former chief of staff at the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, calls “stateless income,” in which multinational companies arrange to direct the bulk of their profits to low-tax or no-tax jurisdictions in which they may actually have only minimal operations.星 巴克可以在英國躲避賦稅，蘋果可以在美國繳納相對於其利潤低得多的稅額，是因為它們利用了南加州大學(University of Southern California)法律教授、前美國國會稅收聯席委員會(Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation)幕僚長愛德華·克萊恩巴德(Edward D. Kleinbard)稱為“無國籍收入”的條款，該條款允許跨國公司將大部分利潤劃入低稅或無稅的司法管轄區，而公司實際上可能在這些區域只有很少的經營。Transfer pricing is an issue in all multinational companies and can be used to move profits from one country to another, but it is especially hard for countries to monitor prices on intellectual property, like patents and copyrights. There is unlikely to be a real market for that information, so challenging a company's pricing is difficult.轉移定價是所有跨國公司都有的問題，公司可以通過轉移定價將利潤從一個國家轉移至另一個國家，但是，各國對專利、版權等知識產權的價格進行監督尤其困難。不大可能有真正的市場來提供有關知識產權價格的信息，因此很難挑戰一家公司對知識產權的定價。The United States, at least theoretically, taxes companies on their global profits. But taxes on overseas income are deferred until the profits are sent back to the United States.美國至少在理論上對公司的全球利潤徵稅，但對公司的海外收益延遲徵稅，等利潤返回美國之後才須繳納。Apple makes no secret of the fact it has not paid taxes on a large part of its profits. “We are continuing to generate significant cash offshore and repatriating this cash will result in significant tax consequences under current US tax law,” the company's chief financial officer, Peter Oppenheimer, said last week.蘋果毫不諱言其大部分盈利都沒有納稅的事實。蘋果首席財務官彼得·奧本海默(Peter Oppenheimer)上周說：“我們仍繼續在海外產生大量現金，根據美國目前的稅法，把這些錢拿回美國將導致巨大的納稅問題。”A company spokesman says the company paid $6 billion in federal income taxes last year, and “several billion dollars in income taxes within the US in 2011.” It is a testament to how profitable the company is that it would still face “significant tax consequences ” if it used the cash it has to buy back stock.公司的一名發言人說，去年公司共繳納聯邦所得稅60億美元，而且“在2011年，在美國境內繳納了幾十億美元的所得稅”。如果蘋果用它所擁有的現金來回購公司股份，它仍然會面臨“巨大的納稅問題”，這說明了蘋果的利潤有多高。There is something ridiculous about a tax system that encourages an American company to invest abroad rather than in the United States. But that is what we have.美國稅收體系的荒唐之處在於，它鼓勵美國公司在海外投資而不是在美國本土投資。然而，這就是我們的體系。In principle, there are two ways the United States could get out of the current mess. The first, proposed by President John F. Kennedy more than 50 years ago, is to end the deferral. Companies would owe taxes on profits when they made them . There would be, of course, credits for taxes paid overseas, but if a company made money and did not otherwise pay taxes on it, it would owe them to the United States. After it paid the taxes, it could move the money wherever it wished without tax consequences.原則上來說，美國有兩種方法可能擺脫目前的糟糕狀態。第一種方法是約翰·F·肯尼迪總統(John F. Kennedy)50多年前提出來的，就是結束延遲徵稅。公司掙了錢的那年就該納稅。當然，公司在海外繳納了稅額可以用來抵免在美國的納稅，但如果一家公司掙了錢卻沒有在海外繳納所得稅的話，它就應該向美國納稅。繳稅之後，公司可以隨心所欲地轉移資金，而不必擔心納稅問題。President Obama has not gone that far, but he has suggested immediate taxation of foreign profits earned in tax havens, defined as countries with very low tax rates.奧巴馬總統還沒有走到這一步，但他曾提出要對在海外避稅天堂所獲得的利潤馬上徵稅。避稅天堂指的是那些稅率極低的國家。Some international companies hate that idea, of course. They warn that we would risk making American multinational corporations uncompetitive with other multinationals, and perhaps encourage some of them to change nationality.當然，有些跨國公司很不喜歡這個想法。他們警告稱，這樣做，就可能會讓美國的跨國公司與其他跨國公司相比，失去競爭力，也許還會促使一些公司改變國籍。The other way is to move to what is called a territorial system, one in which countries tax only profits earned in those countries. Apple would then be free to bring the money home whenever it wanted, tax-free. But without doing something about the ease with which companies manage to claim profits are made wherever it is most convenient, that would simply be a recipe for giving up on collecting tax revenue. Companies around the world have done a good job of persuading countries to lower tax rates. Back in the 1980s, the American corporate tax rate of 34 percent was among the lowest in the world. Now the 35 percent United States tax rate on corporate income is among the highest. In this country, notwithstanding the high rate, the corporate income tax now brings in about 18 percent of all income tax revenue, with individuals paying the rest. That is half the share corporations paid when Dwight Eisenhower was president.另一種方式是採用所謂的地域系統，即一國祇對在本國境內所獲得的利潤徵稅。這樣的話，蘋果就隨時能把資金拿回美國，不須再繳稅。然而，如果企業能夠隨意在對它最有利的地方宣布獲得利潤，而我們不對這種自由進行限制的話，這種方法等於放棄對企業徵稅。跨國公司在世界各地成功地說服了各國對其降低稅率。 20世紀80年代時，美國34%的企業所得稅率屬世界最低水平。而如今，美國35%的企業所得稅率卻位居世界最高水平。在美國，雖然企業所得稅率較高，但企業上繳的所得稅目前在政府的全部所得稅收入中只佔18%，其餘部分為個人所得稅。這是德懷特·艾森豪威爾(Dwight Eisenhower)任總統時，公司繳納的所得稅份額的一半。There seems to be something of a consensus developing around the idea that the United States rate should be lowered. Both President Obama and Representative Dave Camp, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, say they want to do that without reducing government revenue, but they disagree on most details. Mr. Camp likes the territorial idea, but he concedes that we would have to do something about the ease with which companies move income from country to country.人們似乎正在就美國應該降低企業所得稅率的想法達成一致。奧巴馬總統和眾議院籌款委員會(House Ways and Means Committee)主席戴維·坎普(Dave Camp)眾議員都表示，他們希望在不減少政府收入的前提下這麼做，但是在大部分細節上他們存在分歧。坎普比較青睞地域系統，但他承認我們必須採取措施限制公司把收益從一個國家轉移到另一個國家的隨意性。In Europe, where budget problems have grown drastically, there seems to be a growing understanding that governments must raise a certain amount of revenue and a belief that if one sector manages to avoid paying taxes, that means other sectors must pay more. That led to the anti-Starbucks demonstrations in Britain. In this country, there is little sign of similar attitudes, let alone a belief that those who find ways to twist the laws to avoid paying taxes are being unpatriotic.在預算問題日益嚴峻的歐洲，人們對政府必須獲取一定稅收的認識正在提高，人們也認識到，如果某個部門能躲避納稅，這就意味著其他部門必須繳納更多的稅額。這是導致英國的反星巴克(Starbucks)遊行的原因。在美國，沒有跡象表明人們有類似的認識，更不用說他們會認為那些想方設法地通過扭曲法律來躲避納稅的人不愛國了。If that belief were to become widespread, Apple and similar companies might find that their success in avoiding taxes was making them unpopular with other taxpayers — people whom Apple wants to be its customers.如果這種認識能變得更普遍，蘋果以及類似的公司可能會發現，它們的成功避稅會讓其他納稅者不喜歡它們，而這些納稅者是蘋果希望能成為自己顧客的人。Floyd Norris comments on finance and the economy at nytimes.com/economix.弗洛伊德·諾里斯(Floyd Norris)在nytimes.com/economix上評論金融和經濟問題。翻譯：許欣、陳柳
High & Low FinanceApple’s Move Keeps Profit Out of Reach of TaxesBy FLOYD NORRIS May 07, 2013蘋果是怎樣合法避稅的FLOYD NORRIS 報導 2013年05月07日Why would a company with billions of dollars in the bank — and no plans for a large investment — decide to borrow billions more?一家擁有數百億美元現金、但沒有大規模投資計劃的公司，為什麼會決定再藉數百億美元的錢呢？A decade ago, that was a question some short-sellers were asking about Parmalat, the Italian food company that had seemed to be coining money.10年前，這是一些做空者對意大利食品公司帕瑪拉特(Parmalat)提出的問題，這家公司似乎很能賺錢。It turned out that the answer was not a happy one: The cash was not real. The auditors had been fooled. A huge fraud was being perpetrated.事實證明，答案不令人愉快：那些錢不是真的。審計員們上當了。那是一場巨大的騙局。Lucas Jackson/Reuters中央車站的一家蘋果零售店。蘋果公司共借款170億美元（約合1049億元人民幣），它所發行的債券成了歷史上數額最大的企業債券。Now it is a question that could be asked about Apple. Its March 30 balance sheet shows $145 billion in cash and marketable securities. But this week it borrowed $17 billion in the largest corporate bond offering ever.如今，這個問題可能對蘋果公司(Apple)提出。蘋果3月30日的資產負債表顯示，公司擁有1450億美元（約合8295億元人民幣）的現金和有價證券。但蘋果在本週通過發行債券借了170億美元，這是有史以來最大規模的公司債券。The answer for Apple is a more comforting one for investors, if not for those of us who pay taxes. The cash is real. But Apple has been a pioneer in tactics to avoid paying taxes to Uncle Sam. To distribute the cash to its owners would force it to pay taxes. So it borrows instead to buy back shares and increase its stock dividend.就蘋果來說，問題的答案頗令投資者放心，但對於我們這些納稅人來說，卻不是安慰。蘋果的現金是真的，但這家公司是設法逃避向山姆大叔納稅的先驅。把現金分給股東將會迫使公司納稅。所以，蘋果選擇用發行債券的辦法來回購股份、增加股票分紅。The borrowings were at incredibly low interest rates, as low as 0.51 percent for three-year notes and topping out at 3.88 percent for 30-year bonds. And those interest payments will be tax-deductible.此次發行債券的利率非常低，最低的是三年期的，只有0.51%，最高的是30年期的，為3.88%。而且，公司支付利息的開支可以在稅前扣除。Isn't that nice of the government? Borrow money to avoid paying taxes, and reduce your tax bill even further.這個政府可真夠好的。讓你通過借錢避免繳納賦稅，還可以進一步降低你的稅額。Could this become the incident that brings on public outrage over our inequitable corporate tax system? Some companies actually pay something close to the nominal 35 percent United States corporate income tax rate. Those unfortunate companies tend to be in businesses like retailing. But companies with a lot of intellectual property — notably technology and pharmaceutical companies — get away with paying a fraction of that amount, if they pay any taxes at all.這會成為引起公眾對我們不公平的公司稅制憤怒的事件嗎？有些公司的確繳納了接近名義上的公司所得稅率35%的賦稅。這些不幸的公司多屬零售等行業。但擁有很多知識產權的公司——尤其是技術和製藥公司——能僥倖躲避大部分賦稅，如果不是全部賦稅的話。Anger at such tax avoidance — we're talking about presumably legal tax strategies, by the way — has been boiling in Europe, particularly in Britain.在歐洲，特別是英國，人們對此類避稅行為的憤怒正在增長。順便說一句，我們說的是大概合法的避稅策略。It got so bad that late last year Starbucks promised to pay an extra £10 million — about $16 million — in 2013 and 2014 above what it would normally have had to pay in British income taxes. What it would normally have paid is zero, because Starbucks claims its British subsidiary loses money. Of course, that subsidiary pays a lot for coffee sold to it by a profitable Starbucks subsidiary in Switzerland, and pays a large royalty for the right to use the company's intellectual property to another subsidiary in the Netherlands. Starbucks said it understood that its customers were angry that it paid no taxes in Britain.憤怒程度之高導致星巴克(Starbucks)在去年晚些時候承諾將在2013和2014年額外繳納1000萬英鎊（約合9600萬元人民幣）的稅款，高於其在英國必須正常繳納的所得稅。星巴克在英國的正常稅額為零，因為該公司宣稱其英國分公司賠錢。當然，星巴克的英國分公司向盈利的星巴克瑞士分公司支付大筆購買咖啡的錢，還向星巴克荷蘭分公司支付巨額使用費，來獲取公司知識產權的使用權。星巴克表示，該公司知道消費者因星巴克在英國不納稅而感到憤怒。Starbucks could get away with paying no taxes in Britain, and Apple can get away with paying little in the United States relative to the profits it makes, thanks to what Edward D. Kleinbard, a law professor at the University of Southern California and a former chief of staff at the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, calls “stateless income,” in which multinational companies arrange to direct the bulk of their profits to low-tax or no-tax jurisdictions in which they may actually have only minimal operations.星 巴克可以在英國躲避賦稅，蘋果可以在美國繳納相對於其利潤低得多的稅額，是因為它們利用了南加州大學(University of Southern California)法律教授、前美國國會稅收聯席委員會(Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation)幕僚長愛德華·克萊恩巴德(Edward D. Kleinbard)稱為“無國籍收入”的條款，該條款允許跨國公司將大部分利潤劃入低稅或無稅的司法管轄區，而公司實際上可能在這些區域只有很少的經營。Transfer pricing is an issue in all multinational companies and can be used to move profits from one country to another, but it is especially hard for countries to monitor prices on intellectual property, like patents and copyrights. There is unlikely to be a real market for that information, so challenging a company's pricing is difficult.轉移定價是所有跨國公司都有的問題，公司可以通過轉移定價將利潤從一個國家轉移至另一個國家，但是，各國對專利、版權等知識產權的價格進行監督尤其困難。不大可能有真正的市場來提供有關知識產權價格的信息，因此很難挑戰一家公司對知識產權的定價。The United States, at least theoretically, taxes companies on their global profits. But taxes on overseas income are deferred until the profits are sent back to the United States.美國至少在理論上對公司的全球利潤徵稅，但對公司的海外收益延遲徵稅，等利潤返回美國之後才須繳納。Apple makes no secret of the fact it has not paid taxes on a large part of its profits. “We are continuing to generate significant cash offshore and repatriating this cash will result in significant tax consequences under current US tax law,” the company's chief financial officer, Peter Oppenheimer, said last week.蘋果毫不諱言其大部分盈利都沒有納稅的事實。蘋果首席財務官彼得·奧本海默(Peter Oppenheimer)上周說：“我們仍繼續在海外產生大量現金，根據美國目前的稅法，把這些錢拿回美國將導致巨大的納稅問題。”A company spokesman says the company paid $6 billion in federal income taxes last year, and “several billion dollars in income taxes within the US in 2011.” It is a testament to how profitable the company is that it would still face “significant tax consequences ” if it used the cash it has to buy back stock.公司的一名發言人說，去年公司共繳納聯邦所得稅60億美元，而且“在2011年，在美國境內繳納了幾十億美元的所得稅”。如果蘋果用它所擁有的現金來回購公司股份，它仍然會面臨“巨大的納稅問題”，這說明了蘋果的利潤有多高。There is something ridiculous about a tax system that encourages an American company to invest abroad rather than in the United States. But that is what we have.美國稅收體系的荒唐之處在於，它鼓勵美國公司在海外投資而不是在美國本土投資。然而，這就是我們的體系。In principle, there are two ways the United States could get out of the current mess. The first, proposed by President John F. Kennedy more than 50 years ago, is to end the deferral. Companies would owe taxes on profits when they made them . There would be, of course, credits for taxes paid overseas, but if a company made money and did not otherwise pay taxes on it, it would owe them to the United States. After it paid the taxes, it could move the money wherever it wished without tax consequences.原則上來說，美國有兩種方法可能擺脫目前的糟糕狀態。第一種方法是約翰·F·肯尼迪總統(John F. Kennedy)50多年前提出來的，就是結束延遲徵稅。公司掙了錢的那年就該納稅。當然，公司在海外繳納了稅額可以用來抵免在美國的納稅，但如果一家公司掙了錢卻沒有在海外繳納所得稅的話，它就應該向美國納稅。繳稅之後，公司可以隨心所欲地轉移資金，而不必擔心納稅問題。President Obama has not gone that far, but he has suggested immediate taxation of foreign profits earned in tax havens, defined as countries with very low tax rates.奧巴馬總統還沒有走到這一步，但他曾提出要對在海外避稅天堂所獲得的利潤馬上徵稅。避稅天堂指的是那些稅率極低的國家。Some international companies hate that idea, of course. They warn that we would risk making American multinational corporations uncompetitive with other multinationals, and perhaps encourage some of them to change nationality.當然，有些跨國公司很不喜歡這個想法。他們警告稱，這樣做，就可能會讓美國的跨國公司與其他跨國公司相比，失去競爭力，也許還會促使一些公司改變國籍。The other way is to move to what is called a territorial system, one in which countries tax only profits earned in those countries. Apple would then be free to bring the money home whenever it wanted, tax-free. But without doing something about the ease with which companies manage to claim profits are made wherever it is most convenient, that would simply be a recipe for giving up on collecting tax revenue. Companies around the world have done a good job of persuading countries to lower tax rates. Back in the 1980s, the American corporate tax rate of 34 percent was among the lowest in the world. Now the 35 percent United States tax rate on corporate income is among the highest. In this country, notwithstanding the high rate, the corporate income tax now brings in about 18 percent of all income tax revenue, with individuals paying the rest. That is half the share corporations paid when Dwight Eisenhower was president.另一種方式是採用所謂的地域系統，即一國祇對在本國境內所獲得的利潤徵稅。這樣的話，蘋果就隨時能把資金拿回美國，不須再繳稅。然而，如果企業能夠隨意在對它最有利的地方宣布獲得利潤，而我們不對這種自由進行限制的話，這種方法等於放棄對企業徵稅。跨國公司在世界各地成功地說服了各國對其降低稅率。 20世紀80年代時，美國34%的企業所得稅率屬世界最低水平。而如今，美國35%的企業所得稅率卻位居世界最高水平。在美國，雖然企業所得稅率較高，但企業上繳的所得稅目前在政府的全部所得稅收入中只佔18%，其餘部分為個人所得稅。這是德懷特·艾森豪威爾(Dwight Eisenhower)任總統時，公司繳納的所得稅份額的一半。There seems to be something of a consensus developing around the idea that the United States rate should be lowered. Both President Obama and Representative Dave Camp, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, say they want to do that without reducing government revenue, but they disagree on most details. Mr. Camp likes the territorial idea, but he concedes that we would have to do something about the ease with which companies move income from country to country.人們似乎正在就美國應該降低企業所得稅率的想法達成一致。奧巴馬總統和眾議院籌款委員會(House Ways and Means Committee)主席戴維·坎普(Dave Camp)眾議員都表示，他們希望在不減少政府收入的前提下這麼做，但是在大部分細節上他們存在分歧。坎普比較青睞地域系統，但他承認我們必須採取措施限制公司把收益從一個國家轉移到另一個國家的隨意性。In Europe, where budget problems have grown drastically, there seems to be a growing understanding that governments must raise a certain amount of revenue and a belief that if one sector manages to avoid paying taxes, that means other sectors must pay more. That led to the anti-Starbucks demonstrations in Britain. In this country, there is little sign of similar attitudes, let alone a belief that those who find ways to twist the laws to avoid paying taxes are being unpatriotic.在預算問題日益嚴峻的歐洲，人們對政府必須獲取一定稅收的認識正在提高，人們也認識到，如果某個部門能躲避納稅，這就意味著其他部門必須繳納更多的稅額。這是導致英國的反星巴克(Starbucks)遊行的原因。在美國，沒有跡象表明人們有類似的認識，更不用說他們會認為那些想方設法地通過扭曲法律來躲避納稅的人不愛國了。If that belief were to become widespread, Apple and similar companies might find that their success in avoiding taxes was making them unpopular with other taxpayers — people whom Apple wants to be its customers.如果這種認識能變得更普遍，蘋果以及類似的公司可能會發現，它們的成功避稅會讓其他納稅者不喜歡它們，而這些納稅者是蘋果希望能成為自己顧客的人。Floyd Norris comments on finance and the economy at nytimes.com/economix.弗洛伊德·諾里斯(Floyd Norris)在nytimes.com/economix上評論金融和經濟問題。翻譯：許欣、陳柳
沒有留言:
張貼留言