At that point there'd be no point in a country offering cut-rate taxes to any corporation that does substantial business in the US, because taxes on any profit realized internationally will still be collected. It's just that the US is taking them rather than the country that's offering the cut-rate tax deal. So that country (Ireland or whoever) no longer benefits from having low corporate taxes, and they might as well have taxes at least as high as those in the US.
It seems like any sufficiently important country or union could impose a rule like this if they wanted to. There must be some facet of international law that prevents it, or some other complexity to the idea that I'm missing.
The IRS collects on income over $108k/year, and income over that amount is taxed at that bracket and higher. Foreign Tax Credit also prevents double dipping by the IRS.
Me being a cynical bastard will expect countries rallying to offer themselves to the US and reduce their cut to buy political favor.
With your proposal you do end up taxing it twice, just at a reduced rate. As I understand it, that would require changes to double taxation agreements.
Uber, AirBnB, clothing rental, device upgrade plans...
Like some of my friends can afford a decent house, but prefer renting because it gives greater flexibility (they can rent a small flat in the center of the city in a walking distance to the office and meet with friends often while they don't have children instead of investing into big house in the suburbs with empty rooms they wouldn't use).
But if you own nothing and don't save, this is bad.
The UK did a great thing last year, they increased to minimum payment to private pension (equivalent of US 401k) to 8% of salary, so even irresponsible people will have some savings at retirement age. And I think the UK should continue gradually increasing these contributions.
Ah, there are enough loopholes that a lot of people still won't end up with any savings at retirement age.
There are a lot of self-employed people in the UK, at the low end of pay (gig workers, freelance cleaners, graphic designers, etc) and high end (consultants, IT contractors etc), and bootstrapping entrepreneurs (pay all over the place). The pension 8% doesn't apply to any of them.
In other words, if you sell to us, we'll call it dumping, but in areas we monopolize, sovereign governments must have no role in the free market.
Up next, countries in the system must respect human rights as defined by Radio Free Europe.
Sovereignty goes both ways. No country is obligated to deal (allow trade or capital flows) with any other country they don't want to. If this agreement will even have such enforcement.
Its called gunboat diplomacy
Dollar & "cheap credit" diplomacy is more of a thing nowadays, and other powerful countries are doing it too (notably China)
It is effectively a new mechanism for the G7 to encroach on the sovereignty of other countries.
And if you tell me, taxing international corporations is a good thing, I agree, but it is just a pretense. Just a setup. The G7 can also just tell those international corporations to fess up the money. They have enough influence to do just that. There is no reason to include Poland, Sri Lanka or Botwana or Bolivia in this agreement. The reason those countries are included is so that later on, the same agreement can be used to blackmail those countries.