I take it you didn't look at the link I posted. The entire field of economics would disagree with you.
Part of the cost is shifted to consumer, depending on elasticity. The rest is paid by owners. Billionaires tend to own companies that pay tax, money which would otherwise have accrued to the owner.
That is what the CBO report I linked quantifies.
- though I didn't mean to imply that the entire tax gets offloaded downstream. That was clumsy.
My point is that taxing corporations without inordinately harming their employees and consumers' standards of living is impossible. Even worse, it grants a competitive edge to established corporations over lesser competing firms, which lack the connections or resources to navigate that tax code as efficiently.
It just isn't healthy for the market or effective at its purpose. If we're serious about maintaining healthy competitive markets and a public with purchasing power, we should consider different options.
And there's political reasons - corp tax is popular with the masses even if it's inefficient.
1. The business cannot absorb the levied tax into its overhead and shuts down. Production and operations cease. Said business doesn't buy materials or supplies, workers become unemployed, and customers do not shop. Result: a net revenue loss in sales, payroll, and income taxes.
2. The business can absorb the levied tax into its overhead... which is then offloaded onto the consumer whose buying power and standard of living decreases.
Follow the money long enough and you'll find most taxes are paid by the individual consumer in roundabout and convoluted ways.