Ideas are only ideas unless we find a practical way of taking these ideas and evaluating them for beneficial application. Its not my place to say at this moment which tax system is likely to work the best as different policies are discussed and debated among lawmakers. Some will advocate for high taxes and some will advocate for low. Each one has their own supporters that come from a long line of economic theorists. There are also other alternatives strategies we sometimes miss because of social aspects of arguments and adherence. We may also consider maintaining lower headquarter (HQ) and normal/moderate taxes on suppliers as a mechanism to attract back to North America manufacturing interest.
There is a difference between exploring ideas for future research and trying to definitively make conclusions without an actual investigation. The one thing that is not helpful for researchers is to make a conclusion before understanding the actual questions or looking at the pieces of information that lead to an affirmation of the connection between question and conclusion. We see this all the time when doctoral students are interested in a topic and then seek out only those answers that justify the conclusion (researcher bias).
Thus, taxes have become a big issue in our country and its been debated for some time (See cognitive teams). While I cannot say this to be a fact, I can say that in my experience the ALL THIS and ALL THAT answers are rarely correct because they are exclusive and seem to ignore the vast majority of exceptions that are a natural part of life (This is why unexplored option C sometimes works). Thus, one can only say in my experience I believe there is a possibility that having lower headquarter taxes and moderate supplier taxes might lead to attracting intellectual capital and suppliers back to the U.S.
To help ensure that I'm not biasing the questions it is helpful to keep a couple mental anchors in mind. 1.) Being indifferent to the results helps maintain a level of objectivity. Coming to a wrong conclusion and proposing that as truth could damage and hurt a lot of people and waste others resources (In formal research this would be the long-tail consequences of skewed research). 2.) There is no "proof" that something IS, but only that it is a logical possibility (a little more qualitative) and additional research will determine the probabilities (a little more quantitative) likeliness of outcome (predicting the environment).
There are four fundamental questions (different researchers might see the questions differently) we want to ask when trying to determine if one can create the basis of a chain of logic. I put them into a typical research format although this is more of a essay explanation (Disclaimer: In very formal research I might have lots of literature supporting each of the points in the logical chain and look to existing research to fill the gaps. Probability of something would require a creation of logic and the determination of probabilities through observation, manipulation of variables, and supported instruments. That would take a long long time!😾 So think of this as a "thought" experiment or a type of investigation of pure reason.):
R1: Does attracting corporate headquarters improve on economic investment?
R1-1 Large manufacturers and non-manufacturing firms are more likely to invest in R&D activities. The large manufacturers have a stake in the research to develop new products. Small non-manufacturing firms are also investing in R&D. Small firms in design & engineering, technology, and small manufacturers might be interested R&D pooled investment opportunities. See Firms R&D. Digital Era Infrastructure Draw
R2: Does lowering (maintaining low) headquarters tax attract business to the U.S.?
R2-1 HQ can be attracted and retained through 1. better clustered communications and knowledge exchange, 2.) focused capital, resources, talent spill over, and shared services, and 3.) lower costs and higher legal and regulatory environment (Baaij, et. al 2015). See Attract MNC Innovate Tax Environ and 15% Global Tax Floor
R3: Will supply chains be inclined to follow parent company headquarters?
(One might consider a couple of sub questions for each such as R2-1, "Under what circumstance will suppliers follow headquarters?", "Are there employee size differences?" "Which industries are most attracted?", "What is the expected return rate to companies/governments from infrastructure improvements?", etc... R2-2 to100)
R4: Are businesses willing to pay (direct and indirect) for national infrastructure?
Because I would like to devote a little time to each of the questions mulling the possibilities I think it would be best to give each its own article to minimize confusion. None of them will be in great depth but just a connection point. Each question would have to be supported through additional significant research (That isn't the goal today!😢). "Connecting" them through some basic research studies might show at least a possibility of a relationship for future exploration. At some point one might move beyond this essay discussion down the chain of logic to extrapolate a larger conclusion.
This is part of a larger research that explores the possibility of using academic, labor, and creative capital within global-export oriented clustered environments to create rapid industry expansion and economic growth/prosperity potential. You can see the unfinished Theory of Transactional Clusters and Perpetual Sustainable Development. They look like they are different but one is the pathway to understanding the practical utility of the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment