[libertyEQ]

Your comment basically breaks HN guidelines by calling into question the motivations of all commenters that disagree with you. Some of us simply believe that taxing corporations makes little sense because companies set their pricing with applicable taxes in mind. Ultimately, only people pay taxes, so only people that have not fully considered the implications believe they are "sticking it to the man," when in reality the government is abstracting the cost of these taxes on the people.

It's simply a consumption tax that people do not realize they are paying because it is built into the products citizens are buying.

[dangerlibrary]

Your comment asserts that corporate tax has zero impact on corporate profit. If you don't fully agree with that statement, you may want to consider whether you fully agree with everything you wrote.

[libertyEQ]

>Your comment asserts that corporate tax has zero impact on corporate profit.

I didn't intend to "assert" that, and I think it's fair to ask you to elaborate, as I believe there are assumptions embedded in your interpretation of what I wrote.

edit: Grammar.

edit1: Do you think Apple incorporates the cost of the tax burden into the price of an iPhone? I think it really comes down to whether you think Apple would reduce their unit price if it would ultimately result in gross profit increases. It's like taking VC financing, "Do you want to own 100% of a $500K/yr revenue company or 49% of a $3M/yr revenue company?"

[dangerlibrary]

Imagine a world where there is no corporate tax. Apple does a price analysis and decides the profix maximizing sales point of a phone is $1,000. They price the phone at $1,000.

Then, a 10% corporate income tax rate is put in place.

Does Apple raise the price of the phone to $1,100? Is that now the profit maximizing decision?

According to your claim "Ultimately, only people pay taxes," the answer is yes - Apple would immediately raise the price of the iPhone to offset the loss incurred by the new tax. Except that then, fewer people would buy iPhones. We already know that $1,100 is not the profit maximizing price point for a phone. So, the amount Apple would increase its price is a function of the price sensitivity of iPhone buyers.

This is a little tricky to explain, but khan academy has a video that explains it quite well.

https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/microec...

[Scea91]

> We already know that $1,100 is not the profit maximizing price point for a phone.

$1,000 is a profit maximizing price point with 0 % taxes. With 10 % taxes it would be different.

[dangerlibrary]

Correct. Was that not clear?