But he is also proposing a significant cut in the corporate tax rate. To many, this approach seems inconsistent Shouldn t the corporate tax rate be raised, not lowered, so that corporations contribute their fair share to deficit reduction?

A 15 tax would raise 300 billion. The choice of tax rate would be part of the negotiation over how far to reduce the overall US corporate tax rate.

At the same time, the effective corporate tax rate in Japan is higher than it is elsewhere, making it difficult for Japan to attract investment, foreign or domestic. In order to survive international tax competition and thus be able to rely on corporate taxes as a source of revenue Japan s corporate tax rate should be lowered in the long run.

Indeed, cutting these items to pay for a reduction in the corporate tax rate could end up increasing the tax on corporate economic activity in the US. Eliminating accelerated depreciation for equipment would raise the effective tax rate on new investments repealing the domestic production deduction would increase the effective tax rate on US manufacturing and rescinding the R D tax credit would reduce investment in innovation.

The pro growth rationale for reducing the US corporate tax rate is compelling, and explains why Obama has proposed cutting it from 35 to 28 (roughly the weighted average rate of the other developed countries).

Indeed, cutting these items to pay for a reduction in the corporate tax rate could end up increasing the tax on corporate economic activity in the US. Eliminating accelerated depreciation for equipment would raise the effective tax rate on new investments repealing the domestic production deduction would increase the effective tax rate on US manufacturing and rescinding the R amp D tax credit would reduce investment in innovation.

Instead of cutting proven tax incentives for business investment, the US should offset at least some of the revenue losses from a lower corporate tax rate by raising tax rates on corporate shareholders. Most countries that reduced their corporate tax rates have followed this path, while the US has done the opposite.

BERKELEY The United States now has the highest statutory corporate income tax rate among developed countries. Even after various deductions, credits, and other tax breaks, the effective marginal rate the rate that corporations pay on new US investments remains one of the highest in the world.

There is no inconsistency between a progressive, balanced deficit reduction plan and lowering the corporate tax rate. Of all taxes, corporate taxes are the most harmful to economic growth without which meaningful deficit reduction is far more difficult to achieve.

Excessive state spending, heavy regulation, and dangerously high taxes have helped create the state s economic woes. The top personal income tax rate (also levied on capital gains), the sales tax rate, the corporate tax rate, and the gas tax are all at or near the highest of any state.

The US now has the highest corporate tax rate of these countries. Even after incorporating various deductions, credits, and other tax reducing provisions, the effective average and marginal corporate tax rates in the US what corporations actually pay are higher than the OECD average.

A recent study found that taxing capital gains and dividends as ordinary income, subject to a maximum 28 rate on long term capital gains (the pre 1997 rate), could finance a cut in the corporate tax rate from 35 to 26 . Such a change would reduce corporations incentives to move investments abroad or shift profits to low tax jurisdictions, while increasing the progressivity of tax outcomes by shifting more of the burden of corporate taxation from labor to capital owners.

Grundsatzkommission Corporate Governance (German Panel for Corporate Governance) (2000). Corporate Governance Rules for German Quoted Companies.

Under current law, US corporate profits are taxed at a rate of 35 the highest rate among OECD countries, where the average is 25 . That tax is paid on profits earned in the US and on repatriated profits earned by US companies foreign subsidiaries.

Finally, Abe s government must reduce the corporate tax rate to align it more closely with international standards. Amid increasingly intense international competition to attract foreign investment, reducing the corporate tax would actually increase Japan s tax revenues, by spurring companies to invest their vast cash stockpiles in more productive activities.

The third arrow is not a traditional industrial policy based approach. On the contrary, it emphasizes reform of the labor market, deregulation, and a reduction in the corporate tax rate.

It would also be desirable to reduce the US corporate tax rate gradually, bringing it closer to the 25 OECD average. That, too, would encourage more repatriation of overseas earnings.

These revenue losses could be offset by curtailing so called corporate tax expenditures deductions, credits, and other special tax provisions that subsidize some economic activities while penalizing others and broadening the corporate tax base. Both President Barack Obama s plan for business tax reform and the Simpson Bowles deficit reduction plan propose reducing such expenditures to pay for a reduction in the corporate tax rate.

Statement on Global Corporate Governance Principles. International Corporate Governance Network.

A lower rate would strengthen incentives for investment and job creation in the US, and weaken incentives for tax avoidance. It would also reduce numerous efficiency reducing distortions in the US tax code, including substantial tax advantages for debt financing over equity financing and for non corporate businesses over corporate businesses.

Revised Statement on Global Corporate Governance Principles. International Corporate Governance Network.

Finance Committee on Corporate Governance (2000). Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance.

But a rate cut would be costly in terms of foregone revenues each percentage point would reduce corporate tax revenues by about 100 billion over the next decade. Moreover, recent studies indicate that a significant share of the corporate tax burden falls on capital, so a reduction in corporate taxes would weaken the progressivity of the tax system at a time when income inequality is at an all time high.

Corporate Governance Committee (2004). The Belgian Code on Corporate Governance ('Lippens Code')

Committee on Corporate Governance (1999). Code of Best Practice for Corporate Governance.

Corporate strategy

Corporate responsibility

Corporate leaders realized that economic incentives accrued from being a good corporate citizen.

Eliminating special interest loopholes, like tax breaks for oil and gas, or for corporate jets, would not yield enough revenue to pay for a meaningful rate cut. And curtailing accelerated depreciation, the manufacturing production deduction, and the R amp D tax credit which account for about 80 of corporate tax expenditures would involve significant tradeoffs.

Eliminating special interest loopholes, like tax breaks for oil and gas, or for corporate jets, would not yield enough revenue to pay for a meaningful rate cut. And curtailing accelerated depreciation, the manufacturing production deduction, and the R D tax credit which account for about 80 of corporate tax expenditures would involve significant tradeoffs.

An increase in the corporate tax rate appeals to many US voters who believe that corporations are not paying their fair share of taxes and are worried about widening income inequality. But, in a world of mobile capital, raising the corporate tax rate or simply leaving it at its current level would be a bad way to generate revenue, a bad way to increase the tax system s progressivity, and a bad way to help American workers.

By global standards, Japan s current corporate tax rate of 35 is quite high. Indeed, while it remains lower than in some US states (California s rate, for example, stands at 40 ), it exceeds the rates applied in Germany (25 ), China (24 ), South Korea (24 ), the United Kingdom (24 ), and Singapore (17 ).

Committee on Corporate Governance (1997). Corporate Governance in the Netherlands Forty Recommendations (Peters Code).

European Corporate Governance Institute. (In particular, see index of corporate governance codes by country.

Corporate specific reasons.

For these reasons, Obama is championing a revenue neutral reform that would leave corporate tax revenues unchanged, with the proposed rate cut financed by limiting deductions, credits, and loopholes, which would broaden the tax base.

Given all this, the recession will lead to a sharp increase in corporate defaults, which had been very low over the last two years, averaging 0.6 per year, compared to an historic average of 3.8 . During a typical recession, the default rate among corporations may rise to 10 15 , threatening massive losses for those holding risky corporate bonds.

Government Commission on the German Corporate Governance Code (2005). The German Corporate Governance Code ('Cromme Code')

JPK Working Group I on Corporate Governance in Malaysia (2000). Report on Corporate Governance in Malaysia.

The Secret Corporate Takeover

The Corporate Tax Conundrum

Whose Corporate Social Responsibility?

Operationalizing the corporate strategy

Corporate and income tax

In the ensuing discussion, questions were raised regarding the precise definitions of general terms such as corporate responsibility , corporate social responsibility and positive corporate contribution , and regarding the notion of a corporate responsibility for development, as well as UNCTAD's mandate in this regard.