Income Taxes. Who Is Subject to Tax. Capital Gain from Sale of Property Held under Legal Life Estate with Contingent Remainder Is Taxable under Trust Provisions. United States v. De Bonchamps (9th Cir. 1960)

1960 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 418
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Income Taxes ◽  
Capital Gain

Scandinavian Local Income Taxation: Lessons for the United States?

1977 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 471-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven D. Gold
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
Institutional Arrangements ◽  
Income Taxes ◽  
Income Taxation ◽  
Local Autonomy ◽  
Tax Base ◽  
Fiscal Disparities

This paper describes and analyzes the experiences of Norway. Sweden and Denmark with local income taxation in order to test the validity of comments made by numerous American economists about such taxes. Although local income taxes are their major source of locally raised revenue, it appears that the problems of revenue instability and tax base mobility are not serious in these countries. Fiscal disparities have been greatly reduced through consolidation of government units and heavy reliance on transfers from the national government, and these institutional arrangements may have reduced local autonomy in some important respects. The heavy reliance on income taxes by all levels of government is one reason for the extremely high marginal tax rales to which most workers are subject.

scholarly journals Dividend Taxation and Corporate Governance

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 163-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall Morck ◽  
Bernard Yeung
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Tax Reform ◽  
The United States ◽  
Income Taxes ◽  
Corporate Sector ◽  
Free Standing ◽  
Corporate Groups ◽  
Dividend Taxation ◽  
Corporate Insiders ◽  
Dividend Tax

In 2003, the United States enacted a tax reform that reduced, but did not eliminate, individual dividend income taxes. Cutting the dividend tax deprives corporate insiders of a justification for retaining earnings to build unprofitable corporate empires. But not eliminating it entirely preserves an advantage for institutional investors, who can put pressure on underperforming managers. This balance is broadly appropriate in the United States—whose large companies are freestanding and widely held. In addition, preserving the existing tax on intercorporate dividends, in place since the Roosevelt era, discourages the pyramidal corporate groups commonplace in other countries, and preserves America's large corporate sector of free-standing widely held firms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document