Is this a realist idea and if so should it become a Democratic Mandate?

[Bandit]

Any American Corporation fleeing to offshore locations to Evade American taxes should be excluded from Government Contracts or general business.. Should/could it include those Corporations that have already done this very thing or just any Corporations in the future that do so. I mean can we realistically stop buying product from Exxon and other big oil corporations? Corporations are already starting to talk about what they will do if a Democrat becomes President and taxes are raised. I say any American Corporation that is so unpatriotic that it runs to some offshore haven to Evade American taxes should not benefit from American taxes..

[The Traveler]

1. Further recommendation

Companies fleeing the US will no longer be protected by American military resources and personnel.

[InkAddict]

4. They are not fleeing the US/they are augmenting their global prescence.

Then some committee or other would have to prove they did it specifically to evade taxes on their profits, after all, those reductions keep getting better and better under this crew. Evasion doesn't equal lower taxes, just a consequence of lobbying expertise. Lower labor costs are good for the corps. and for Wal-Mart on the homefront as American workers lose out, so everybody who is in is happily partying - NOT!

Edit for: what mike_c said.

[me b zola]

8. There goes our (US) foreign policy

Ultimately, isn't that what has been driving US foreign policy? When I hear "protect American interest abroad", I believe that they mean protect these same companies that are skirting US tax, environmental, and labor laws.

[mike_c]

2. like their republican alter egos, democratic leaders will never seek...

...to limit the profitability or power of corporations in any really meaningful way.

[Donnachaidh]

3. Not only should THAT be done -- they should pay TARIFFS

on any merchandise they want to sell in this country if they've already fled to evade taxes. Let's say 25% of the retail value per unit.

Hey, we regularly hit other countries with tariffs on products they export here -- why should THEY be treated any different?

[Bandit]

5. All foreign corporations or just ex-American ones?

An example Halliburton has government contracts in Iraq but so do Arab corporations. Should they both be subject to tariffs. Are you referring only to commodities sold within the USA? I would like to see our government just not do business with such a company. Why should my hard earned tax money go to support a tax evader.

[Donnachaidh]

9. just EX-American ones

THEY should be getting hit with the STIFFEST fines possible. ESPECIALLY if jobs were lost here. They ARE tax evaders.

Didn't Hslliburton pull some stunt and said they were only opening offices in the Middle East - and then the CEO MOVED there? Well Mr. CEO should forfeit any and ALL properties he holds in the US. And I'd include any property that *suddenly* went into the names of wives or children - another little tactic the uber-rich play when faced with lawsuits or liens.

[MaryCeleste]

6. The issue would be proof that the motivation was taxes

Then again a serious clean up of our current tax code would make intent that much clearer

[treestar]

7. I would think so, since supposedly they have competitors

Often on DU I see expressed a concept that we have no ability to start up anything on our own. We could raise capital but we'd have to be organized. If X Corp makes widgets and moves the factory to China, why do we assume nothing can be done and that X Corp is the only company in all eternity to have the right to make widgets? We could start up Y corp in the US and have it make widgets. This concept seems entirely foreign to so many Americans, that it's kind of sad. They feel at the mercy of these corporations. But inherently these corporations don't have the right to a monopoly, even without laws, they can't stop anyone from competing with them.