Paul Ryan on Corporations
Republican nominee for Vice President; U.S. Rep. (WI-1)
Raising corporate tax will cost us 710,000 jobs
RYAN: Eight out of ten businesses, they file their taxes as individuals, not as corporations. The average tax rate on businesses in the industrialized world is 25%, and the president wants the top effective tax rate on successful small businesses to go
above 40%. 2/3 of our jobs come from small businesses. This one tax would actually tax about 53% of small business income. It's expected that'd cost us 710,000 jobs. And you know what? It doesn't even pay for
10% of their proposed deficit spending increases. What we are saying is lower tax rates across the board and close loopholes, primarily to the higher-income people. We have three bottom lines: Don't raise the deficit, don't raise taxes on the middle
class and don't lower the share of income that is borne by the high-income earners.
BIDEN: 97% of small businesses make less than $250,000. What they count as small business are hedge funds that make $800 million a year, because they're passthrough.
Source: 2012 Vice Presidential debate
, Oct 11, 2012
Stimulus was political patronage & corporate welfare
Without a change in leadership, why would the next four years be any different from the last four years? The first troubling sign came with the stimulus. President Obama's first and best shot at fixing the economy. At a time when he got everything he
wanted under one-party rule. It cost $831 billion. The largest one-time expenditure ever by our federal government. It went to companies like Solyndra, with their gold-plated connections, subsidized jobs and make believe markets.
The stimulus was a case of political patronage, corporate welfare anachronism at their worst.
You, the American people, were cut out of the deal. What did taxpayers get out of the Obama stimulus?
More debt. That money wasn't just spent and wasted, it was borrowed, spent and wasted.
Source: 2012 Republican National Convention speech
, Aug 29, 2012
Lower corporate tax rate to improve global competitiveness
I have proposed to level the playing field for American-made products to compete against foreign competitors, making it easier for American manufacturers to keep jobs in the U.S. Our current corporate tax is the second highest in the industrialized
world, which kills American jobs and puts American companies at a competitive disadvantage. My Roadmap proposal would end these backwards tax policies and put American workers in the position to thrive, instead of struggling to survive.
Source: 2012 House campaign website, ryanforcongress.com, "Issues"
, Aug 11, 2012
Fannie & Freddie are failed experiment in corporate welfare
The federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continues to be the most costly taxpayer bailout to result from the 2008 financial crisis. So far, Fannie and Freddie have received over $185 billion in taxpayer-funded bailouts. Through their unique
status, which they cultivated through political influence, they recklessly privatized their profits, outsourced their risks to the American public, and created a disaster for taxpayers.
While under conservatorship, CBO estimates that Fannie and
Freddie could cost taxpayers $335 billion. Corporate-welfare arrangements like the GSEs socialize risk by shifting losses to the taxpayers, but allow profits to accrue to management, bondholders and Wall Street institutions that trade mortgage-backed
securities. On their current course, the GSEs represent a failed experiment in corporate welfare and the largest bailout of financial institutions in recent history.
THE SOLUTION: Privatize the business of government-owned housing giants.
Source: The Path to Prosperity, by Paul Ryan, p. 26&30
, Apr 5, 2012
Dodd-Frank reforms intensify too-big-to-fail problem
The financial-regulation law authored in 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act, offers another example of the trend of government overreach in the private sector. The Dodd-Frank Act has expanded the power of unelected bureaucrats, created a mandate for hundreds of
new regulations, and entrenched the role of influence-peddlers in Washington. It has solidified government's guarantee of Wall Street at the expense of the taxpayer and imposed burdensome compliance costs on a wide array of private-sector companies.
Although the bill is dubbed "Wall Street Reform," it actually intensifies the problem of too-big-to-fail by giving large, interconnected financial institutions advantages that small firms will not enjoy.
While the authors of the Dodd-Frank
Act went to great lengths to denounce bailouts, this law only sustains them, by drawing on taxpayer dollars to bail out the creditors of large, "systemically significant" financial institutions. The expected cost for this new authority is $33 billion.
Source: The Path to Prosperity, by Paul Ryan, p. 27
, Apr 2, 2012
25% top individual rate and top corporate tax rate
This budget advances a framework that calls for an American tax system that is simple, fair and efficient to promote innovation and sustained job creation in the private sector.
The Solution: Simplifying the Tax Code and Promoting Job Creation and
Source: The Path to Prosperity, by Paul Ryan, p. 66
, Apr 2, 2012
- Reject the President's call to raise taxes
- Consolidate the current six individual income tax brackets into just two brackets of 10 and 25%
- Reduce the corporate rate to 25%
- Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax
- Broaden the tax
base to maintain revenue growth at a level consistent with current tax policy and at a share of the economy consistent with historical norms of 18% to 19% in the following decades
- Shift from a "worldwide" system of taxation to a "territorial" tax
system that puts American companies and their workers on a level playing field with foreign competitors and ends the "lock-out effect" that discourages companies from bringing back foreign earnings to invest in the US.
8.5% Business Consumption Tax instead of taxing profit
The Road Map plan for business and corporate taxes is also simple and fair. Instead of taxing profits as we do now, the new plan would only tax what a business "consumes" to make a product or provide a service. It's called a Business Consumption Tax that
would be, in effect, a sales tax of 8.5% on everything a business buys. Under this plan, every business would have ample incentive to maximize profits and minimize expenses (which is the opposite of our current tax code).
Source: Saving Freedom, by Jim DeMint, p.244
, Jul 4, 2009
Voted YES on workforce training by state block grants & industry partners.
Supporting Knowledge and Investing in Lifelong Skills Act or SKILLS Act:
Opponent's Argument for voting No:
- Reauthorizes appropriations workforce investment systems for job training and employment services.
- Requires a plan describe:
- strategies and services to more fully engage employers and meet their needs, as well as those to assist at-risk youth and out-of-school youth in acquiring education, skills, credentials, and employment experience;
- how the state board will convene industry or sector partnerships that lead to collaborative planning;
- how the state will use technology to facilitate access to services in remote areas;
- state actions to foster partnerships with non-profit organizations that provide employment-related services; and
- the methodology for determining one-stop partner program contributions for the cost of the infrastructure of one-stop centers.
- Repeals title VI (Employment Opportunities for Individuals with Disabilities)
National League of Cities op-ed, "H.R. 803 fails because it would:"
Reference: SKILLS Act;
Bill H.R. 803
; vote number 13-HV075
on Mar 15, 2013
- Undermine the local delivery system that has been the cornerstone of job training programs
- Establish a program that is based on political boundaries (states) rather than on economic regions and local labor markets, or the naturally evolving areas in which workers find paying work
- Eliminate a strong role for local elected officials but require that they continue to be fiscally liable for funds spent in their local areas
- Change what was once a program targeted to those most in need--economically disadvantaged adults and youth and special population groups like veterans, migrant farm workers, and low income seniors--into a block grant to governors
- Contribute to the emerging division between those American's who have the requisite skills to find employment and those who do not.
Voted NO on letting shareholders vote on executive compensation.
Corporate and Financial Institution Compensation Fairness Act: Amends the Securities Exchange Act to require that any proxy for an annual shareholders meeting provide for a separate shareholder vote to approve executive compensation for named executive officers. The shareholder vote shall not be:
- binding on the corporation
- construed as overruling a board decision, or as creating or implying any additional fiduciary duty by the board; or
- construed as restricting or limiting shareholder ability to place executive compensation proposals within proxy materials.
Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. BARNEY FRANK (D, MA-4): The amount of wages is irrelevant to the SEC. What this bill explicitly aims at is the practice whereby people are given bonuses that pay off if the gamble pays off, but don't lose you anything if it doesn't. That is, there is a wide consensus that this incentivizes excessive risk.
Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. SPENCER BACHUS (R, AL-6): True, the first 6 pages of the bill give the owners, the shareholders, a non-binding vote on the pay of top executives. But then come the next 8 pages, the switch, which gives the regulators the power to decide appropriate compensation for not only just top executives but for all employees of all financial institutions above $1 billion in assets and all without regard for the shareholders' prior approval. So under the guise of empowering shareholders, it is, in fact, the government that is empowered. And, finally, on page 15, the bill designates those same government entities which regulated AIG, Countrywide, and collectively failed to prevent the worst financial calamity since the Great Depression. This bill continues the Democrat majority's tendency to go to the default solution for every problem: create a government bureaucracy to make decisions better left to private citizens and private corporations.
Reference: Say-On-Pay Bill;
; vote number 2009-H686
on Jul 31, 2009
Voted YES on more funding for nanotechnology R&D and commercialization.
Congressional Summary:Extends funding for research and development topics, nanotechnology, project commercialization, prioritization of applications, and federal administration and oversight.
Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. NYDIA VELÁZQUEZ (D, NY-12): We need jobs that cannot be shipped overseas and will not evaporate in the next cycle of boom and bust. But those jobs aren't going to appear out of thin air. They need to be created. By expanding existing industries and unlocking new ones, H.R. 2965 will generate the jobs we need. Job creation is the primary goal of R&D. But in order to generate new positions, we have to first develop new industries. Commercialization is critical to that process.
Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. ED MARKEY (D, MA-7): I must oppose this bill because I have serious concerns about allowing SBIR awards to go to an unlimited number of businesses owned or controlled by venture capital (VC) firms.
The SBIR program, responsible for over 60,000 patents, has always focused on innovation from truly small businesses for whom commercial capital market funding is typically not an option. However, with the change made in this bill, the SBIR program would be wide open to applicants that already are well-capitalized due to VC participation, crowding out the small businesses that have been the focus of the highly successful SBIR program.
While I support VC participation in the SBIR program, enabling an unlimited amount of large VC majority-owned firms to qualify for SBIR funding calls into question whether this program, intended for genuinely small businesses, is, in fact, still focused on these firms.
We should do everything in our power to strengthen small businesses that generate 70% of new jobs in our country. H.R 2965 does not do enough to ensure that small businesses are the focus of the SBIR program, and therefore I cannot support the bill.
Reference: Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act;
; vote number 2009-H486
on Jul 8, 2009
Voted YES on allowing stockholder voting on executive compensation.
To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to provide shareholders with an advisory vote on executive compensation [and as part of that process, fully disclosing executive compensation].
Proponents support voting YES because:
We should not deprive the public, the stockholders, from being able to do anything meaningful once they find out about scandalous levels of executive compensation or board compensation. Everyone talks about the corporate board as the remedy. But the board is often a part of the problem, being paid huge amounts of money for showing up once or twice a year at meetings.
Give the stockholders a meaningful remedy. Once you get the mandatory disclosure put in place by previous legislation, we are saying the stockholders should be allowed to have a referendum on that and not have a runaround by the board.
Opponents support voting NO because:
This vote is based on mischaracterization--it is an unnecessary amendment. The opportunity for these kinds of votes already exists within the structure of corporate governance right now. A good company from Georgia, AFLAC, went ahead and already has these nonbinding shareholder votes. But there is a difference between having individuals in the private sector, shareholders and individuals outside of the mandating of government to have it occur and have government come in with its heavy hand and say, this is exactly what you need to do because we know best. Our constituents know better how to act and how to relate to corporations than Washington.
Reference: Shareholder Vote on Executive Compensation Act;
Bill H R 1257
; vote number 2007-244
on Apr 20, 2007
Voted YES on replacing illegal export tax breaks with $140B in new breaks.
Vote to pass a bill that would repeal an export tax break for U.S. manufacturers ruled an illegal trade subsidy by the World Trade Organization, while providing for about $140 billion in new corporate tax cuts. Revenue raising offsets would decrease the cost of the bill to $34.4 billion over 11 years. It would consist of a buyout for tobacco farmers that could not go over $9.6 billion. It also would allow the IRS to hire private collection agencies to get back money from taxpayers, and require individuals who claim a tax deduction for a charitable donation of a vehicle to obtain an independent appraisal of the car.
Reference: American Jobs Creation Act;
Bill HR 4520
; vote number 2004-259
on Jun 17, 2004
Voted YES on Bankruptcy Overhaul requiring partial debt repayment.
Vote to pass a bill that would make it easier for courts to change debtors from Chapter 7 bankruptcy, which allows most debts to be dismissed, to Chapter 13, which requires a repayment plan.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Gekas, R-PA;
Bill HR 333
; vote number 2001-25
on Mar 1, 2001
Rated 93% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record.
Ryan scores 93% by US Chamber of Commerce on business policy
Whether you own a business, represent one, lead a corporate office, or manage an association, the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of AmericaSM provides you with a voice of experience and influence in Washington, D.C., and around the globe.
Our members include businesses of all sizes and sectors—from large Fortune 500 companies to home-based, one-person operations. In fact, 96% of our membership encompasses businesses with fewer than 100 employees.
"To advance human progress through an economic, political and social system based on individual freedom, incentive, initiative, opportunity, and responsibility."The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
Source: COC website 03n-COC on Dec 31, 2003
Repeal ObamaCare reporting requirements for small business.
Ryan co-sponsored Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act
A BILL To repeal the expansion of information reporting requirements for payments of $600 or more to corporations. Section 9006 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the amendments made thereby, are hereby repealed; and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied as if such section, and amendments, had never been enacted. [This is the first attempt at dismantling ObamaCare by pieces, as opposed to H.R. 2 which dismantles ObamaCare in whole. The proposed section of the ObamaCare law to be repealed appears below. --OnTheIssues editor].
SEC. 9006. EXPANSION OF INFORMATION REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
Source: HR144&HR4 11-HR004 on Jan 12, 2011
- The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsections:
APPLICATION TO CORPORATIONS. The term 'person' includes any corporation that is not an organization tax-exempt.
- REGULATIONS. The Secretary may prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this section, including rules to prevent duplicative reporting of transactions.
- EFFECTIVE DATE. The amendments made by this section shall apply to payments made after December 31, 2011.
Rated 14% by UFCW, indicating a pro-management voting record.
Ryan scores 14% by UFCW on labor-management issues
The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) is North America's Neighborhood Union--1.3 million members with UFCW locals in all 50 states, Puerto Rico and Canada. Our members work in supermarkets, drug stores, retail stores, meatpacking and meat processing plants, food processing plants, and manufacturing workers who make everything from fertilizer to shoes. We number over 60,000 strong with 25,000 workers in chemical production and 20,000 who work in garment and textile industries.
The UFCW House scorecard is based on these key votes:
Source: UFCW website 12-UFCW-H on May 2, 2012
- (+) Extension of Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
- (+) H. Am. 877 Bishop Am. to HR 3094, penalties for lawsuits against unionization
- (+) H. Am. 880 Jackson-Lee Am. to HR 3094, preventing delays in union votes
- (-) Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act, freezing public salaries
- (-) Regulation from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act, for less corporate regulation
- (-) Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act
- (-) Workforce Democracy and Fairness Act, letting CEOs fire union organizers
Page last updated: Jun 16, 2016