U.S. tax laws do need changing

I am writing in response to your editorial about simplifying the tax code ["Tame the tax monster," April 17]. I'm a tax preparer, and I strongly disagree with the "flat tax."

People in New York need to know that there is nothing fair about a flat tax. Enacting one would take away our deductions for mortgage interest and real estate taxes. We would lose all incentive for home ownership. It would put the final nail in the coffin for middle-class working families. This is exactly what the very rich want.

Also, it is important to remember that the cost of living in New York is far greater than Idaho, or just about any other state. That means we lose again if we opt for a flat tax.

Taxes should be complicated. One size does not fit all. Each of us has different circumstances; that's why there are accountants.

Daniel J. Garcia, Nesconset
 

According to United States tax laws, any profits earned overseas by American corporations must be taxed at a rate of 35 percent when returned here. That's why many companies park their cash on foreign soil -- cash that could be used to create more jobs here or shared with American investors who could pump that money into our economy.

Changing these incentives is never discussed by our political leaders. I wonder why? Can you spell campaign contributions? These are the 10 corporations with the most untaxed foreign profits:

General Electric, $94 billion; Pfizer, $48.2 billion; Merck, $40.4 billion; Johnson & Johnson, $37 billion; Exxon Mobil, $35 billion; Citigroup, $32.1 billion; Cisco Systems, $31.6 billion; IBM $31.1 billion; Procter & Gamble, $30 billion; Microsoft, $29.5 billion.

The total is $408.9 billion. At a 35 percent tax rate, the revenue to the United States would be more than $143 billion -- and that's just 10 companies.

This revenue could soften some of the major cuts in our budget.

Steven Haar, Bayville