[bodono]

The US tax code is absolutely riddled with tax loopholes. Many of these loopholes were designed to act as an incentive, such as tax breaks for hiring former felons, building factories in certain locations, investing in R&D etc etc. Major corporations often pay far lower than the US corporate tax rate precisely because they respond to these tax incentives (and sometimes abuse them, but that's a different story). Does this deal mean that the US will close these loopholes? If so, then 'rich nations' have lost a major tool for creating desired outcomes. If not, then how can this deal prevent other countries just offering whatever loopholes they want that reduce the effective tax rate below the minimum?

[viraptor]

> Many of these loopholes were designed to act as an incentive, such as tax breaks for hiring former felons

I wouldn't call all of those incentives loopholes. There's an incentive to hire felons because it's better to have them working secure jobs than having to spend more tax money getting them through the legal system and months/years of jail again. It's an incentive because it's a cheaper solution overall. It's not the same class of an issue as double-Irish.

I'm not sure what the solution for mixing this with the minimum tax is, but if there's a good reason for the incentive, it may even be beneficial to the country to essentially match the missing tax itself. That's assuming the incentives have the real impact they should.

[gostsamo]

This is a minimum with the corporate tax rate in the US being above that. Therefore, the difference between them minimum and the official value is the incentives margin that the government can use to nudge corporations in the desired direction.

[bodono]

Yes I understand that, but I believe that many corporations today pay even lower than a 15% effective tax rate. I suppose you're saying that these loopholes will be closed up to that minimum?