Letter Submission

To submit a letter to the editor, please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Letters must contain the author's name, hometown (state as well, if not in New Hampshire) and phone number, but the number will not be published. We do not run anonymous letters. Local issues get priority, as do local writers. We encourage writers to keep letters to no more than 400 words, but will accept longer letters to be run on a space-available basis. Letters may be edited for spelling, grammar, punctuation and legal concerns.


Hosmer has slimed himself with anti-Koch brothers rhetoric

Hosmer vs. the Koch Bros.

To the Daily Sun,

As is plainly obvious our suddenly forceful governor has seen fit to go on a veto blitz this year in order to position herself for a possible run at the U.S. Senate seat held by the doggedly don't-rock-the-boat Kelly Ayotte.

The governor's budget veto plaintively highlights her opposition to business tax cuts, which, according to State Senator Hosmer in his Sept. 3 op-ed, are thought by all as "more symbolic than substantive." However pointless, this position is designed to play well with the reflexively and self-congratulatingly anti-business/anti-corporate core Democrat voter.

Senator Hosmer has evidently decided to work on firming up his position as highly possible choice for whichever office Gov. Hassan decides not to pursue next year. His overblown rhetoric touches on most if not all the stock leftist fears, spending priorities and bogeymen, referring to the dreaded Koch brothers several times. The "Koch-funded budget stalemate"(absolutely ludicrous), "hyper-partisan attacks" and "toxic partisan politics" may play well with the simplistic audience this piece was designed for but clearly the "compromise" budget he is advocating does not allow for input from the other viewpoint. He also plays up (three times, no less) the pro New Hampshire/anti Washington sentiment so saleable these days, not unlike Senator Ayotte. But both are or would be straight-line party leadership votes unless they can sneak in a meaningless "optics" vote to seemingly be responsive to that sentiment.

However, Hosmer's only real claim to fame in his elections has been his not-too-anti-business and not-too-political (slimey) image. Whether personally written or composed by an earnest summer intern, I'm afraid he has just slimed himself.

Stephen J. Conkling


  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 597

Unfair to vilify companies that leave U.S. to seek better tax structures

To The Daily Sun,

Tax inversions. Have you ever heard of them? You should have heard about them from your political leadership because their impact on tax revenues is important to you. Tax inversions illustrate a large structural problem within America's corporate tax system. A tax inversion is a strategic maneuver an increasing number of companies are choosing to undertake in response to a competitive disadvantage. The way it works is that, most often, an American company first buys or sometimes merges with a foreign rival. Then the new corporate entity shifts its domicile abroad in order to reap tax benefits. The new company is based outside the United States.

Don't get mad at the companies. They are making a sound rational financial decision based on the situation forced on them by the American government. Here's why it makes financial sense for these companies to leave America. America has a combined federal and state tax rate on corporations of about 40 percent. (In New Hampshire it is higher than that because the New Hampshire corporate taxes are higher than the national average.) In the rest of the developed world (OEDC) the corporate tax rate is an average of about 25 percent. Making matters worse, America taxes the income made by American companies whether the money is made in the U.S. or whether it is made abroad, should the money flow back to the U.S. ever. The companies can increase their bottom line by up to 60 percent by changing their home country.

This puts a lot of dollars at risk for companies. It keeps capital made by American companies off shore, which means it will not be reinvested in America, lowering future domestic growth which costs jobs and reduces opportunity. Taxes are not the only factor in play in these deals but it is a large motivator. The higher the percentage of earnings that come from off-shore the higher the probability the company will leave. This is what happens when lawyers try to do social engineering without a grasp of economics. It is called the "Hassan approach" to economic development. If you do not believe in America and prefer to be citizen of the world perhaps this makes sense to you. If however you live here it and have to deal with the consequences your enthusiasm might be ... dampened.

Politically this is a tough nut because a politician intent on solving the problem of companies leaving America has to explain why we have been using the tax code to shift jobs off shore, an unpopular topic. Then they are going to have to explain why not taxing the income of U.S. companies earned in other countries is a bad idea, another an unpopular topic. Then they are going to have to explain why we can no longer support the level of spending to which we have become accustomed yet another very unpopular topic. Finally, they will have to tell the voters that their personal tax rates are going up and benefits are going down because corporate tax dollars are declining ... if they are honest.

This is a self-inflicted wound. It is serious and it is growing. It could not come at a worse time. The answer put forward by the administration so far ... is to vilify the companies which is patently unfair. Neither political party is eager to tackle the issue because they will have to admit complicity in its establishment. The time has come for serious consideration of the fiscal and monetary position of the nation and this is but one of the issues.
Marc Abear

  • Category: Letters
  • Hits: 418