????好幾個(gè)月以來，關(guān)于如何將總額約2萬億美元的企業(yè)存款重新投入美國經(jīng)濟(jì)，許多經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家、商人和政客已經(jīng)說啞了嗓子。預(yù)計(jì)接下來，他們將熱烈討論美國企業(yè)在海外的存款。

????美國一些科技、制藥和能源巨頭正在準(zhǔn)備進(jìn)行一次大規(guī)模的游說活動(dòng)，以爭取一個(gè)免稅期，使他們能以一個(gè)很高的貼現(xiàn)率，將自己存放在海外的約1萬億美元資金帶回美國。

????這次活動(dòng)目前仍處于計(jì)劃階段。不過據(jù)消息人士透露，這將是一次齊心協(xié)力的持久戰(zhàn)，為了說服政策制定者，甲骨文（Oracle）、思科（Cisco）、蘋果（Apple）、杜克能源（Duke Energy）和輝瑞制藥（Pfizer）等大公司都將出錢資助這次游說活動(dòng)。此次游說的目的是為了給他們的海外收入爭取為期一年的稅收減免，使他們能夠按5%左右的稅率，將這筆錢轉(zhuǎn)移回美國國內(nèi)，而不是按當(dāng)前35%的稅率。

????各大企業(yè)此次推動(dòng)游說，適逢美國國內(nèi)熱議企業(yè)稅法全面改革問題。這些企業(yè)希望不論最終出臺(tái)什么樣的改革方案，最好都能把免稅期這一條涵蓋在內(nèi)。不過如果廣域改革停滯不前，那么他們很可能會(huì)謀求單獨(dú)推動(dòng)他們的計(jì)劃。不過這些企業(yè)的代表都拒絕對(duì)游說活動(dòng)的細(xì)節(jié)發(fā)表評(píng)論，有的根本就沒有回電話。

????這次游說活動(dòng)要想取得成功，實(shí)在不是一件容易的事情。2004年跨國企業(yè)曾向美國國會(huì)進(jìn)行過游說，希望國會(huì)批準(zhǔn)為期一年的稅收減免，以此作為促進(jìn)就業(yè)的一攬子計(jì)劃的一部分。當(dāng)時(shí)這些企業(yè)主張，如果國會(huì)批準(zhǔn)了稅收減免，他們會(huì)把轉(zhuǎn)移回美國國內(nèi)的錢用于研究、投資和招聘上，這將有助于促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長。后來國會(huì)批準(zhǔn)了這項(xiàng)免稅計(jì)劃，許多公司從那次免稅期中獲得了好處。根據(jù)美國國稅局的數(shù)據(jù)，當(dāng)時(shí)共有843家公司利用了那次免稅期，從海外移回了3620億美元的資金。不過美國廣域經(jīng)濟(jì)是否從那次免稅中獲得了好處？這很難說。

????當(dāng)時(shí)美國財(cái)政部制定了一系列規(guī)定，以確保返回的海外資金的確是被企業(yè)用于投資。不過錢是一種具有可替換性的東西。盡管財(cái)政部明確規(guī)定企業(yè)不得將這筆資金用于支付紅利或股票回購，不過后來的分析還是表明，企業(yè)將這筆資金中的大部分付給了股東。一份由美國國家經(jīng)濟(jì)研究局發(fā)布的研究顯示，企業(yè)每從海外挪回1美元資金，付給股東的錢就增加60到92美分。

????該研究的共同主筆人克里斯汀?福布斯是麻省理工學(xué)院斯隆商學(xué)院（MIT's Sloan School of Management）的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)教授，也是前總統(tǒng)布什的經(jīng)濟(jì)顧問委員會(huì)成員。他表示：“如果國會(huì)批準(zhǔn)了這次免稅期，這將為美國帶回大量的現(xiàn)金，把這些錢付給股東，對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)來說是件好事。不過假如你是名政客，宣稱這樣做會(huì)產(chǎn)生許多新工作崗位或新的投資，那么你的這種主張缺乏數(shù)據(jù)支持?！?/p>

調(diào)整主張

????也許正是由于這個(gè)原因，現(xiàn)在主張進(jìn)行另一次稅收減免的企業(yè)高管們正在調(diào)整他們的論調(diào)。在《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》（Wall Street Journal）10月份的一篇社論上，思科公司首席執(zhí)行官約翰?錢伯斯和甲骨文公司總裁薩夫拉?卡茨主張，第二個(gè)免稅期將有助于美國失業(yè)人口重返工作崗位。不過他們并沒有承諾公司一定會(huì)把所有移回的海外資金都直接投入到與創(chuàng)造就業(yè)有關(guān)的投資中。

????錢伯斯和卡茨也承認(rèn)，企業(yè)有可能會(huì)再一次將這筆錢付給股東。不過他們認(rèn)為，與直接投資相比，更重要的是免稅期會(huì)對(duì)市場產(chǎn)生推動(dòng)作用，從而對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)形成新的刺激，進(jìn)而增加消費(fèi)者的信心。他們還表示，如果國會(huì)批準(zhǔn)了第二個(gè)免稅期，由此產(chǎn)生的稅收收入就高達(dá)500億美元，美國可以利用這筆錢來鼓勵(lì)招聘，不過，前提是美國企業(yè)決定將其全部海外收入轉(zhuǎn)移回美國國內(nèi)，而這不大可能。

????與這次游說活動(dòng)關(guān)系甚密的游說人士私底下承認(rèn)，他們有很多工作要做，這就是為什么他們現(xiàn)在就要開始準(zhǔn)備了。之前一些跨國公司也想在2009年的經(jīng)濟(jì)恢復(fù)計(jì)劃中插入類似提案，但未能成功，這次失敗也成了他們的前車之鑒。當(dāng)時(shí)，一支兩黨聯(lián)立的參議員隊(duì)伍向美國國會(huì)提交了一份議案，要求減免海外稅一年，作為經(jīng)濟(jì)恢復(fù)法案的一項(xiàng)修正案。這些參議員以加州民主黨議員芭芭拉?鮑克瑟和內(nèi)華達(dá)州共和黨議員約翰?恩賽因?yàn)槭住２贿^該修正案最終只獲得了42票，未能通過。

????在國會(huì)推銷該議案時(shí)，鮑克瑟也坦承有些企業(yè)利用了第一次免稅期，美國財(cái)政部對(duì)這筆錢應(yīng)該怎樣花已有規(guī)定，而那些企業(yè)褻瀆了這些規(guī)定的精神。不過鮑克瑟也對(duì)其他議員做了保證，表示只要把條件制定得更嚴(yán)格，那么在最近的這次提案中，就可以避免類似的事再次發(fā)生。北達(dá)科他州參議員拜倫?道爾甘總結(jié)了在民主黨中廣泛蔓延的反對(duì)情緒，他表示：“讓一頭驢踢兩次就是傻子。”

????在兩年后的今天，這個(gè)議案將如何被提出來，現(xiàn)在還不是很清楚。不過，眼下共和黨人在參議院實(shí)力上升，加之不久前他們拿下了眾議院，這預(yù)示著這個(gè)議案的前景樂觀。但這個(gè)方案也受到了小企業(yè)的抨擊，稱這相當(dāng)于給那些最大型的企業(yè)白送了一筆錢。聯(lián)合了茶葉黨（Tea Party，在美國迅速崛起的政治勢力，現(xiàn)在已成為美國的第三大黨派——譯注）的共和黨真的會(huì)欣然接受這樣一項(xiàng)方案嗎？那些支持2009年議案的人主張，這項(xiàng)議案會(huì)為美國市場注入急需的流動(dòng)性——不過隨著銀行放松借貸，這個(gè)理由已經(jīng)不太適用。

????通過這次游說活動(dòng)，這些企業(yè)究竟能否使國會(huì)相信，免稅期將大大刺激私人市場、促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)恢復(fù)？與這次活動(dòng)關(guān)系緊密的游說人士也認(rèn)為，即便游說活動(dòng)成功了，企業(yè)也必須在資金的使用上接受一些苛刻的條件。不過如果這些條件過于苛刻，那么企業(yè)也有可能會(huì)放棄該方案。

????另一個(gè)大問題是：白宮在這個(gè)問題上持什么態(tài)度？奧巴馬的經(jīng)濟(jì)團(tuán)隊(duì)過去對(duì)這個(gè)議案一向不是很熱衷。不過現(xiàn)在奧巴馬正在尋找機(jī)會(huì)，以期改善與大企業(yè)之間的關(guān)系，因此他有可能會(huì)從一個(gè)新的視角看待這個(gè)問題。不過不管怎樣，奧巴馬上上周四連夜趕往硅谷，與科技界的首席執(zhí)行官們會(huì)面，向他們兜售自己的預(yù)算方案，當(dāng)時(shí)他肯定會(huì)聽到一大堆有關(guān)免稅的說詞。

????譯者：樸成奎

????Economists, businessmen, and politicians of every stripe have spent months talking themselves hoarse about how to get the roughly $2 trillion in corporate reserves back into the economy. Get ready to start hearing a lot about that sum's international cousin.

????A group of tech, pharmaceutical and energy giants is readying a major lobbying blitz for a tax holiday that would allow them to bring home the estimated $1 trillion they've got parked overseas at a steeply discounted rate, Fortune has learned.

????The campaign is still in its planning stages, but sources close to the effort say Oracle, Cisco, Apple (AAPL, Fortune 500), Duke Energy (DUK, Fortune 500), and Pfizer (PFE, Fortune 500) are among the major players looking to bankroll a coordinated, sustained pitch to sell policymakers on the idea. Their aim is to win a one-year tax amnesty on their foreign earnings, allowing them to repatriate that money at a tax rate of about 5%, instead of the 35% they face now.

????The push is timed to coincide with the start of a serious debate on a comprehensive overhaul of the corporate tax code, and the companies are hoping to include the holiday in any reform package that moves forward. But if the broader reform effort stalls, they will likely angle to move their plan separately. Representatives from the companies either declined to comment on the specifics of the effort or did not return calls.

????It's going to be a tough sell. Multinationals prevailed on Congress to approve a one-year tax holiday once before, as part of a jobs package in 2004. Back then, the companies argued the relief would help them boost economic growth, because they'd plow their repatriated money into research, investment, and hiring. And while plenty of outfits benefited from the break -- 843 corporations made use of the holiday, bringing back a total of $362 billion, according to the IRS -- the broader economic benefits were dubious.

????The Treasury Department wrote rules trying to ensure that the recovered cash was in fact invested back into the companies. But money is fungible. Although the rules expressly prohibited using the funds for dividend payments or stock buybacks, subsequent analysis has shown participants sent most of it to shareholders anyway. One study, released by the National Bureau of Economic Research, found that for every dollar of repatriated cash, companies bumped up shareholder payouts between 60 and 92 cents.

????"A tax holiday would bring a substantial amount of cash back to the United States and paying that out to shareholders is good for the economy," said study co-author Kristin Forbes, an economics professor at MIT's Sloan School of Management and a member of then-President George W. Bush's council of economic advisers. "But if you're a politician claiming this will create a lot of jobs or new investment, it isn't supported by the data."

Fine-tuning the argument

????Perhaps that's why, so far, corporate executives arguing for another holiday are modulating their pitch. In an October editorial in the Wall Street Journal, Cisco (CSCO, Fortune 500) CEO John Chambers and Oracle (ORCL, Fortune 500) president Safra Catz contended that a second holiday would help put Americans back to work. But they don't promise that companies would drive all of their repatriated money directly into job-creating investments.

????They acknowledge that companies might pass the money along to shareholders again. But Chambers and Catz argue on top of direct investments, the holiday would spur a new stimulus by boosting markets, thereby increasing consumer confidence. And they say the tax revenue itself could fund $50 billion worth of credits to encourage new hiring -- a sum only possible in the unlikely event companies decide to bring home the entirety of their overseas reserves.

????Lobbyists close to the effort privately admit they've got a lot of work to do, which is one reason they're getting started now. Their benchmark is a failed attempt to attach a similar proposal to the 2009 economic recovery package. A bipartisan team of senators, led by California Democrat Barbara Boxer and Nevada Republican John Ensign, offered a one-year foreign tax holiday as an amendment to that bill, and it gathered only 42 votes.

????Making the case for the amendment on the floor of the Senate at the time, Boxer acknowledged companies that took advantage of the first holiday abused the spirit of the requirements on how the money needed to be spent. But she tried to reassure her colleagues that tighter strings in the latest proposal would prevent a repeat performance. Summing up the feelings of the widespread Democratic opposition, Sen. Byron Dorgan (N.D.) said, "There is no education in the second kick of the mule."

????How the proposal will play two years later is not yet clear. Republican pickups in the Senate, and their takeover of the House, would seem to augur brightened prospects. But will Tea Party-affiliated Republicans embrace a plan that small businesses slam as a giveaway to the biggest corporations? Proponents of the 2009 measure argued it would inject much-needed liquidity into the markets -- a pitch that's lost its urgency as banks have loosened up on lending.

????But can they prevail with a campaign that sells the holiday as a gigantic, privately-funded stimulus to goose the economic recovery? Lobbyists close to the effort agree the companies will need to accept some tough conditions on the use of the money, but tie the strings too tight, and the companies could sour on their own program.

????Another big question mark: Where will the White House come down? Obama's economic team has been cool to the proposal in the past. But with the President scouting for opportunities to burnish his relationship with big business, he could give the idea a fresh look. Either way, he's sure to get an earful about it on Thursday, when he makes an overnight trip to Silicon Valley to meet with tech industry CEOs and try to sell them on his budget.