Return to Transcripts main page

LEGAL VIEW WITH ASHLEIGH BANFIELD

Voting Underway in Wisconsin; Momentum Versus Delegate Math; Tax Reform. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired April 5, 2016 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:16] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Welcome to LEGAL VIEW.

In about 15 minutes, big news. The president expected to speak live at the White House. He is planning to talk about the Treasury Department's brand new steps to crack down on businesses that move their addresses overseas. Why is that big news? Because it costs money, folks. They do it so they can cut down on what they pay in taxes. So how can that change? And it's a big topic on the campaign trail now. So big news coming out of the briefing room. We're going to bring it to you just as soon as the president begins his live address. So stay tuned for that.

And, once again, a state that might not get much attention in a normal election year is about to get, to quote the Republican frontrunner, "interesting." I speak of Wisconsin, where voters today are deciding how to divvy up the 42 Republican delegates and 86 Democratic ones and thereby raise or lower the odds of contested conventions for both of these political parties.

Donald Trump needs some good news after an awful week and he'd prefer at least one fewer rival after the contest tonight. Likewise, Hillary Clinton, who's lost five of the last six Democratic contests, well, she'd prefer to have a win in the column, too. Trump and Clinton also want to have their nominations clinched before the likes of Ted Cruz, John Kasich and Bernie Sanders can lure away those very special delegates in July.

CNN's Jason Carroll joins me now from a polling place in the Milwaukee suburb of Brookfield. Chris Frates is in Green Bay, usually chilly, but no overcoat today, so it's got to be a lovely day for voters. That's great for turnout. Talk a little bit about the mood and what people are saying, Jason, as they head into those polls?

JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, in terms of the turnout, why don't you take a look right behind me here. You can see a line already starting to form here. We've seen a steady stream of folks coming in to cast their vote. Here, as you know, they're expecting record turnout in this state, expecting 40 percent of registered voters to turn out. That would equal some 1.75 million people. If that happens, Ashleigh, it will be the largest turnout since 1980. You know, in terms of a the large voter turnout, the Trump camp seems

to feel as though that would be a benefit for them. As you know, he is trailing behind Ted Cruz in the polls here. Trump speaking out a little earlier today, basically saying that he believes Kasich is the one that's hurting him here in this state more than anything else.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: In all fairness to Kasich, you know, Kasich has, what, one in 32, so he's been in 32 - I think he has 32 losses and one victory that had I spent another day in Ohio, I would have won. But I wanted to make sure I won Florida, so I stayed.

No, but we won pretty - you know, I mean, it was pretty close. So he's won 32. I don't think he should be staying. You know, if you think of it, Jeb did better than him, right? Marco did much better than him. Many people did much better than him and they got out. He's just a stubborn guy, so let him - let him play the game.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARROLL: As you know, Kasich showing no signs of dropping out anytime soon. In terms of what's going to be happening here later on tonight, Trump telling crowds over the weekend, Ashleigh, expect a surprise. Despite his bad week last week, despite Kasich still being in the race, he says, suspect - expect a surprise tonight. He says despite what the polls are showing, he still says he can win here in the state of Wisconsin.

Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: I love surprises. So does television. That's great. Jason, thank you for that. Keep an eye on things for us. Jason's going to bring us the results and the news and the mood all day long.

Chris Frates also at a polling place, to Green Bay. All right, you cheese head, bring me the - bring me the mood where you are.

CHRIS FRATES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I'll tell you, Ashleigh, both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have made the case that if there was good turnout, then they would do well. So I have good news for both their campaigns, that turnout is expected to be high across this state and that's what we're seeing here at this polling place. More than 300 people have come through the door since 7:00 a.m. and they usually get about 1,600 people in.

And I've been talking to a lot of Democrats. Those Democrats are going for Bernie Sanders. So that's good news for Sanders. I also talked to one Republican who switched over, because this is an open primary in Wisconsin, and voted for Bernie Sanders just because he was a never Trump guy. So Sanders, of course, trying to run up the score here in Wisconsin and get as many of those 86 delegates as possible.

Hillary Clinton, of course, has been managing expectations here, trying to lower those expectations in Wisconsin throughout the week. And that's largely because, you know, this is a better playing field for Bernie Sanders. It's a majority white state. He usually does better there. And, in fact, Hillary Clinton was campaigning in New York yesterday ahead of the big primary here and she even went on "The View" today. She's not here in Wisconsin. But let's take a listen to what she had to say on "The View."

[12:05:02] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I just don't understand what he thinks is the role of somebody running for president. I don't think it is to scapegoat people, to buy people, engage in this kind of, you know, prejudice and paranoia. And so it's not only women and we who should be concerned, it's everybody because of the way that he conducts himself.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FRATES: So Hillary Clinton sounding like a general election candidate there talking about the race as a whole. But she's very much focused on New York now. Bernie Sanders expected to do well here in Wisconsin. But he's trying to offset Hillary Clinton in New York and she leads Bernie Sanders by double-digits there. In fact, she was campaigning there, as I mentioned. Bernie Sanders looking for the upset.

And the reason why is simple math. About 250 delegates are up for grabs in New York. That's second only to California. And, remember, Bernie Sanders is lagging Hillary Clinton by about 240 delegates. And while there's no winner-take-all states in the Democratic primary, proportionally Bernie Sanders needs to do well. He needs 75 percent of the pledged delegates remaining to clinch that nomination. Hillary Clinton needs just 35 percent of them.

So this New York debate will be huge. Hillary Clinton trying to keep her firewall intact with a big win in her adopted home state. And, of course, we have the huge CNN debate on April 14th, and that's the first time that Sanders and Clinton will go mano a mano in more than a month, Leslie. Ashleigh, I'm sorry.

BANFIELD: Oh, very exciting. It's OK. You know, my mom has called me Leslie before, too. That's crazy, right?

Jason Carroll, thank you. And also, Chris Frates, thank you very much. Nice to see you out and about.

I want to bring in my panel now. Scottie Nell Hughes is the commentator for USA Radio Networks and a supporter of Donald Trump, Margaret Hoover is a Republican consultant and CNN political commentator, Van Jones is a Democratic activist, author and CNN political commentator. He's spent some days in the White House himself. And Maria Cardona is a CNN political commentator and Hillary Clinton supporter. Her firm does work for a pro-Clinton super PAC.

All right, I've put it all on the table. All the disclosures. All the bios. Now let's get to the hard stuff. I'm going to start with you, Maria. You just heard Chris Frates talking about that firewall that Hillary Clinton would like Wisconsin to be. There's about five points at the last count that separated Sanders and Clinton. And with Sanders going in, six out of seven he's won out of the last contests. Seven out of eight would be damaging to Hillary in New York, wouldn't it?

MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I don't think it would be damaging. It certainly is a lot funner to win than to lose for sure.

BANFIELD: I'll say.

CARDONA: But Wisconsin has always been a state that is tailor made for somebody like Bernie Sanders. They have a very proud stances on liberal issues and liberalism and being very progressive. It's also a very white state. And a lot of college students. And as we have seen in past primaries and especially caucuses, this is an electorate that is very favorable to Bernie Sanders.

Having said that, she certainly has been campaigning and will continue to campaign there and focus on her message there of being the one to fight for middle-class voters and keeping the country safe until the very last vote is cast. And the thing about Wisconsin, as is in all caucuses and primaries for Democrats, is that it's proportional. So she doesn't have to win the state in order to continue -

BANFIELD: Right.

CARDONA: To add to her count of delegates, which at this point is becoming insurmountable for Bernie Sanders.

BANFIELD: And speaking of, you know, racking up the delegates without maybe winning the state, Van, to you, that that delegate math is still, as Maria just said, it's not in, you know, Sanders' court right now. And so now he seems to have done something that, you know, he didn't appreciate several weeks ago, and that was going after super delegates. So how does he - how does he sort of rationalize doing that and how can he be called out for that?

VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, well, you know, it's interesting because, first of all, in a normal election, a normal moment, Sanders would be out. But somehow we're in the middle of a second Sanders surge. He raised $41 - $42 - $43 million last month. And, you know, that seems to be an unending source of support for him. And so he's trying to keep his hopes live.

The reality is that when you've got to get 75 percent of everything left on the earned delegate table, that's probably not possible. And so suddenly the super delegates that were the dirty word a month ago are now his possible salvation.

How does he make the argument? He says, listen, if I keep winning and winning and winning and Hillary Clinton is limping and limping and it looks like she cannot be beat the Republican nominee, maybe the super delegates come around to me. It's an odd argument for him to be making, but it's a way for him to point out that he has the momentum, at least at this point, and that momentum should count for something.

BANFIELD: Yes. Well, but, you know, Michigan was a surprise for Hillary, but Illinois was a sweeter surprise for her, I think, after that. Let me ask you, Margaret - or, Scottie, if I could throw this one to

you. Last night Anderson Cooper was talking with John Kasich about what's been going on between your guy, Donald Trump, and John Kasich. Donald Trump has made no secret he wants him out. He says he's taking Trump's votes. That's usually what you do in an election, you try to take votes away from your opponent. But Donald Trump doesn't like it. And so Anderson asked John Kasich about that last night and here's what he had to say.

[12:10:20] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. JOHN KASICH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If you come after me, I'm not going to sit there and take it, Anderson. I'm not some kind of a dummy. I know how to fight back. By I would prefer to be talking about creating jobs, future for our kids.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: So, Scottie, John Kasich is not having any of it. And he continues to be a thorn in the side of Donald Trump's effort to make it to the magical number. How is Donald Trump going to deal with that? Instead of just saying he needs to get out, does he have any other strategy to try to fight back?

SCOTTIE NELL HUGHES, DONALD TRUMP SUPPORTER: Well, I think you kind of just ignore John Kasich until you get to the convention because that is exactly the -

BANFIELD: But he's not.

HUGHES: Well, because if you're looking at it, right, and John Kasich's only in this to go to the convention in hope that they repeal that eight-state winning law, the rule 40, the wonderful rule 40 of the RNC. And that's the only reason why he's staying in this race. He knows he has no chance at all of winning the Republican nomination by the 1,237 magic number. And so he's just literally in it to be a pain in the side and get to Ohio - get to Cleveland and that when everything goes into the brouhaha chaos, that he can sit there and say, hey, I'm the last man standing, you have to go with me.

Now, he's the -

BANFIELD: And you've got to give it to him, right, Scottie, you've got to give it to him because it's politics and it is the way the game is played. It's not cheating. It's not lying.

HUGHES: Nope.

BANFIELD: It's not scamming. It is the way it works. So that's why I ask you, what's Donald going to do about that?

HUGHES: Well, I think you kind of just ignore it. Just kind of like we've ignored him this entire election season and hope that he - Mr. Trump, and we're still optimistic, that he will get this 1,237 by the time we get to the convention. Here's the problem with Kasich in a state like Wisconsin that is known

for its independent voters. In 2012, 51 percent actually went for the GOP and Obama lost those independent voters. And this is an open primary state with same-day voter registration and people can crossover and vote. That's where John Kasich, that thorn in that side, might grow into a really stinky rose for someone like a Donald Trump.

BANFIELD: Yes.

HUGHES: When people say they don't want to vote for Trump, so they go for Kasich.

BANFIELD: Yes, that - I mean that open primary is usually (ph) very good for - for your guy, for Donald Trump. He does well in open primaries.

Margaret, I want you to see a quick sound bite and it has to be very quick because the entire speech was only, I think, 90 seconds of Melania Trump. She was out on the campaign stump for her husband yesterday. And she talked a little bit about that notion of him being tough and fighting. Have a listen to what she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MELANIA TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP'S WIFE: As you may know by now, when you attack him, he will punch back ten times harder.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: And that was just one of the languages that that young lady knows. She speaks five languages. She's no dummy. She did decide to read a very quick speech, but I'm wondering, Margaret, if this is now a new tack for Donald Trump because he has a 73 percent unfavorable rating among women right now. And she's lovely. I mean it - you can show whatever picture you want of her naked, but she's a lovely person and she's a kind person and she speaks well and that can only be good for him.

MARGARET HOOVER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I thought, though, a tacit acknowledgment on behalf of the Trump forces and Donald Trump himself that he recognizes that he's had a very dismal week with women and so he brought out, you know, his chief female surrogate and chief female spokesperson to make that case for him. And it's much softer coming from Melania saying he's going to hit you ten times harder back than it is from Donald Trump. I mean that language incites riots when Donald Trump says it. When Melania says it, you call her nice and lovely. And by every measure she is lovely. It doesn't take away from the fact that -

BANFIELD: Because she sounds like Zsa Zsa Gabor. You can't help liking that, you know? Darling.

HOOVER: (INAUDIBLE) you're - you're - what's interesting, though, Ashleigh, is that she actually hasn't - Donald Trump has not really suffered with the female Republican vote nearly as drastically as we're seeing with the general election vote. I mean with female Republican primary voters, especially in Wisconsin, his numbers have come down about 10 percent over the last three months, but his missteps over the last couple of weeks really don't hurt him with female Republican voters nearly as much. It - it is - it is the general election where this really sets up a damming, damming dynamic.

BANFIELD: So just her -

HOOVER: Mitt Romney won 44 percent of the female vote in the general election and that wasn't enough.

BANFIELD: Just for fun and games, I want to go -

HOOVER: (INAUDIBLE) has to win more.

BANFIELD: I want to go around this entire wheel with basically the one word answer from all of you. I'll start with you, Margaret. Who is better out on the campaign trail for Donald Trump, his wife, Melania, or his daughter, Ivanka?

HOOVER: Well, I - I think - I think they've both very good.

BANFIELD: One word answer.

HOOVER: I think Ivanka's very good. I say Ivanka.

BANFIELD: Scottie?

HUGHES: Yes, I'm sorry, both. You can't - both of them bring great qualities to it.

BANFIELD: Van?

HUGHES: So I have to be fair and balanced.

BANFIELD: Van?

JONES: I think Ivanka just because everybody's seen her grow up and she's so extraordinary as a business person.

[12:15:01] BANFIELD: She really is. Maria?

CARDONA: Ivanka. I agree.

BANFIELD: Yes. I think she's terrific. Just beautifully spoken. There are a lot of people out there on the Twitter who say that Ivanka should be running and I (INAUDIBLE) -

CARDONA: And she's a new mom.

HUGHES: She might one day.

BANFIELD: A brand new mom as well.

JONES: I'll tell you, as much - as much as I criticize Donald Trump, I don't think anybody could raise a better set of kids than he's raised.

BANFIELD: Yes.

JONES: As much - I don't like him, but his kids are amazing.

BANFIELD: You know, I was just speaking to a -

CARDONA: Isn't that interesting.

BANFIELD: Sixty-something Florida voter, a woman in Florida this morning who said, I love the way he's raised his kids.

Let's go live to the president, folks.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: (INAUDIBLE) this for a hot second.

As we learned last week, America's economy added 250,000 jobs in March. That means that our business has extended the longest streak of private sector job creation on record. Seventy-three straighten months, 14.4 million new jobs, unemployment about half of what it was six years ago. This progress is due directly to the grit and determination and hard work and the fundamental optimism of the American people.

You know, as I travel around the country, what always stands out is the fact that the overwhelming majority of folks work hard and they play by the rules. And they deserve to see their hard work rewarded. They also deserve to know that big corporations aren't playing by a different set of rules. That the wealthiest among us aren't able to game the system. That's why I've been pushing for years to eliminate some of the injustices in our tax system. So I am very pleased that the Treasury Department has taken new action to prevent more corporations from taking advantage of one of the most insidious tax loopholes out there in fleeing the country just to get out of paying their taxes.

This got some attention in the business press yesterday, but I wanted to make sure that we highlighted the importance of the Treasury's action and why it did what it did. This directly goes at what's called corporate inversions. They are not new. Simply put, in layman's terms, it's when big corporations acquire small companies and then change their address to another country on paper in order to get out of paying their fair share of taxes here at home.

As a practical matter, they keep most of their actual business here in the United States because they benefit from American infrastructure and technology and rule of law. They benefit from our research and our development and our patents. They benefit from American workers, who are best in the world, but they effectively renounce their citizenship. They declare that they're based somewhere else, thereby getting all the rewards of being an American company without fulfilling the responsibilities to pay their taxes the way everybody else is supposed to pay them.

When companies exploit loopholes like this, it makes it harder to invest in the things that are going to keep America's economy going strong for future generations. It sticks the rest of us with the tab and it makes hard-working Americans feel like the deck is stacked against them.

So this is something that I've been pushing for a long time. Since I became president, we've made our tax code fairer and we've taken steps to make sure our tax laws are actually enforced, including leading efforts to crack down on off shore evasion.

I will say that it gets tougher sometimes when the IRS is starved for resources and squeezed by the congressional appropriation process so that there are not enough people to actually pay attention to what all the lawyers and accountants are doing all the time. But we have continued to emphasize the importance of basic tax enforcement.

In the news over the last couple of days, we've had another reminder in this big dump of data coming out of Panama that tax avoidance is a big, global problem. It's not unique to other countries because, frankly, there are folks here in America who are taking advantage of the same stuff. A lot of it's legal, but that's exactly the problem. It's not that they're breaking the laws, it's that the laws are so poorly designed that they allow people, if they've got enough lawyers and enough accountants, to wiggling out of responsibilities that ordinary citizens are having to abide by.

Here in the United States, there are loopholes that only wealthy individuals and powerful corporations have access to. They have access to off-shore accounts. And they are gaming the system. Middle-class families are not in the same position to do this. In fact, a lot of these loopholes come at the expense of middle-class families because that lost revenue has to be made up somewhere.

[12:19:57] Alternatively it means that we're not investing as much as we should in schools, in making college more affordable, in putting people back to work, rebuilding our roads, our bridges, our infrastructure, creating more opportunities for our children.

So this is important stuff. And these new actions by the Treasury Department build on steps that we've already taken to make the system fairer. But I want to be clear, while the Treasury Department actions will make it more difficult and less lucrative for companies to exploit this particular corporate inversions loophole, only Congress can close it for good and only Congress can make sure that all the other loopholes that are being taken advantage of are closed.

I've often said the best way to end this kind of irresponsible behavior is with tax reform that lowers the corporate tax rate, closes wasteful loopholes, simplifies the tax code for everybody. In recent years I've put forward plans repeatedly that would make our tax system more competitive for all businesses, including small businesses. So far, Republicans in Congress have yet to act. My hope is that they start getting serious about it.

When politicians perpetuate a system that favors the wealthy at the expense of the middle class, it's not surprising that people feel like they can't get ahead. It's not surprising that often times it may produce politics that is directed at that frustration. Rather than doubling down on policies that let a few big corporations or the wealthiest among us play by their own rules, we should keep building an economy where everybody has a fair shot and everybody plays by the same rules. Rather than protect wasteful tax loopholes for the few at the top, we should be investing more in things like education and job creation and job training that we know grow the economy for everybody. And rather than lock in tax breaks for millionaires, or make it harder to actually enforce existing laws, let's give tax breaks to help working families pay for child care, or for college, and let's stop rewarding companies that are shipping jobs overseas and profit overseas and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here at home and are good corporate citizens.

That's how we're going to build America together. That's how we battled back from this great recession. That's the story of these past seven years. And that can be the story for the next several decades if we make the right decisions right now. And so I hope this topic ends up being introduced into the broader political debate that we're going to be having leading up to election season.

OK? And with that, I turn it over to Mr. Josh Earnest.

QUESTION: A question about the Panama papers, Mr. President.

OBAMA: Yes.

QUESTION: Given that the release of these millions of pages of financial information -

OBAMA: Right.

QUESTION: Are you concerned that that reflects on the ability of the Treasury Department to sort of be able to see all the financial transactions across the globe, (INAUDIBLE), and would that not suggest that the sanctions regime that you put in place in a bunch of places around the world might not be as strong as you think it is?

OBAMA: Well, we know the sanctions regime is strong because Iran wouldn't have, for example, cut a deal to end their nuclear program in the absence of strong actions enforcement. But there is no doubt that the problem of global tax avoidance generally is a huge problem. It's been brought up in G-7 meetings. It's been brought up in G-20 meetings. There has been some progress made in coordinating between tax authorities in different countries so that we can make sure that we're catching some of the most egregious examples.

But as I said before, one of the big problems that we have, Michael, is that a lot of this stuff is legal, not illegal. And unless the United States and other countries lead by example in closing some of these loopholes and provisions, then in many cases you can trace what's taking place but you can't stop it. And there's always going to be some illicit movement of funds around the world, but we shouldn't make it easy. We shouldn't make it legal to engage in transactions just to avoid taxes.

And that's why I think it is important that the Treasury acted on something that's different from what happened in Panama. The corporate inversions issue is, you know, financial transaction that is brokered among major Fortune 500 companies to avoid paying taxes. But the basic principle of us making sure that everybody's paying their fair share and that we don't just have a few people who are able to take advantage of tax provisions, that's something that we really have to pay attention to because, as I said, this is all net outflows of money that could be spent on the pressing needs here in the United States. And the volume that you start seeing when you combine legal tax avoidance with illicit tax avoidance or, you know, some of the activities that we're seeing, you know, this is not just billions of dollars, it's not even just hundreds of billions of dollars. Estimates are this maybe be trillions of dollars worldwide and it could make a big difference in terms of what we can do here.

[12:25:45] I'm going to take one more question and then I'm going to turn it over to Josh. One last one. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Mr. President, the Republican frontrunner today outlined his plan -

OBAMA: Oh, no, it's a -

QUESTION: To pay for that wall along the border. (INAUDIBLE) barring undocumented immigrants for - in the U.S. from sending money back home. What would be the real implication of his plan and are his foreign policy proposals already doing damage to U.S. relations abroad?

OBAMA: The answer to the latter question is yes. I think that I have been very clear earlier that I am getting questions constantly from foreign leaders about some of the wackier suggestions that are being made. I do have to emphasize that it's not just Mr. Trump's proposals. I mean you're also hearing concerns about Mr. Cruz's proposals, which, in some ways, are just as draconian when it comes to immigration, for example.

The implications with respect to ending remittances, many of which, by the way, are from legal immigrants and from individuals who are sending money back to their families, are enormous. First of all, they're impractical. We just talked about the difficulties of trying to enforce huge outflows of capital. The notion that we're going to track every Western Union, you know, bit of money that's being sent to Mexico, you know, good luck with that.

Then we've got the issue of the implications for the Mexican economy, which, in turn, if it's collapsing, actually sends more immigrants north because they can't find jobs back in Mexico. But this is just one more example of something that is not thought through and is primarily put forward for political consumption.

And as I've tried to emphasize throughout, we've got serious problems here. We've got big issues around the world. People expect the president of the United States and the elected officials in this country to treat these problems seriously, to put forward policies that have been examined, analyzed, are effective, where unintended consequences are taken into account. They don't expect half-baked notions coming out of the White House. We can't afford that. All right.

Turn it over to Josh. Thank you, guys.

BANFIELD: Half-baked notion coming out of the White House. That is exactly how the president just described Donald Trump, Republican candidate for president, and his most recent memo today on how to get Mexico to pay for the wall. How to get Mexico to pay for the wall, stop allowing anyone here to send any kind of money back home. That's effectively what he says will do it. If Mexico pays for the wall, the flow of money continues going south. And what the president said was, the unintended consequences of that might be, you collapsed the Mexican economy, and guess how many more immigrants are going to come north for jobs.

But let's go back to the first issue that the president was speaking of, and that's the corporate inversions. That's a really fancy word for amscraying (ph), Alison Kosik, one of our business correspondents. She knows a lot about this topic. Amscraying the U.S. to get a tax leg up. But I don't know that a lot of people understand exactly how it works because, as an individual, it doesn't matter where you move in the U.S., you still pay U.S., you know, income tax. So how do you benefit as a corporation?

ALISON KOSIK, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: OK, so if you're a corporation and you move your headquarters overseas - I'm going to put up a chart and show you. Let's say you move your company to Ireland and you see the tax rate there is 12.5 percent as opposed to what you'd be taxed on for - in the U.S. That's 35 percent.

But let me go a step further and say, let's go - let's go ahead and say that the company makes a profit, let's say in England, where the tax rate is 21 percent. So that means if the company made $100 profit in England, it would be taxed 21 percent. That's $21. But if the company wants to bring that profit back to the United States, well, guess what, it has to pay the difference of the 21 percent tax rate and the 35 percent tax rate here in the U.S. So that equals $14. That $14 goes to the IRS. And that means the company essentially is paying a 35 percent tax rate.

[12:30:05] The U.S. has what's known as a worldwide corporate tax system. Something that other countries don't have. They have what's known as a territorial tax - income tax system where