I don't go into business to fill out paperwork and keep track of ridiculous crap like this. I go into business to generate revenue and make the lives of my customers and others around me better. This kind of law makes my life worse. Perhaps they want fewer businesses to compete with their big corporate donors.
This year, on the IRS tax form, where it says, "I attest under penalty of law that this information is true and correct [or whatever]." Well.. I can't actually sign that because it's impossible for me to know what I can deduct, what I can't, what I should report, etc... If the IRS wants my money, let them come and get it. I just refuse to put up with this crap anymore. It's absurd.
This is why civilizations crumble.
The country tables can be found at: http://www.freetheworld.com/2009/reports/world/EFW2009_ch4.p...
All chapters, including collection methodology can be found: http://www.freetheworld.com/release.html
Methodology is explained in detail on the site.
(Fair amount of "socialist" in that list, too)
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2010/03/taxes-per-person.html
(And partly it's because there's a lot more that goes into the ranking than just tax rate.)
I would gladly move out of the US, if there was someplace significantly better. There isn't right now.
Remember this global networked communication thing we've got going?
Edit: Not to mention that any country that the Internet's light pipes run through will want to control those pipes, pass laws limiting what can be done with them, etc.
The US is still in the top 10 list of countries with the fewest headaches for starting a business. In addition, it's the biggest market for almost everything. If you want to sell in the US (which you almost certainly do) you'll have to establish a business entity there, anyway.
You can't just make a quality OS or a website in English and start selling all over Europe. You can do that in the US and be a market leader in every state.
The EU has no internal borders; it is a single market on a single currency.
And it's far from homogeneous in terms of laws which would apply to you doing business in its various member nations.
From my own past experience of being a business, and of working with businesses, this is largely-unjustified alarmism. You already wanted to 1099 anyone you'd done that much aggregate business with, since it provided an extra form of documentation of your own (deductible!) expenses.
If government really is a net detriment to your business, why don't you move to a place that has no functioning government (like Somalia) and see how good it is to run a business there.
Laws like this do the opposite. They add resistance to independence. There will be people who say, "All this paperwork is a nightmare. It's easier to keep my day job." And they'll make more money in the short term, so this law is counter productive in a capitalist economy.
If capitalism is what made America great, then laws like this are making America not great. The politicians are making lives more difficult for everyone else and that means the business people who make this country great, or have for quite some time, will simply leave.
In a world of free trade, we -- individuals -- are free to do business anywhere. I can easily go to Canada and that's what will start happening if America continues to display this kind of arrogance within the leadership.
Well, for now. If there are people who use the economy as a basis to keep immigrants from flooding in, just imagine the reaction if citizens start flooding out.
This sort of unrelated/obfuscated clause insertion and the 60-vote requirement to defeat a filibuster are two prime examples.
Will there have to be constitutional amendments saying1) bills must be clear and address only one topic, and 2) simple majorities shall always rule, expect in pre-specified cases, and no parliamentary rules shall override simple majority in letter or in spirit.
Random historical tidbit: the Constitution of the Confederacy (for non-Americans: the Southern states which seceded during our civil war) had this requirement built in (one subject per bill, and the subject must be clearly stated). It also had a line-item veto, and placed strict limits on federal spending.
Of course, it also had text permanently establishing slavery...