PDA

View Full Version : How to cut the deficit #2.



Qtec
03-09-2011, 09:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, good news and bad news. The good news is, oil megacorporation ExxonMobil had such a profitable year in 2009, it contributed $15 billion <u>to the world's</u> tax coffers.

The bad news: <u>Not a cent of that went to the IRS.</u>

ExxonMobil, the world's second-largest company, says it actually paid out 47 percent of its profits in taxes, but not to the good ol' capitalist US of A. Says Forbes in a report on all the taxes of the US's top 25 firms (with added emphasis):

Exxon tries to limit the tax pain with the help of 20 wholly owned subsidiaries domiciled in the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands that (legally) shelter the cash flow from operations in the likes of Angola, Azerbaijan and Abu Dhabi. No wonder that of $15 billion in income taxes last year, Exxon paid none of it to Uncle Sam, and has tens of billions in earnings permanently reinvested overseas.

By contrast, the nation's largest corporation, Wal-Mart, paid $7.1 billion globally in taxes, and the lion's share of it—$5.9 billion, or 83 percent—went to the US government.

The most hilarious part is ExxonMobil still finds a way to bitch about its lot in life. The corporation's website includes an issues page on "industry taxes," which threatens that energy innovation is already on the ropes because of excessive taxes, and it will be forever consigned to the dustbin by any new taxes on windfall profits (or, we'd assume, plans like President Obama's to close the offshore earnings loopholes that saved ExxonMobil from the IRS this year). "While our worldwide profits have grown, our worldwide income taxes have grown even more. From 2004 to 2008 our earnings grew by 79 percent, but our income taxes grew by 130 percent," ExxonMobil's flacks wrote, presumably while playing the world's smallest—and most expensive—violin.

Not that this should shock anybody. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>In 2008, the New York Times discovered that one in four of the US's largest corporations regularly pay no income tax to the IRS, and billions are lost.</span> Exxon's not alone: The Forbes article points out that General Electric avoided paying any income tax last year on profits of $10.3 billion. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>In addition to offshore tax shelters, GE had another ace in the hole: It submitted a record-breaking <u>24,000-page tax return</u>.</span> God bless the IRS's auditors; I'd have paid billions not to have to read that thing. </div></div>

Amazing? Unbelievable?


It gets better.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In any case, the original story is wrong in this respect: According to the 10-K, a screenshot of which is provided below, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>ExxonMobil didn't have a zero-tax liability in 2009; <span style="color: #990000">it was actually owed $46 million by the IRS</span></span>, against $15.1 billion in foreign taxes owed. As Jeffers says, that may not be the case; but it's what ExxonMobil told the SEC, its shareholders, and the world. And since the firm refuses to share its actual tax numbers with the public, it's all we have to go by </div></div>

link (http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/04/exxon-mobil-paid-zero-income-tax-offshore%20shelter-wal-mart-general-electric-forbes)

Q

Gayle in MD
03-10-2011, 08:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So, good news and bad news. The good news is, oil megacorporation ExxonMobil had such a profitable year in 2009, it contributed $15 billion <u>to the world's</u> tax coffers.

The bad news: <u>Not a cent of that went to the IRS.</u>

ExxonMobil, the world's second-largest company, says it actually paid out 47 percent of its profits in taxes, but not to the good ol' capitalist US of A. Says Forbes in a report on all the taxes of the US's top 25 firms (with added emphasis):

Exxon tries to limit the tax pain with the help of 20 wholly owned subsidiaries domiciled in the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands that (legally) shelter the cash flow from operations in the likes of Angola, Azerbaijan and Abu Dhabi. No wonder that of $15 billion in income taxes last year, Exxon paid none of it to Uncle Sam, and has tens of billions in earnings permanently reinvested overseas.

By contrast, the nation's largest corporation, Wal-Mart, paid $7.1 billion globally in taxes, and the lion's share of it—$5.9 billion, or 83 percent—went to the US government.

The most hilarious part is ExxonMobil still finds a way to bitch about its lot in life. The corporation's website includes an issues page on "industry taxes," which threatens that energy innovation is already on the ropes because of excessive taxes, and it will be forever consigned to the dustbin by any new taxes on windfall profits (or, we'd assume, plans like President Obama's to close the offshore earnings loopholes that saved ExxonMobil from the IRS this year). "While our worldwide profits have grown, our worldwide income taxes have grown even more. From 2004 to 2008 our earnings grew by 79 percent, but our income taxes grew by 130 percent," ExxonMobil's flacks wrote, presumably while playing the world's smallest—and most expensive—violin.

Not that this should shock anybody. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>In 2008, the New York Times discovered that one in four of the US's largest corporations regularly pay no income tax to the IRS, and billions are lost.</span> Exxon's not alone: The Forbes article points out that General Electric avoided paying any income tax last year on profits of $10.3 billion. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>In addition to offshore tax shelters, GE had another ace in the hole: It submitted a record-breaking <u>24,000-page tax return</u>.</span> God bless the IRS's auditors; I'd have paid billions not to have to read that thing. </div></div>

Amazing? Unbelievable?


It gets better.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In any case, the original story is wrong in this respect: According to the 10-K, a screenshot of which is provided below, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>ExxonMobil didn't have a zero-tax liability in 2009; <span style="color: #990000">it was actually owed $46 million by the IRS</span></span>, against $15.1 billion in foreign taxes owed. As Jeffers says, that may not be the case; but it's what ExxonMobil told the SEC, its shareholders, and the world. And since the firm refuses to share its actual tax numbers with the public, it's all we have to go by </div></div>

link (http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/04/exxon-mobil-paid-zero-income-tax-offshore%20shelter-wal-mart-general-electric-forbes)

Q </div></div>

Thanks for this excellent post, Q. As always, good information which we should all be aware of.

Since we have several tourettes posters on here, much of your good informations, is burried by the filth of the attack dogs.

Glad I saw it. This morning it was nearly at the bottom, after the Peanut Gallery had flooded the forum, with their standard RW BS. I imagine within an hour it will be back at the bottom again, hidden under a boatload of narcissistic, Tourettes toddler poop!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

pooltchr
03-10-2011, 10:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Exxon tries to limit the tax pain

Amazing? Unbelievable?


Q </div></div>

Absolutely! How dare anyone use the tax laws to limit the amount of money they are forced to give to the government??

I have seen the light, Q. I will no longer take the mortgage interest deduction on my taxes. I will no longer deduct what I pay in property taxes when filling out my tax forms.

In fact, this year, I think I will just send the government more money than what I am supposed to pay, just to help offset this travesty!

BTW, will you be sending a check to the US government this year, just because you think everyone should just give money to Washington???


Steve

LWW
03-10-2011, 06:36 PM
I wonder if the cabal would like to post their returns so we can see if they practice what they preach?

JohnnyD
03-10-2011, 06:45 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Exxon tries to limit the tax pain

Amazing? Unbelievable?


Q </div></div>

Absolutely! How dare anyone use the tax laws to limit the amount of money they are forced to give to the government??

I have seen the light, Q. I will no longer take the mortgage interest deduction on my taxes. I will no longer deduct what I pay in property taxes when filling out my tax forms.

In fact, this year, I think I will just send the government more money than what I am supposed to pay, just to help offset this travesty!

BTW, will you be sending a check to the US government this year, just because you think everyone should just give money to Washington???


Steve </div></div>Excellent post

Soflasnapper
03-10-2011, 07:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Exxon tries to limit the tax pain

Amazing? Unbelievable?


Q </div></div>

Absolutely! How dare anyone use the tax laws to limit the amount of money they are forced to give to the government??

I have seen the light, Q. I will no longer take the mortgage interest deduction on my taxes. I will no longer deduct what I pay in property taxes when filling out my tax forms.

In fact, this year, I think I will just send the government more money than what I am supposed to pay, just to help offset this travesty!

BTW, will you be sending a check to the US government this year, just because you think everyone should just give money to Washington???


Steve </div></div>

Nobody expects a company to volunteer paying tax money it can avoid paying, legally.

What's at issue is the state of the law that allows such highly profitable companies so many tax breaks that they can pay so little, or nothing, legally.

Considering that these powerful industries buy the Congress and then themselves write, or have their wholly owned Congress allies write, such loopholes in the tax law, this is the problem for this country.

There were warnings from the past that if the people ever learned that they could get their legislatures to pay them, or subsidize them, it would spell the end of the republic and the economy.

That warning has come true, but not because 'the people' figured it out and took advantage of the country in that way, but because the corporations have gained that level of power and control over the government.

pooltchr
03-10-2011, 07:50 PM
But it is not the fault of Exxon for limiting their tax payments to what is required by law. Some posters here seem to feel that Exxon is terrible for abiding by the law.

If there is any outrage, it should be directed at the lawmakers who write the tax laws. They have made taxes incredibly complicated, and successful companies have hired teams of lawyers to make sure they aren't overpaying.

Simplify the tax laws http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer get rid of the IRS, increase tax revenues, and we won't have to worry about tax deductions or loopholes.

The added benefit of reducing the size and cost of operating the IRS is a bonus!

Steve

Qtec
03-11-2011, 01:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">But it is not the fault of Exxon <u>for limiting their tax payments to what is required by law.</u> Some posters here seem to feel that Exxon is terrible for abiding by the law.


Steve </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Public sector employees are paid by the taxpayers, <u>so when they use collective bargaining,<span style="color: #990000"> legally, as is their right</span> they are trying to get more out of the taxpayers </u></div></div> <span style="color: #990000">Duh........</span>

See the contradiction here?

Q

Qtec
03-11-2011, 01:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There were warnings from the past that <u>if the people ever learned that they could get their legislatures to pay them, or subsidize them, it would spell the end of the republic and the economy.</u>

That warning has come true,<span style='font-size: 11pt'> but not because 'the people' figured it out</span> and took advantage of the country in that way,<span style='font-size: 14pt'> but because the corporations have gained that level of power and control over the government.</span> </div></div>

Tap Tap tap.

Spot on.




Q

LWW
03-11-2011, 04:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's at issue is the state of the law that allows such highly profitable companies so many tax breaks that they can pay so little, or nothing, legally.</div></div>

What's at issue is the truth.

Corporations pay no tax. They never paid tax. They never will pay tax. They cannot be made to pay tax.

The only thing the state can do in this regard is to force, under threat of violence, force the corporation to become a tax collector for the state. Arguing that any company pays tax is patently foolish.

Tax, to a corporation, is no different than a utility bill. That bill is ultimately paid in one of a very few ways:

1 - Increased prices to the end consumer, meaning the customer pays the tax.

2 - Decreased product production cost/quality, meaning the customer pays the tax.

3 - Increased production workload on the same number of employees, meaning the employees pay the tax.

4 - Decreased product development meaning a lesser product is delivered to the end consumer, meaning the customer pays the tax.

5 - Decreased dividends and share prices, meaning the stockholders pay the tax ... which means it's paid by employees, customers, pensioners, butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers.

6 - Reduced wages and benefits to employees, meaning the employee pays the tax.

7 - Moving production out of country, meaning nobody pays the tax.

8 - Closing the business, meaning everyone pays the taxes to support the unemployed workers.

One of the basic flaws of leftist ideology is that the economics of a nation are static and the pieces can be rearranged with no effect on the final results.

pooltchr
03-11-2011, 07:46 AM
This has been well documented, and clearly explained to them before, but they choose to ignore the facts. A corporation exists only on paper. Paper does not pay taxes. There are people who invest money in corporations, and there are people who work for corporations. Those people pay taxes.

When they can't comprehend such a simple concept, how can we expect them to carry on an intelligent conversation about taxes?

Steve

Sev
03-11-2011, 08:18 AM
Well they are about to see a massive tax increase at the market level due to the price of crude spiking.

eg8r
03-11-2011, 08:54 AM
LOL, so your "cut the deficit one" failed miserably and then here you show us your hypocrisy. First you want to tax the heck out of everyone better off than yourself and then you post that they were smarter than you and moved their money offshore so your greedy pathetic self couldn't touch it. Amazing.

eg8r

eg8r
03-11-2011, 08:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Considering that these powerful industries buy the Congress and then themselves write, or have their wholly owned Congress allies write, such loopholes in the tax law, this is the problem for this country.
</div></div>Thought Obama was going to try and slow this down and then he did a 180.

eg8r

LWW
03-11-2011, 03:37 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This has been well documented, and clearly explained to them before, but they choose to ignore the facts. A corporation exists only on paper. Paper does not pay taxes. There are people who invest money in corporations, and there are people who work for corporations. Those people pay taxes.

When they can't comprehend such a simple concept, how can we expect them to carry on an intelligent conversation about taxes?

Steve </div></div>

Excellent post.

Again, I pray that they one day be able to join in intellectual discussions as seekers of truth.

So long as they are no more than conduits for statist propaganda, I cannot take them seriously.

LWW
03-11-2011, 03:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There were warnings from the past that if the people ever learned that they could get their legislatures to pay them, or subsidize them, it would spell the end of the republic and the economy.

That warning has come true, but not because 'the people' figured it out and took advantage of the country in that way, but because the corporations have gained that level of power and control over the government.</div></div>

You know what ... I almost agree.

Where we differ is that the observable reality is that:

1 - The state has figured out that it can tax every class of citizen at confiscatory rates by claiming they are truly taxing "EEEVILLL" corporations.

2 - The large corporations play along because they realize the costs of said "TAX" is simply passed through, and the state protects them in exchange.

3 - For this scam to work the state must:

3A - Promote class warfare, and start at an early age ... and make it pervasive through every avenue of media. As an example, Hollywood today is merely a modern agitprop theater condemning capitalism ... while raking in billions.

3B - Subvert the public education system, which allows them to reinvent history an language. As Orwell predicted, in the past dictatorships had ruled via force ... in the future it would rule because the ability to think independently of the state's teachings would be made impossible. Remember ... he who controls the present controls the past, and he who controls the past controls the future.

3C - An uber-villain must be created so that the enemy has a distinct identity. In the past it's been the Jews or the Chinese or the Mexicans. Now the media has boiled it down to single faces/entities du jour ... witness Reagan, Bush, Palin.

3D - Get 51% of the civilian population dependent upon the state for subsistence.