Thread: Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10

Speechless... thanks for posting that. I think some loopholes and tax subsidies might need to go.

Originally Posted by oufinny

Speechless... thanks for posting that. I think some loopholes and tax subsidies might need to go.

I think that would require the tea party to go first.

My employer was mentioned several times...and is one of the largest taxpayers on the list.

Our tax attorneys must suck, lol

Originally Posted by exphysiologist88

I think that would require the tea party to go first.

Grover Norquist and AFP

* very easy to see how the US grows such large and profitable firms when everything in the deck is stacked in their favor.

the US has had a very big tax avoidance & collection problem which has costs a good 2T in lost revenue to the fed gov in the past decade alone.

Originally Posted by exphysiologist88

I think that would require the tea party to go first.

Maybe but some of the goals of the tea party need to be addressed; many entitlements currently in place are not solvent and doing nothing is not a solution, they will remain insolvent. I can say the same thing about very progressive liberals, anyone on the fringes tends to have ideas that are looked down upon or are flat out not realistic.

I have to say that on an unrelated note, I finally feel like some of the House Republicans are getting it with realizing that revenue increases are necessary. I was happily shocked to see this, hopefully it leads to some smart decisions but I am not holding my breath (Boehner is a one track moron when it comes to taxes).

Originally Posted by LAM

Grover Norquist and AFP

* very easy to see how the US grows such large and profitable firms when everything in the deck is stacked in their favor.

the US has had a very big tax avoidance & collection problem which has costs a good 2T in lost revenue to the fed gov in the past decade alone.

Yeah the fact that guy is basically dictating a whole party in congress has to infuriate people but obviously you don't see anything being done. It is this kind of ridiculousness that makes me a pissed off conservative.

Originally Posted by oufinny

Yeah the fact that guy is basically dictating a whole party in congress has to infuriate people but obviously you don't see anything being done. It is this kind of ridiculousness that makes me a pissed off conservative.

he is directly impeding democracy in the US along with limiting economic functions of government. of course with the US always being on the extreme end of things this is see nowhere else in the world.

Definitely eye openning.

One could also argue that these businesses are tax generators in that they employ people who pay tax. I wonder what the net tax increase (if any) would be should these companies retain less profits (pay more tax) which in turn provides less capital to grow and hire, which means less employement.

Of course the businesses are not doing themselves any favors by hording cash today

I recently listened to an economist in the investment industry that argued, tax incentives should be removed for businesses who hord cash. It makes a lot of sense since the reason they have the extra cash is because they paid less tax to begin with...

Originally Posted by vancouver

One could also argue that these businesses are tax generators in that they employ people who pay tax.

that isn't necessarily true at the federal level depending on the family size of the household and the total household income. males in certain work sectors are seeing wage decreases and/or stagnation while in the degreed healthcare fields are making income progress.

many large US multinational firms are nearing the point where they are just as much harm as good. large firms should never appear to be or in reality be more powerful than the governments that created them. this is major dysfunction

we need to go back to the small firm mentality in regards to many things.

as an engineer most of my white color years were spent working for large MNE's with deep pockets to fuel our huge R&D budgets in telecom in the 90's and 2000's. I tried to do some things at the local level but small firms have no monies for development, at least not many do. I quit my job at the gaming control board because they would not allot me funding to automate the majority of the machine testing as is the standard practice in the 3rd party testing world. I have seen both sides of the coin.

Does Local Firm Ownership Matter?
by David Fleming and Stephan J. Goetz
December 3, 2010
Rural Development Paper no. 48
http://nercrd.psu.edu/publications/rdppapers/rdp48.pdf

Originally Posted by LAM

that isn't necessarily true at the federal level depending on the family size of the household and the total household income. males in certain work sectors are seeing wage decreases and/or stagnation while in the degreed healthcare fields are making income progress.

many large US multinational firms are nearing the point where they are just as much harm as good. large firms should never appear to be or in reality be more powerful than the governments that created them. this is major dysfunction

we need to go back to the small firm mentality in regards to many things.

as an engineer most of my white color years were spent working for large MNE's with deep pockets to fuel our huge R&D budgets in telecom in the 90's and 2000's. I tried to do some things at the local level but small firms have no monies for development, at least not many do. I quit my job at the gaming control board because they would not allot me funding to automate the majority of the machine testing as is the standard practice in the 3rd party testing world. I have seen both sides of the coin.

Does Local Firm Ownership Matter?
by David Fleming and Stephan J. Goetz
December 3, 2010
Rural Development Paper no. 48
http://nercrd.psu.edu/publications/rdppapers/rdp48.pdf

I said one could argue; I would never own an oppinion that could be argued.

I think the more employees a business owner employs the more tax incentive he or she should have. I do like your small business logic. It would be great if we could limit the market share one company can control. It makes for a better democracy.

Originally Posted by vancouver

It would be great if we could limit the market share one company can control. It makes for a better democracy.

What a novel idea. We need an Equalization of Opportunity Bill.

We have to find a way to get more money in the hands of these job creators, 18% is too much, let's cut it to 2% and let the markets sort this thing out.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

We have to find a way to get more money in the hands of these job creators, 18% is too much, let's cut it to 2% and let the markets sort this thing out.

I hear this will help. After reading that article it really, really changed my mind about a lot of companies I otherwised admired. The fact that government/defense contractors get so much money on top of the massive contracts wreaks of foul play throughout our government (congress mainly as they pass the laws). This alone shows that lobbying does almost nothing good for America and even though you get a vote for your congressman, it really equates to nothing in the grand scheme of things. I get more and more disenchanted every day. Why are these facts not presented and asked in debates, I bet most people running for President have no clue.

Originally Posted by oufinny

I hear this will help. After reading that article it really, really changed my mind about a lot of companies I otherwised admired. The fact that government/defense contractors get so much money on top of the massive contracts wreaks of foul play throughout our government (congress mainly as they pass the laws). This alone shows that lobbying does almost nothing good for America and even though you get a vote for your congressman, it really equates to nothing in the grand scheme of things. I get more and more disenchanted every day. Why are these facts not presented and asked in debates, I bet most people running for President have no clue.

The facts are not presented in debates because it would shed light on what is actually going on and the American people wouldn't put up with it anymore. It would ruin the political gravy train.

Originally Posted by Zaphod

The facts are not presented in debates because it would shed light on what is actually going on and the American people wouldn't put up with it anymore. It would ruin the political gravy train.

Of course and since all the media companies are huge corporations, mind you they sponsor and fund the debates, there is no chance they are going to stop the gravy train just like you said.

Originally Posted by oufinny

I hear this will help. After reading that article it really, really changed my mind about a lot of companies I otherwised admired. The fact that government/defense contractors get so much money on top of the massive contracts wreaks of foul play throughout our government (congress mainly as they pass the laws). This alone shows that lobbying does almost nothing good for America and even though you get a vote for your congressman, it really equates to nothing in the grand scheme of things. I get more and more disenchanted every day. Why are these facts not presented and asked in debates, I bet most people running for President have no clue.

That's the crux of the whole thing. On the GOP side we are being sold a bill of goods that is complete bullshit. We are told that companies aren't willing to do business here because of the high tax rate. Now we are being shown what they actually pay and the lie is starting to unfold. Big companies have lobbyists who get those rates down in the teens but Joe Average who decides to open a metal-working shop gets gouged despite having 100% of his company in the U.S. Any tax loopholes should be tied to the %age of your company that is in the U.S. as that generates more revenue via expanding the tax base. You should be rewarded for that, not having the slickest lobbyist.

In addition, removing the Bush tax cuts is not soaking the rich. Starting in 2001 we were sold a bill of goods that lowering tax rates would spur job creation. It didn't and reversing course on failed policy isn't "soaking the rich", it's called smartening up. Now, I am not for just repealing the cuts for a portion of the population, I'm for repealing them all because that's the only way to generate serious revenue.

As for defense, cut the budget in half and move that money toward infrastructure. How many planes that never see action do we need to build?John Stewart made a good point, 1% of the population is coming back from war. They have experience in building countries, why not put them to work building ours?

On the Dems side, entitlements need to go through major reform and we need to look at ways not only to cut waste and fraud, but to get people to take care of themselves. 1 in 3 Americans has type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes. Say what you will, but type 2 diabetes is something you do to yourself, not something you get attacked by and it increases your risk of nearly every disease by huge numbers. People need to start taking care of themselves and this, "I'm free to eat whatever I want" mentality needs to go. I 100% support taxing the shit out of sugar and processed garbage as well as charging much higher healthcare premiums to people who cannot maintain an acceptable weight. I'm not saying charge a 6'0" 220lbs dude a fortune for healthcare, but if baby Huey has enough money to gain 300lbs he can kick in a little more to take care of his ills later down the road since he'll cost much more.

None of this will happen, mind you, but it would put us on the right track.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

That's the crux of the whole thing. On the GOP side we are being sold a bill of goods that is complete bullshit. We are told that companies aren't willing to do business here because of the high tax rate. Now we are being shown what they actually pay and the lie is starting to unfold. Big companies have lobbyists who get those rates down in the teens but Joe Average who decides to open a metal-working shop gets gouged despite having 100% of his company in the U.S. Any tax loopholes should be tied to the %age of your company that is in the U.S. as that generates more revenue via expanding the tax base. You should be rewarded for that, not having the slickest lobbyist.

In addition, removing the Bush tax cuts is not soaking the rich. Starting in 2001 we were sold a bill of goods that lowering tax rates would spur job creation. It didn't and reversing course on failed policy isn't "soaking the rich", it's called smartening up. Now, I am not for just repealing the cuts for a portion of the population, I'm for repealing them all because that's the only way to generate serious revenue.

As for defense, cut the budget in half and move that money toward infrastructure. How many planes that never see action do we need to build?John Stewart made a good point, 1% of the population is coming back from war. They have experience in building countries, why not put them to work building ours?

On the Dems side, entitlements need to go through major reform and we need to look at ways not only to cut waste and fraud, but to get people to take care of themselves. 1 in 3 Americans has type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes. Say what you will, but type 2 diabetes is something you do to yourself, not something you get attacked by and it increases your risk of nearly every disease by huge numbers. People need to start taking care of themselves and this, "I'm free to eat whatever I want" mentality needs to go. I 100% support taxing the shit out of sugar and processed garbage as well as charging much higher healthcare premiums to people who cannot maintain an acceptable weight. I'm not saying charge a 6'0" 220lbs dude a fortune for healthcare, but if baby Huey has enough money to gain 300lbs he can kick in a little more to take care of his ills later down the road since he'll cost much more.

None of this will happen, mind you, but it would put us on the right track.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

People need to start taking care of themselves and this, "I'm free to eat whatever I want" mentality needs to go. I 100% support taxing the shit out of sugar and processed garbage as well as charging much higher healthcare premiums to people who cannot maintain an acceptable weight. I'm not saying charge a 6'0" 220lbs dude a fortune for healthcare, but if baby Huey has enough money to gain 300lbs he can kick in a little more to take care of his ills later down the road since he'll cost much more.

None of this will happen, mind you, but it would put us on the right track.

You mean the obese should be protected as those with other disabilities? I bet you also think they should be forced to pay for two seats on an airline. You must be obesophobic!

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

That's the crux of the whole thing. On the GOP side we are being sold a bill of goods that is complete bullshit. We are told that companies aren't willing to do business here because of the high tax rate. Now we are being shown what they actually pay and the lie is starting to unfold. Big companies have lobbyists who get those rates down in the teens but Joe Average who decides to open a metal-working shop gets gouged despite having 100% of his company in the U.S. Any tax loopholes should be tied to the %age of your company that is in the U.S. as that generates more revenue via expanding the tax base. You should be rewarded for that, not having the slickest lobbyist.

In addition, removing the Bush tax cuts is not soaking the rich. Starting in 2001 we were sold a bill of goods that lowering tax rates would spur job creation. It didn't and reversing course on failed policy isn't "soaking the rich", it's called smartening up. Now, I am not for just repealing the cuts for a portion of the population, I'm for repealing them all because that's the only way to generate serious revenue.

As for defense, cut the budget in half and move that money toward infrastructure. How many planes that never see action do we need to build?John Stewart made a good point, 1% of the population is coming back from war. They have experience in building countries, why not put them to work building ours?

On the Dems side, entitlements need to go through major reform and we need to look at ways not only to cut waste and fraud, but to get people to take care of themselves. 1 in 3 Americans has type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes. Say what you will, but type 2 diabetes is something you do to yourself, not something you get attacked by and it increases your risk of nearly every disease by huge numbers. People need to start taking care of themselves and this, "I'm free to eat whatever I want" mentality needs to go. I 100% support taxing the shit out of sugar and processed garbage as well as charging much higher healthcare premiums to people who cannot maintain an acceptable weight. I'm not saying charge a 6'0" 220lbs dude a fortune for healthcare, but if baby Huey has enough money to gain 300lbs he can kick in a little more to take care of his ills later down the road since he'll cost much more.

None of this will happen, mind you, but it would put us on the right track.

You get four for that one. I am with you on all counts. If we are going to have nationalized healthcare people should pay for the decision to eat poorly and raise healthcare costs. I really don't mind paying $0.50 more on a bottle of booze if it equates to me receiving social security I already pay for or medicare when I retire in 35-40 years. I don't think taxing people into oblivion is a way to go either, like you mention above, but we are on an unsustainable path with all the entitlements and government spending; it has to be paid for somehow and forms of consumption taxes is not a bad idea.

I'm proud of LAM and Dale for pointing fingers.

Should we all just be mindless people and shut the phuq up.

Or like these porn actresses and just shut up and take it!

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

You mean the obese should be protected as those with other disabilities? I bet you also think they should be forced to pay for two seats on an airline. You must be obesophobic!

Of course they should.

Obesity is not a disability, its something people do to themselves and is immediately reversible by starting to take care of yourself. It may take a little willpower, but if you eat what you should be eating its pretty east. Secondly, you pay by the seat on a plane, not per person. You are entering a mode of transportation where standing is not an option, therefore you are purchasing a seat. If you take up 2, you buy 2, no matter if it's with a bunch of your shit or your big fat ass.

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

Of course they should.

Obesity is not a disability, its something people do to themselves and is immediately reversible by starting to take care of yourself. It may take a little willpower, but if you eat what you should be eating its pretty east. Secondly, you pay by the seat on a plane, not per person. You are entering a mode of transportation where standing is not an option, therefore you are purchasing a seat. If you take up 2, you buy 2, no matter if it's with a bunch of your shit or your big fat ass.

Agreed, but but some have a medical condition behind their obesity. Further others can claims depression as a medical condition. Any insurance company that rates a policy is going to face human rights litigation and probably lose. It would take some bold policy makers to pass any kind of reform that would allow insurance companies to charge more.

A better solution would be to tax fast food and any processed foods. Use 100% of the tax revenue to fund healthcare. Since healthy people consume less junk food, their taxes will be lower. Of course now you'll have food corporations sue the government...

Originally Posted by IronAddict

I'm proud of LAM and Dale for pointing fingers.

Should we all just be mindless people and shut the phuq up.

Or like these porn actresses and just shut up and take it!

I try to get the minimal amount of information on economics from tv, less than 10%. most of the things that politicians say on tv in regards to taxes, the US, etc. are outright lies. painfully obvious they are doing the bidding for their corporate masters.

I was crunching some numbers last night and since the 70's the GDP of the US has tripled while our real GDP growth avg 2.7% since 1970 and is well below the world total of 3.5% and the same as the European Union avg at around 2.7%.

with the size of the US workforce as compared to other nations and with our increase in GDP our real GDP growth should be substantially higher.

Originally Posted by vancouver

Agreed, but but some have a medical condition behind their obesity. Further others can claims depression as a medical condition. Any insurance company that rates a policy is going to face human rights litigation and probably lose. It would take some bold policy makers to pass any kind of reform that would allow insurance companies to charge more.

A better solution would be to tax fast food and any processed foods. Use 100% of the tax revenue to fund healthcare. Since healthy people consume less junk food, their taxes will be lower. Of course now you'll have food corporations sue the government...

Depression in most is treated medically with drugs, nothing about lifestyle changes or simple supplementation to improve mood and hormone levels is ever touched upon. People would be shocked what a few dietary changes, some folic acid, SAMe and exercise will do for their depression. Shit, in many mild cases that will eliminate it. If you are a laze fuck that is sad and mad at the world, claim you are depressed and get some prozac but eat to deal with your "sadness", that is not my problem to support.

I am all for human rights and limits on the governments intrusions into our life choices but taxing unhealthy foods does not take away your choice to eat, no different than high taxes on cigarettes and alcohol does. I am not being FORCED to buy it at a higher price, I consciously have to make a choice to purchase it knowing the risks associated with it and the premium you have to pay to eat it. This is not in my eyes out of line or unfair, it is MORE FAIR. How many overweight kids are there who exist off fruit roll ups, carb only meals and a XBox 360 as their sole form of entertainment? Frankly, the amount is staggering and disgusting at the same time. When I was growing up I had to get called to every meal from outside 9 times out of 10 or was busy playing a sport cause my parents saw the value in them. Now parents are too fucking lazy more often than not or petrified by the alarmist news media that if they let their kid outside he/she will be raped and murdered. Really, you run the numbers on that and they are so high it is a real risk? Maybe watch your kids outside instead so they can be active and healthy instead. End rant/

Originally Posted by oufinny

Depression in most is treated medically with drugs, nothing about lifestyle changes or simple supplementation to improve mood and hormone levels is ever touched upon. People would be shocked what a few dietary changes, some folic acid, SAMe and exercise will do for their depression. Shit, in many mild cases that will eliminate it. If you are a laze fuck that is sad and mad at the world, claim you are depressed and get some prozac but eat to deal with your "sadness", that is not my problem to support.

I am all for human rights and limits on the governments intrusions into our life choices but taxing unhealthy foods does not take away your choice to eat, no different than high taxes on cigarettes and alcohol does. I am not being FORCED to buy it at a higher price, I consciously have to make a choice to purchase it knowing the risks associated with it and the premium you have to pay to eat it. This is not in my eyes out of line or unfair, it is MORE FAIR. How many overweight kids are there who exist off fruit roll ups, carb only meals and a XBox 360 as their sole form of entertainment? Frankly, the amount is staggering and disgusting at the same time. When I was growing up I had to get called to every meal from outside 9 times out of 10 or was busy playing a sport cause my parents saw the value in them. Now parents are too fucking lazy more often than not or petrified by the alarmist news media that if they let their kid outside he/she will be raped and murdered. Really, you run the numbers on that and they are so high it is a real risk? Maybe watch your kids outside instead so they can be active and healthy instead. End rant/

I agree with your, but your sentiment is very simplistic coming from your socioeconomic background (I'm only assuming you're middle class). Try to not be depressed when you live in New Orleans after Katrina and even today. Try to not be depressed if you're one of the unemployed who's also lost their home. Further, poor people are fatter than the middle class and especially the rich. Yes I absolutely agree that most fat asses don't have an excuse.

As for taxing, I disagree. In Canada Cigarettes went from a couple dollars to $9 a pack in 10 years from 1990-2000. The smoking rate dropped in that decade more than any other decade. All the research has pointed to tax.

I like the tax solution becasue it would create revenue to offset the cost of healthcare, as long as the government didn't pocket it. I don't think it will prevent people from eating poorly (though there could be some marginal benefit), but at least the consequence to society would be less. My healthcare premiums are high because of the fat asses smoking a pack a day. If I can't stop them from making bad choices, I want them to pay.

What would your plan be...

Originally Posted by oufinny

You get four for that one. I am with you on all counts. If we are going to have nationalized healthcare people should pay for the decision to eat poorly and raise healthcare costs. I really don't mind paying $0.50 more on a bottle of booze if it equates to me receiving social security I already pay for or medicare when I retire in 35-40 years. I don't think taxing people into oblivion is a way to go either, like you mention above, but we are on an unsustainable path with all the entitlements and government spending; it has to be paid for somehow and forms of consumption taxes is not a bad idea.

What is pushing healthcare costs so high isn't how people live, it's the fact that healthcare companies are "for profit." So it's in their best interest to keep "raising" healthcare costs.

Originally Posted by Zaphod

What is pushing healthcare costs so high isn't how people live, it's the fact that healthcare companies are "for profit." So it's in their best interest to keep "raising" healthcare costs.

I'm as against for profit healthcare as the next guy, lifestyle probably contributes 60-80% of healthcare costs. Keep in mind that number is totally made up.

Originally Posted by Zaphod

What is pushing healthcare costs so high isn't how people live, it's the fact that healthcare companies are "for profit." So it's in their best interest to keep "raising" healthcare costs.

the thousands of lobbyists in DC are highly paid to make sure that the status quo remains such.

healthcare costs could easily be reduced by a good 25% those monies could be spent on consumption, savings, etc. which would obviously be more beneficial for all in a consumption based economy which has substantially more economic recession and burst cycles than other other country by far.