Every business everywhere needs a tax break?
So they should get breaks on the royalties they pay to the government as well?
Would BP never make any money without these breaks?
I know the government gets what...20 billion a year in offshore royalties?
CD, I get your point. Big Oil has bought congress to get subsidies they really don't need, just Like Big Agriculture bought congress for the ethanol subsidies. It's all equally wrong.
I'm more curious as to what kind of tax breaks WC is refering to. Abatements? Rebates on receipts? I'm not sure every business needs one. I'm sure they want one, but need? Not so much.
Could be more.
Agreed.CD, I get your point. Big Oil has bought congress to get subsidies they really don't need, just Like ConAgra bought congress for the ethanol subsidies. It's all equally wrong.
Like I have stated previously I agree with business related tax deductions. Beyond that, ALL tax credits, rebates, abatements, etc. are either direct payoffs for bribes by corporations/organizations/unions or attempts by GOVERNMENT AND POLITICIANS to influence otherwise rational behavior by individuals and businesses.
Did the electric vehicle tax credits last year INFLUENCE me to buy electric vehicles? yes. Would I have bought new electric vehicles without the tax credit? No. Did I really NEED two new golf carts? Not really...I already had two old ones that worked. Given that I was gonna either pay $13,000 for 2 new golf carts or send the IRS a check for $13,000 and not even get a "thank you" the decision was pretty ing easy.
Rational and informed people will adjust their behavior given irrational tax incentives.
Last edited by CosmicCowboy; 07-06-2010 at 05:42 PM.
And all subsidies, even well meaning ones like college loans can have unintended negative consequences.
Take Manny is God as an example.
He's not very smart, but he has learned that if he just stays in school he can keep borrowing money to live on and doesn't have to work or produce anything. He can sleep till mid-afternoon every day and then come in here and make snarky comments to people that actually work and produce things.
Achieving anything in life is not the goal. The goal is to stay in school so he can continue to borrow money to live on without working.
Now, since he is stupid, he really can't take anything hard because he can't afford to make bad grades because then he can't stay in school.
But since he only takes cushy classes he will eventually (after stretching it out as long as he possibly can) probably graduate with a piece of paper that says he is a college graduate. It will be a worthless degree and no one will hire him, but it will be a degree.
When he can't find a job (because anything he might possibly actually be capable of doing is beneath him because he is a "college graduate") he will decide to go back to school so he can get back on the student loan program again.
After he has his masters and still can't get a job he will default on his student loans (because it's the racist governments fault he can't get a position that pays him what he thinks he is worth) and will live with his parents forever.
If he had just gone to work at McDonalds out of high school he could be an assistant manager by now!
Last edited by CosmicCowboy; 07-06-2010 at 06:14 PM.
I have said before that businesses should not be taxed.
Think about it. The owners of business get taxed twice. their company gets taxed, and then they get taxed. In the case of companies with share holders, the shareholders get taxed on their profits, after the business is taxed.
My primary reason for not wanting businesses taxed has to do with global compe ion. We would be far more compe ive.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 07-07-2010 at 05:12 AM.
My point is that I have seen both sides of the coin - living in poverty and its causes and effects and ending the cycle of poverty for my family...That's odd. I too grew up poor. I've also worked with poor people (them), extensively both as a teacher and thru the Job Corps. My experiences don't exactly grok yours.
It's not a sword fight, dan.....nobody cares how much we make.
....my experience is that working with the poor too long can really jade you over time - as seems to have happened to you....it can jade you because you fail to understand the poverty mindset and some of the poor decisions they make because you've never had to make life choices like the working poor have to make everyday yourself....your jaded, you have no sympathy for the poor, its a characteristic I've seen in many well intentioned wing-nuts...
Ultimately, maybe Manny finds his niche and ends up more successful than you...after all, the key too success today, unlike your time CC, is working smarter not harder..And all subsidies, even well meaning ones like college loans can have unintended negative consequences.
Ha! Not even the most brain dead neo-con economist has ever suggested NO businesses should ever be taxed.
I'll give you a little preview of America's credit status if that ever happens: D-E-F-A-U-L-T.
You're welcome.
Most businesses pay very little in federal taxes anyway because of write-offs and business expenses...
Which is completely different from eliminating all taxes from businesses. Individuals get away with some pretty ridiculous LEGAL tax evasion strategies too.
But on that point, it's the multinational corporations that usually get away with the most egregious tax evasion. They need to be clamped down on. Obama is trying to do that by stopping some of the more exotic off-shore account stratgies.
..but the majority of two worker family pay their fair share...in fact, family with two professional workers pay the majority of taxes in the U.S., not corporations
Yeah... that un-American self-improvement is for s.
Let's all get factory jobs and watch the corporations ship our work abroad when we have the temerity to ask for a ing dental plan.
That may be the excuse, of even belief. I see it as a means of destroying our freedoms.
Please tell me. What corporation has avoided paying taxes? I suggest you look up their stock symbol and balance sheets and income statements to see just how much they do pay in taxes first.
DMX7...
Exxon was everyone's favorite target for a while. In 2007, they paid $28.9 billion in taxes leaving only $40.6 billion in net income. 2008, $36.5 billion in taxes and $45.2 billion net income. 2009 $15.1 billion in taxes and $19.2 billion net income.
Why should a corporation have to pay 41.6% to 44.75 in taxes, of their taxable income?
I'm jaded.
You don't know about me, dan. Honestly. You couldn't be more wrong, but then again, you'd never admit it if you could ever bring yourself to realize it.
I ing lived the cycle of "poor" decisions and I also managed to make a few pretty astute ones as well....very much like the kids I worked with in Job Corps. It's a mix, dan. Get over yourself.
Taxes are only one driver of cost. I'm not sure it's even a major one after all the write-offs and exemptions/rebates are factored in. Most businesses effective tax rates are lower than mine.
"What corporation has avoided paying taxes"
Goldman Sucks paid not a penny in 2009, IIRC.
That Houston company, Transocean, has a small staff in Switzerland to avoid paying US taxes.
etc, etc, etc. "You Can't Be Serious"
Also, 50K wealthy Americans have secret accounts in Switzerland that Switzerland won't reveal. There are probably 10s of 1000s of other Americans with money stashed in other tax cheat countries.
Umm...net income is income minus expenses and taxes. They did not pay 41.6 or 44.75% percent. According to Securities & Exchange Commission filings, Exxon paid an effective tax rate of 34% to the U.S. government in 2007.
Exxon's latest 10-Q.
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/...3125-10-110539
Net income before income taxes: $12.068 B
Income taxes: $5.493 B
Effective tax rate for this quarter was 45.5%.
On top of that $5.493 B for federal income taxes, Exxon also paid another $8.613 B in other taxes (state, local, foreign). Basically when it's all said and done Exxon ends up paying about twice as much in taxes as they end up with in profits.
Last edited by coyotes_geek; 07-07-2010 at 09:08 AM.
This is predicated on the assumption that Exxon's tax payment reflects it's global operations. It doesn't.
Exxon harbors billions of dollars in it's offshore operations. It also expenses costs to wholly owned subsidiaries. It pays itself to ship oil to itself and takes that cost, with it's markup, as an expense.
The 10Q, while informative, is not an accurate snapshot of what eventually becomes Exxon's tax liability.
Did I say otherwise?
My 2007 number of 41.6% minus the 34% federal leaves 7.6% for state and local taxes, right?
My bad. I thought we were discussing Federal Income Taxes.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
