Reply With Quote
Exxon, and if you can prove 2/3's of businesses.
Who is "they"? Exxon, big businesses, or every corporation in America?
Exxon, and if you can prove 2/3's of businesses.
http://www.grist.org/article/exxon-m...e-tax-in-2009/
I already posted the answer to the second part of your question.
I call bull on this article.
What, no mention of the ridiculous idea behind CDS's? The total value of all the CDS at the end of... 2007, I believe, was more than the amount of money circulating in the known world.
But one unfortunate pattern that has emerged in the last 18 months is to lay all the blame for our difficulties only on the business community and the financial world. This quite ignores the role of Congress in many areas, but most glaringly in forcing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Housing Administration to back loans to people who could not afford them. And not to mention the role of the Securities and Exchange Commission, which in 2004 sanctioned higher levels of leverage for financial firms, from 12 times equity to over 30 times equity.
What about all the rosy predictions from the majority of financial analysts? Is it any wonder that people are pissed off at them?
Look, if I run a business, and I predict nothing but great things for the future, and the people who rely on my business get wiped out when my predictions go wrong, should they just say, "Well, predictions are hard, no worry." Of course not.
What do you think were in those CDS's that made them so toxic?
This article is just this asshole meeting his quota of articles, parroting the Repug/conservative/hate media talking points. Absolutely nothing original.
DMX7 just dodges the truth like Keanu Reeves dodges bullets in The Matrix.
can you show me an example of that 2/3rds please.
You don't want to sniff at that claim too close. He just pulled it straight out of his ass.
Now that's different. Corporations outside the USA don't pay US income taxes, because they are not US corporations. That's why we need a consumption based tax system rather than a p[productivity based tax system.
I wonder what they "2/3rds" becomes when you take out the non-USA companies?
I'll bet all pay taxes, except those who had losses.
That article is an article based on the Huffington post article. the facts are different.
You should really verify facts before spouting other peoples propaganda, making yourself the fool-tool.
From Exxon's 2009 Income Statement, numbers in $millions:
Total Other Income/Expenses Net
Earnings Before Interest And Taxes 35,325
Interest Expense 548
Income Before Tax 34,777
Income Tax Expense 15,119
Minority Interest (378)
Net Income 19,280
If I look at earnings, and taxes paid, they paid 42.8% in state, federal, and other taxes combines. Are you saying none of this was federal taxes?
Previous two years:
From Exxon's 2008 Income Statement:
Total Other Income/Expenses Net
Earnings Before Interest And Taxes 82,423
Interest Expense 673
Income Before Tax 81,750
Income Tax Expense 36,530
Minority Interest (1,647)
Net Income 45,220
From Exxon's 2007 Income Statement:
Total Other Income/Expenses Net
Earnings Before Interest And Taxes 70,874
Interest Expense 400
Income Before Tax 70,474
Income Tax Expense 29,864
Minority Interest (1,005)
Net Income 40,610
2008 has their tax rate at 44.3%.
2007 has their tax rate at 42.1%
All looks normal to me.
You're right. i don't want to sniff that out.
40% of their profits? god that is disgusting!! And the libs who have never had a real job, had to cut paychecks, want to tax more from them.
I'll answer this DarrinS style.
How toxic could CDS's have been viewed if people in the finance industry were trading for them?
I'm sure DarrinS is fully aware of the faulty logical premises on which CDS's worked (or rather, didn't).
Yep.
Then they wonder why the tax base is moving to other countries where they don't get so heavily taxed, effectively reducing the receipts from them to zero for us.
Yes, they do, you dumb .
Did you really think Sony, Lenovo, BMW, Mercedes, Toyota, Porsche, etc. aren't responsible for any taxes here just because they're foreign companies?
You pay taxes for the business you do here, it doesn't matter if you're foreign.
"The report discloses that each year from 1998 to 2005, an average of 68% of the foreign companies doing business in the U.S. paid zero federal income taxes. During the same period 66% of U. S. domestic corporations paid no federal income taxes to the federal government."
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_b...-of-corpo.html
Last edited by DMX7; 07-20-2010 at 05:55 PM.
Well, here's the report.
Comparison of the Reported Tax Liabilities of Foreign- and U.S. Controlled Corporations, 1998-2005
I would like to see an actual example of one of these corporations. Sadly, no example is given.
25% of the largest? Funny, I have never seen a zero tax liability with those I have searched in the past. I would think that one in four would pop up.
Another concern. Why a 2008 report, and not a 2010 report? Could the corrections to the report show past data inaccurate by chance? Could the 2010 report, if it exists, show corporations getting tax payer dollars from the Obama corporate tax credits?
I would like to know a few USA companies to look up and verify. In farther reading, I see that no examples are given. If you read the report, it is based on initial tax return data, only statistically reported by the IRS:
Now considering how the tax system works, many corporations made little or no profit during these years. no profit = no tax liability.To meet these objectives, we analyzed data from the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) Statistics of Income (SOI) samples of corporate tax returns for tax years 1998 through 2005. These SOI samples were based on returns as filed, and did not reflect IRS audit results or any net operating loss carrybacks from future years. The data that we report are estimates based on the SOI sample.
I think if you wish to continue with the 2/3rds aspect of this report, you should find us an example of such a corporation. Show is their annual report reflecting the data.
No, and what you say isn't completely accurate. Does Sony, BMW, Mercedes, and Porsche have physical profitable locations in the states? Levono will pay their taxes through the part that IBM owns of them. Toyota actually has a USA manufacturing facility. They paid 28.5% in their fiscal year ending march 2010, and 36.7% for 2008. For 2009, they got back 11% of a $5.2 billion loss, thanks to corporate tax credits... The democrats just love tax credits!
OK, tell me. What do any of those companies outside of Levono and Toyota have to do with employing people here in the states to pay taxes?
Only two of your six had USA income statements. Sony and Toyota. Sony paid for FY's ending in September, 36.8% for 2009, 27.4% for 2008, and 29.4% for 2007. Porsche is a subsidiary of Volkswagen. Please get your facts strait.
I searched six companies before using the ones you supplied. Of the six I looked up, only LSI didn't pay taxes for a year. For 2007, they paid $11.3 million on a $2,444.5 million loss. Paid $28.7 million on a 559.6 million loss for 2008. After the democrats corporate tax credits, they got back 83.1 million for a $108.9 million loss for 2009.
It sure would be nice to see an example that actually fits what the report says.
Correction...
Mercedes has an income statement under Daimler. How can I look things up when you don't know the parent company name? Anyway, they paid 47.1% in 2007, 39% in 2008, and paid $346 million for a $2.3 billion loss in 2009.
I imagine it would be nice if you didn't have to spend time searching their wild notions they get from huffpos.
Just stop already.
You don't even understand the concept.
Employment, Physical location, etc.??? Nothing to do with whether or not a company is responsible for taxes here.
You're completely off the mark.
Last edited by DMX7; 07-20-2010 at 08:40 PM.
I don't think you understand.
...And considering you're usually wrong, that's a good thing!
If just the products are coming here, then the maker is not responsible for the taxes. The retailer who makes the profit is.
What is it you think I don't understand? I'll bet you're wrong.
Still waiting DarrinS.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
