It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fortune 500 Companies Stash $2.1 Trillion Offshore as US Taxpayers Foot the Bill

page: 1
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 07:49 PM
link   


While millions of Americans are struggling to pay bills and put food on the table, corporations are livin' it up, big time, literally at the expense of overburdened American citizens. These same American's are the ones who pay their taxes and aren't able to use convenient loopholes to hide their money off shore. Of course the tax money ultimately goes directly to the federal reserve to pay for the interest on our debt.



America's Fortune 500 companies are "playing by different rules" when it comes to the federal tax system and, according to a new report out Tuesday, are stashing $2.1 trillion in offshore tax havens—with as much as $620 billion owed to the U.S. taxpayers who are left footing the bill.





The report, Offshore Shell Games 2015: The Use of Offshore Tax Havens by Fortune 500 Companies (pdf), examines the accounting tricks that have enabled the country's most profitable companies to hide their earnings.





"The American multinationals that take advantage of tax havens use our roads, benefit from our education system and large consumer market, and enjoy the security we have here, but are ultimately taking a free ride at the expense of other taxpayers."



Not only that, but in the context of externalities, corporations use our public infrastructure, and pollute our lands, but often get off scott-free.

Source

The Report: Off Shore Shell Games

edit on 7-10-2015 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 07:57 PM
link   
If you don't like it, lower the corporate tax rates so companies repatriate the cash. Like people, corporations are rational. Capital is fluid and we are in a global economy. If another country offers more attractive incentives, then companies will take advantage of the situation.

If you are a shareholder of these companies then you'd want them doing everything possible to increase shareholder value. Shareholders are not necessarily the super rich. If you have a pension or 401k, they are likely invested in these companies and your personal returns are dependent upon said shareholder value.
edit on 7-10-2015 by Edumakated because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 07:58 PM
link   
It's terrible when a government fails so bad it makes people do these things.

It's a real letdown for the people, especially voters who made it all possible.




posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   
And there is a huge surprise. The thing is that people are starting to understand a lot more.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

If you are a shareholder of these companies then you'd want them doing everything possible to increase shareholder value. Shareholders are not necessarily the super rich. If you have a pension or 401k, they are likely invested in these companies and your personal returns are dependent upon said shareholder value.


Not only shareholders and investors.

Think about how many employees would get laid off who have jobs with those companies.




posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Sanctions levied on Iran, Russian oligarchs, bad Regimes, all absconded by US, but not these guys. Thats some haven.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:04 PM
link   
What is amazing is they are able to shift the outrage on poor people collecting welfare.

There is very little outrage among the American people about the weathiest dodging taxes, yet when someone is struggling and gets government assistance, there is quite a bit of outrage amongst the working class.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
If you don't like it, lower the corporate tax rates so companies repatriate the cash. Like people, corporations are rational. Capital is fluid and we are in a global economy. If another country offers more attractive incentives, then companies will take advantage of the situation.

If you are a shareholder of these companies then you'd want them doing everything possible to increase shareholder value. Shareholders are not necessarily the super rich. If you have a pension or 401k, they are likely invested in these companies and your personal returns are dependent upon said shareholder value.


How low should they go? If some corporations are paying 0%, then what's the incentive for them to pay 15% versus 25%?



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Didn't we just do this?

This has been an ongoing trend for a while now.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Does anyone find anything ironic about the number 2.1 trillion?

That's the amount Rumsfeld reported missing on 9/10/2001.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:06 PM
link   
"Fortune 500 Companies Save $2.1 Trillion Offshore as US Taxpayers can't qualify for crony loopholes"

Fixed that for you.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
It's terrible when a government fails so bad it makes people do these things.

It's a real letdown for the people, especially voters who made it all possible.




The media has the "voters" brainwashed.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

In truth, corporate taxes should be zero or close to it. Consumers pay the taxes. Raising taxes on corporations just results in higher prices to consumers.

I don't get why this concept is so hard to understand. People do it in their personal lives all the time. People move because property taxes are too high. The move because state income taxes are too high. They shop consistently for the lowest prices. So why would a corporation be any different in their behavior.

We need to be asking WHY these companies are choosing to stack their cash elsewhere, not complaining about that they are doing it.

The more you tax something, the less you get of it. Liberals seem to understand this concept when it comes to taxing anything they don't like... pollution, guns, etc. Yet, they can't seem to wrap their little peabrains around the same concept when it comes to business income. The more you tax a businesses income, the less of that business's income you are going to get because that business will be incentivized to move their operations or utilize tax avoidance strategies. This is why the laffer curve works. Generally, when you lower taxes, government actually collects more tax revenue because businesses begin to invest and earn more money hence increasing the taxes that government can collect.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Jesus Christ, some folks will defend state sanctioned corporate theft to the very end. Why? I don’t know. Our Founding Fathers had the good sense to warn us about corporate greed. They’d be rolling over in their graves to see what’s come of their struggle.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t like being sh*t on. And that’s exactly what Corporate America is doing to us. To me it sends up a red flag when I read that General Electric paid zero Federal taxes last year. Funny, I paid thousands. Corporations have taken control of the People’s goverment and are turning them into slaves. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out. Trickle down economics is a fairy tale. It never worked and never will. How seriously stupid do you have to be to believe that the elite super-rich are going to share the wealth? No way - No how.

Pray to your Corporate God if you like, but leave me out of it. I think major tax reform is a more realistic solution...



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Economically speaking, you could say that a great gift has been made to foreign countries by not welcoming productive enterprise.

Corporate taxation



The corporate income tax is the most poorly understood of all the major methods by which the U.S. government collects money. Most economists concluded long ago that it is among the least efficient and least defensible taxes. Although they have trouble agreeing on—much less measuring with any precision—who actually bears the burden of the corporate income tax, economists agree that it causes significant distortions in economic behavior. The tax is popular with the person in the street, who believes, incorrectly, that it is paid by corporations. Owners and managers of corporations often assume, just as incorrectly, that the tax is simply passed along to consumers. This very vagueness about who pays the tax accounts for its continued popularity among politicians.




Modern economic opinion is divided on the incidence of the corporate income tax, but few economists today believe its burden falls entirely on the owners of capital. The latest thinking is that, since capital is mobile, it will flow to investments that produce the highest after-tax returns. The corporate income tax raises the cost of capital and reduces after-tax returns in the corporate sector, and thus leads to a migration of capital into noncorporate or taxexempt sectors of the economy. This migration has two effects: it lowers the supply of capital available to corporations, and it causes a reduction in rates of return in the noncorporate sector as capital becomes more plentiful there. The ultimate effect, therefore, is to lower returns for all owners of capital across the economy. One important result of this capital migration is that the burden of the corporate income tax, over time, shifts to workers: with a smaller capital stock to employ, workers are less productive and earn lower real wages. In a 1996 survey, public finance economists were asked to estimate what percentage of the corporate income tax in the United States was ultimately borne by owners of capital. While their answers varied, the average response was 41 percent, meaning that the professional consensus is that more than half the burden is eventually shifted from owners of capital to workers or other groups.




The arguments in favor of leaving the corporate income tax alone are politically compelling. For one thing, the tax has a proven ability to raise revenue, an important consideration for a nation that has run chronic budget deficits. For another, the old aphorism that “an old tax is a good tax” has some validity. Any major change in the tax code changes expectations and imposes new costs and complications during the transition period. But the most compelling rationale for the corporate income tax is the difficulty in assessing its incidence. Since no political constituency sees itself as the primary payer of the tax, none is willing to lobby aggressively for change. Indeed, the art of taxation, as seventeenth-century French administrator Jean-Baptiste Colbert reportedly said, “consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissing.” Judged solely by this standard, the corporate income tax has worked well.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I would have no problem with them doing this if they did not infest our government.
They want to buy the government on one hand to enrich themselves and then stash their gains at the same time
It is quite sickening



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
If you don't like it, lower the corporate tax rates so companies repatriate the cash. Like people, corporations are rational. Capital is fluid and we are in a global economy. If another country offers more attractive incentives, then companies will take advantage of the situation.

If you are a shareholder of these companies then you'd want them doing everything possible to increase shareholder value. Shareholders are not necessarily the super rich. If you have a pension or 401k, they are likely invested in these companies and your personal returns are dependent upon said shareholder value.


well...to be fair, this type of stuff is "allowed" on the premise that Wall Street would provide the Golden Parachute for retirees bought into 401k's

We all know that "trickle down" does't do much trickling.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Welcome to one of the side effects of a world wide economy. Companies like Apple sell a bunch of products around the world and that revenue will not be taxed in the country they are headquartered.
Toyota sells thousands of cars in America and don't pay income tax in the United States.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated



In truth, corporate taxes should be zero or close to it.

So taxpayers should pay for all the infrastructure that these companies use not to mention also paying for subsidies these companies get and they should pay no taxes?


People move because property taxes are too high. The move because state income taxes are too high.

Guess what not everyone can afford to move not to mention also find another job in a different state.


We need to be asking WHY these companies are choosing to stack their cash elsewhere, not complaining about that they are doing it.

The answer to that is easy it's because they are greedy asshats.


The more you tax something, the less you get of it.

History proves otherwise. Back when we were paying 80 to 90% in taxes we actually got better service from the companies here in the states.


Generally, when you lower taxes, government actually collects more tax revenue because businesses begin to invest and earn more money hence increasing the taxes that government can collect.

Ah yes the failure known as trickle down. Give the companies what they want and everyone will get more. We have heard this crap since Reagan was in office and we are still waiting for it to kick in.



posted on Oct, 7 2015 @ 09:18 PM
link   


We need to be asking WHY these companies are choosing to stack their cash elsewhere, not complaining about that they are doing it


Because they're criminals, obviously.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2 >>

log in

join