Extend Bush Tax credits. Why ?

Can't wait to hear why people think the tax credits should be extended.
Do companys need more than 1 trillion dollars in cash to start investing in new jobs ?

It's not about money and profit, it's about owning everything and controlling the people.



finance.yahoo.com...


On Tuesday October 26, 2010, 8:02 pm EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. companies are hoarding almost $1 trillion in cash but are unlikely to spend on expanding their business and hiring new employees due to continuing uncertainty about the strength of the economy, Moody's Investors Service said on Tuesday.

As the economy stabilizes companies are also more likely to spend on share repurchases and mergers and acquisitions, Moody's added.

Companies cut costs, reduced investment in plants and equipment and downsized operations in order to boost cash holdings during the recession. As the corporate bond market reopened many companies also boosted cash levels by selling debt and refinancing near-term debt maturities.

Nonfinancial U.S. companies are sitting on $943 billion of cash and short-term investments, as of mid-year 2010, compared with $775 billion at the end of 2008, Moody's said. This would be enough to cover a year's worth of capital spending and dividends and still have $121 billion left over, it said.

However, "we believe companies are looking for greater certainty about the economy and signs of a permanent increase in sales before they let go of their cash hoards, which they suffered so much to build," Moody's said in a report.

"Given low demand and capacity utilization within certain industries, companies are wary of investing their cash in new capacity and adding workers, thereby doing little to abbreviate the jobless recovery," it added.

Around one quarter of the cash is held overseas and is unlikely to be repatriated to the United States, Moody's said.

Meanwhile only 20 companies hold a large portion of corporate cash balances, with $346 billion on their balance sheets, or 37 percent of the total, Moody's said.

Cisco Systems (NasdaqGS:CSCO - News) has the largest cash balance, at $39.86 billion, while Microsoft (NasdaqGS:MSFT - News) is second with $36.79 billion, Moody's said. Google (NasdaqGS:GOOG - News) has the third-largest balance with $30.06 billion, followed by Oracle (NasdaqGS:ORCL - News) with $23.64 billion and Ford Motor Co (NYSE:F - News) at $21.89 billion.

Technology companies held the most cash as a sector, at $207 billion, followed by pharmaceuticals with $124 billion, energy at $105 billion, and consumer products with $101 billion, Moody's said.

I make 60,000 a year in California. Not a lot in California, if tax cuts expire I will lose another $150 more a month going to taxes. As of right now I only have $300 for food and spending a month after bills and i can work with that. your going to see a lot more people go upside down if they expire. That’s why you extend the tax cuts…

do you pay taxes? Why would you want $150 less a month?

reply to post by camaro68ss


I was born and raised in Calif. I was making 90 thousand plus when I left in 1999, and I was raising 4 kids alone after my wife died in 1994. Yes, I pay taxes, and I learned how to streach a buck.
And if you or anyone else thinks, the city, county , state , or federal government is NOT going to raise the price of licences, fee's and taxes on the common people, you live in a dream world . Weather the Bush tax breaks stay or go the common people are going to pay more. The people pay the bulk of the tax load and the wealthy get the bulk of the write offs and the Bail outs. Do you think the 4 billion saved with the Bush tax credits went to the people, it went back to the wealthy. And the people have to make up the difference, with higher licences, fee's and taxes.

Agreed-

Throughout the past weeks it seems some of the top analysts when it comes to fiscal "psychology" seem to think the reason these cuts do not work is that truly they are mostly not added back to industry-rather, they are tacked on to someone else's "wealth", really more of a savings in a bank account than rather potential investment capital, and not injected. Everyone wants to cut deficits on either party line, its just the pick and choose of it all is where we disagree.

I have not seen one candidate or talking head tell me where we're going to make up the $$$ if we extend them. They want them extended because they believe they finance industrial growth etc., and thats pretty much wrong but still their opinion, but just like anything else it has a price.

That money could be far better used in our infastructure IMHO. Its crumbling and a private sector is not going to fix this for us, it is one of those things which is better left to govt. overhaul.

reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE


taxcuts means the government doesnt take more of what you have already earned.

that money doesnt go back to them the government is not paying them

that money never leaves them and you

it means that the government cant rob more from you that you have earned.

it means if you have more of what you earned you can either save it or spend on what you want.

These wars in the Middle East won't pay for themselves.

I mean seriously people. If we were to, you know, seriously consider ending our little adventures over there, then maybe we can start thinking about tax breaks for everyone.

You can't have it both ways, i'm sorry.

They already tried to extend the tax cuts for most people. It was blocked by concern for the rich. And yes, you are rich in this country if you make over $200k a year. The average home price is under $200k and most people will work their entire lives for less than $900k.

It's interesting that there are so many people who have a problem with their tax dollars going to someone else's healthcare or welfare... while we all foot the bill to continue war crimes in the middle east.

My vote is for no more income tax.

Originally posted by spiritualzombie
It's interesting that there are so many people who have a problem with their tax dollars going to someone else's healthcare or welfare... while we all foot the bill to continue war crimes in the middle east.

My vote is for no more income tax.

Both are unconstitutional, why would any intelligent person support either of them?

reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE


Why should government steal more money from everyone?

They have never proven themselves to be responsible when it comes to spending our money.

reply to post by BigTimeCheater


It's really sad most people cannot see past the nose on their own face !

1. The Bush tax credit is the government giving the wealthy a prime rib dinner and throwing the people a bone .
2. The Bush tax credit eliminated billions from the governments (feeding trough) revenue.
3. The Bush tax credit saved individules maybe 2 thousand a year, and saved the wealthy100,000's thousands
to millions a year.
4. Who do you think is going to is going to make up for the lost revenue ?
5. The City's, the Countys, the States, and the Federal Governments ARE going to make up for their losses,
weather The Bush tax credit stays in affect or not, and they are NOT going to burden the wealthy with
higher taxes.

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
reply to post by BigTimeCheater

 

It's really sad most people cannot see past the nose on their own face !

1. The Bush tax credit is the government giving the wealthy a prime rib dinner and throwing the people a bone .
2. The Bush tax credit eliminated billions from the governments (feeding trough) revenue.
3. The Bush tax credit saved individules maybe 2 thousand a year, and saved the wealthy100,000's thousands
to millions a year.
4. Who do you think is going to is going to make up for the lost revenue ?
5. The City's, the Countys, the States, and the Federal Governments ARE going to make up for their losses,
weather The Bush tax credit stays in affect or not, and they are NOT going to burden the wealthy with
higher taxes.

Not trying to sound mean bbut your talking like a government person "4. Who do you think is going to is going to make up for the lost revenue ?" how about they spend less and cut the fat. Goverment just keeps growing and growing.

"5. The City's, the Countys, the States, and the Federal Governments ARE going to make up for their losses" They dont. they cut jobs and the fat and they will balance.

Why is it "the goverment needs more money!" it needs to be the goverment needs to spend less.

And those evil "RICH" people. it was there money in the first place not the goverments!

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
reply to post by BigTimeCheater

 

It's really sad most people cannot see past the nose on their own face !

1. The Bush tax credit is the government giving the wealthy a prime rib dinner and throwing the people a bone .
2. The Bush tax credit eliminated billions from the governments (feeding trough) revenue.
3. The Bush tax credit saved individules maybe 2 thousand a year, and saved the wealthy100,000's thousands
to millions a year.
4. Who do you think is going to is going to make up for the lost revenue ?
5. The City's, the Countys, the States, and the Federal Governments ARE going to make up for their losses,
weather The Bush tax credit stays in affect or not, and they are NOT going to burden the wealthy with
higher taxes.

1. Considering the "wealthy" pay more in taxes than others, why shouldn't they reap the most benefits of a tax cut?

3. Ok, so the individuals got an extra 2 grand. Why do you have a problem with this?

4. Why not cut spending instead of worrying about "lost revenue"? It isnt lost if it wasnt theirs to begin with.

5. The wealthy are already burdened with a high tax rate.

Companies are hoarding money because they have inside information of future gains/profits. The economy isn’t really that shaky. Obviously without adequate credit flow many people will continue to suffer. The problem lies with credit. We are in for a new change in how we spend money. Credit was the way of our past. People simply just cannot pay their credit bills and the reasons are clearly the result in over-consumption. We all love to swipe and swipe and swipe because it’s convenient and less costly for our pockets. The loss of Credit-flow is and will always be known as the turning point of the world economy. However, to believe our economic woes will continue because of company hoarding cash is not realistic. Fiscal responsibility is the new trend. Taking care of your personal credit has proven to be very valuable. Company hoarding cash is reasonable and has been done all the time. Companies rather hold onto their profits rather than higher a few extra employees.

reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE


First off, the latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shouldered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax.

source :www.american.com...

Secondly, why would anyone want higher taxes, more money being taken from their pay, all to support an unconstitutional system the redistributes someones else's hard work? Those on welfare, made the choice to not succeed. No one has the "right" to succeed, they have to earn that themselves.

With regard to AFDC the figures are:

White 38.8%
Black 39.8
Hispanic 15.7
Asian 2.4
other 3.3

Study says most corporations pay no U.S. income tax



WASHINGTON | Tue Aug 12, 2008 12:54pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Most U.S. and foreign corporations doing business in the United States avoid paying any federal income taxes, despite trillions of dollars worth of sales, a government study released on Tuesday said.

The Government Accountability Office said 72 percent of all foreign corporations and about 57 percent of U.S. companies doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes for at least one year between 1998 and 2005.

More than half of foreign companies and about 42 percent of U.S. companies paid no U.S. income taxes for two or more years in that period, the report said.

During that time corporate sales in the United States totaled $2.5 trillion, according to Democratic Sens. Carl Levin of Michigan and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, who requested the GAO study.

The report did not name any companies. The GAO said corporations escaped paying federal income taxes for a variety of reasons including operating losses, tax credits and an ability to use transactions within the company to shift income to low tax countries.

With the U.S. budget deficit this year running close to the record $413 billion that was set in 2004 and projected to hit a record $486 billion next year, lawmakers are looking to plug holes in the U.S. tax code and generate more revenues.

Dorgan in a statement called the report "a shocking indictment of the current tax system." Levin said it made clear that "too many corporations are using tax trickery to send their profits overseas and avoid paying their fair share in the United States."

The study showed about 28 percent of large foreign corporations, those with more than $250 million in assets, doing business in the United States paid no federal income taxes in 2005 despite $372 billion in gross receipts, the senators said. About 25 percent of the largest U.S. companies paid no federal income taxes in 2005 despite $1.1 trillion in gross sales that year, they said.

Companies with the fattest tax breaks

Big profits don't always mean big tax bills. Companies like Boeing, Broadcom and DirecTV have been paying next to nothing in taxes over the last five years. Here's a list of 10 firms getting the biggest tax breaks.



By BusinessWeek

When it comes to racking up tax deductions, many companies display both ingenuity and determination. Thanks to a wide array of credits, exemptions and deferrals, they have a variety of ways to cut the amount they pay the Internal Revenue Service every year.

Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., would like to change that. On Oct. 25, he unveiled a bill that would lower the corporate tax rate from 35% to 30.5%. To make up the lost revenue, Rangel would eliminate some popular tax breaks. While the representative's specific plan is not expected to become law exactly as is, his overall approach to simplifying the corporate tax code has drawn a lot of support.

To identify who might be affected by the type of corporate tax simplification advocated by Rangel, BusinessWeek asked data-tracking outfit Capital IQ to calculate which companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index ($INX) spent the average lowest percentage of their earnings in cash on taxes over the past five years. The data reflect the most recent five-year period available, 2002 to 2006. These are the companies that are, in other words, getting the most mileage out of the various exceptions in the tax code.

* Slide show: Lowest corporate taxpayers

At the head of the list: utility CMS Energy (CMS, news, msgs), 0% of earnings spent on taxes over the past five years; natural-gas driller Chesapeake Energy (CHK, news, msgs), 0.3%; airplane manufacturer Boeing (BA, news, msgs), 0.7%; semiconductor maker Broadcom (BRCM, news, msgs), 1.1%; and utility Florida Power & Light (FPL, news, msgs), 1.2%). For the entire S&P 500, by contrast, the average percentage of earnings spent on taxes was 26% -- still well under the 35% stated corporate tax rate.

When companies pay taxes where do you think they get the money to do so?

They are built into the prices we pay. Whether it's filtered through the company or not is almost irrelevent, it's still us paying.

Amazing how many of you assume because I oppose the Bush tax credit I support any tax at all.

Yes, our government spends to much.

Money like power is not going to be given up by those that have it.

And the fact is the government is going to make up for their losses !

I never said I agree with it , I'm just stating a fact.

reply to post by SevenBeans


They are built into the prices we pay. Whether it's filtered through the company or not is almost irrelevent, it's still us paying.

Taxes are added after Profit is added in.