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.

 

2008-2010, 30 Big Corporations Spent More Lobbying Washington Than They Paid In Income Tax

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by PrimalRed
 


Oh? Show me how it's not true.


Easy "tax benifit" does not mean refund. This whole thing came from this New york times piece
www.nytimes.com...
No refund is ever mentioned




posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by PrimalRed
 


Benefit/rebate/refund are all words that in this context mean the same thing, it is the dollars the US Treasury pays you after you file your income tax return.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrimalRed

They keep a lot of their money overseas and out of the country, why should they pay an American tax on foreign business. 1/2 of their workforce is not even in America anymore.


You see no problems with US companies shipping all our US jobs overseas, not paying taxes, and getting money FROM our government in subsidies (e.g. oil) because they pay off our politicians to be able to do this?

The corruption has become so endemic that we are about to collapse as a nation not because we have no money, but because it is being hoarded by the 1 percent.
source

artists website



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by PrimalRed
 


Benefit/rebate/refund are all words that in this context mean the same thing, it is the dollars the US Treasury pays you after you file your income tax return.


Not at all


What Does Tax Benefit Mean?
A tax benefit is an allowable deduction on a tax return intended to reduce a taxpayer's burden while typically supporting certain types of commercial activity. A tax benefit allows some type of adjustment benefiting a taxpayer's tax liability.

Read more: www.investopedia.com...




tax refund

Definition
The return by the government of excess taxes paid by an individual. If, during the course of a calendar year, an individual paid more taxes than they actually owed (after taking into consderation income tax, withholdings, tax deductions or credits, and other factors), then he or she will receive a tax refund after filing his or her taxes for the year.


Furthermore the news piece does not even to attempt to back any of its claims up with any sort of proof.

GE is saying that they do pay taxes


www.gereports.com...
Claim: GE paid no taxes in 2010.
Fact: GE did pay almost $2.7 billion in cash income taxes in 2010 on a consolidated basis (almost 19% of pretax income from continuing operations) globally, including significant U.S. federal income tax payments. GE also paid in excess of $1 billion in payroll, state and local sales and use and property taxes.

Claim: GE “dodges” tax obligations generally.
Fact: Over the past 10 years, GE has paid almost $23 billion of corporate income taxes to governments around the world, making it one of the highest payers of corporate income taxes. Over the past five years alone, GE has paid over $14 billion of income taxes.

Claim: GE used “tax avoidance strategies” to reduce its tax rate the past few years.
Fact: GE’s tax rate has been lower in recent years due to financial crisis losses at GE Capital. From 2008-2010, GE Capital suffered nearly $32 billion in losses as a result of the financial crisis. That’s not a “tax avoidance strategy.” Absent such unusual losses, GE’s overall effective tax rate would have been 15 percent over the past several years, which is comparable to the average for other multinational corporations. Our 2011 tax rate is slated to return to more normal levels with GE Capital’s recovery.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

Originally posted by PrimalRed

They keep a lot of their money overseas and out of the country, why should they pay an American tax on foreign business. 1/2 of their workforce is not even in America anymore.


You see no problems with US companies shipping all our US jobs overseas, not paying taxes, and getting money FROM our government in subsidies (e.g. oil) because they pay off our politicians to be able to do this?

The corruption has become so endemic that we are about to collapse as a nation not because we have no money, but because it is being hoarded by the 1 percent.

artists website


The US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, you really can't blame them for moving away.
blog.heritage.org...



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by PrimalRed
 


And when the benefit subtracted from owed becomes greater than 0, they get the difference in the form of a check! For example if I owe 2,000 but my benefit/deduction is 3,000 I get a check for 1,000 dollars. However you want to slice it every dollar in benefit/rebate/refund given to Corporations comes out of the tax-payer pocket. Are you okay with that when that corporation is in the billions of dollars profit margin!?



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 




And when the benefit subtracted from owed becomes greater than 0, they get the difference in the form of a check! For example if I owe 2,000 but my benefit/deduction is 3,000 I get a check for 1,000 dollars. However you want to slice it every dollar in benefit/rebate/refund given to Corporations comes out of the tax-payer pocket. Are you okay with that when that corporation is in the billions of dollars profit margin!?


thanks for the math lesson but they DID NOT get a refund...



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by PrimalRed
 


I'm afraid that after the article you quoted was written GE's own spokes person Anne Eisele admited herself that they did in fact pay no taxes in the US in 2010.
Did you not wonder why the NYT hadn't been sued into printing a retraction if their article was so wrong


"Wow, just when we thought it was over... The NYT may be off the hook, at least on the "federal income tax" assertion. No sooner had we published our conclusion that the NYT's statement was "flat-out wrong" than the NYT came right back and said there wasn't a single factual inaccuracy in its article, which was why GE hadn't asked for a correction. And, more importantly, the NYT sent us an AFP article in which GE spokesperson Anne Eisele--the same spokesperson who wrote the comment below--said the following: "GE did not pay US federal taxes last year because we did not owe any."


And


it supports the New York Times's position that GE's tax bill was "none." And it suggests that GE is still trying to find a way, any way, to talk its way out of this, even if that means giving out false information. (And it also undermines GE's legitimate gripe that "American tax bill"--the NYT's phrasing--should include things like local, state, and payroll taxes).


You will notice that the linked article starts off attacking the NYT article at first before admitting that they were mistaken
link
Isn't it great when people admit when their wrong rather then banging on over and over and constantly changing goalpost
edit on 7-12-2011 by davespanners because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by PrimalRed
 


They did, the link you provided to the GE site is nothing more than talking in circles to save their public image, it doesn't actually refute much.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrimalRed
reply to post by Kali74
 




And when the benefit subtracted from owed becomes greater than 0, they get the difference in the form of a check! For example if I owe 2,000 but my benefit/deduction is 3,000 I get a check for 1,000 dollars. However you want to slice it every dollar in benefit/rebate/refund given to Corporations comes out of the tax-payer pocket. Are you okay with that when that corporation is in the billions of dollars profit margin!?


thanks for the math lesson but they DID NOT get a refund...


Doesn't matter because at the end of the day they paid nothing. They got back money while paying absolutely dick all.

This is fair somehow??? I lose $600 a month in income tax and only get back about $2000 of it every year. These companies are making billions in profit and then get back more money from the tax system than what they put into it. These people can afford to buy half the planet and I can't afford to buy a house or own a vehicle that was made in this century.

Yes I see a problem with this.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrimalRed
reply to post by Kali74
 




And when the benefit subtracted from owed becomes greater than 0, they get the difference in the form of a check! For example if I owe 2,000 but my benefit/deduction is 3,000 I get a check for 1,000 dollars. However you want to slice it every dollar in benefit/rebate/refund given to Corporations comes out of the tax-payer pocket. Are you okay with that when that corporation is in the billions of dollars profit margin!?


thanks for the math lesson but they DID NOT get a refund...


exactly why you need to take some classes, you obviously do not have a job or own any property.


you can call it what you want, FACT is they are paying NO taxes and receiving money from the Gov in return.
edit on 12/7/2011 by -W1LL because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   


www.forbes.com...
All these tax burdens are higher than the average citizen pays. So where does General Electric ( GE - news - people ) stand? Contrary to what many in the public seem to think, the conglomerate did pay taxes in 2010. It reported $2.7 billion in cash tax payments during the year, and on its income statement lists a provision for income taxes of $1.05 billion. Considering GE's pretax income of $14.2 billion, that makes for a tax rate of just 7.4%. The only one of the 20 corporate giants with a lower rate was AT&T ( T - news - people ), at -6.4%--but that was only because MaBell won a tax settlement with the IRS that reduced its tax liability by $8.3 billion.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by -W1LL
 


I have a job and own property, i am not the 99%
edit on 7-12-2011 by PrimalRed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:46 PM
link   
I'm wondering if everyone that is complaining about corporations not paying taxes pay their income tax in full while claiming no deductions or tax credits???

If not, aren't you being a bit hypocritical. If they are doing something illegal...then fine, call them on it. But if they are using the tax breaks, credits, and deductions that they are provided...what's the problem?

I know I do it...I take every credit, deduction and tax break me and my accountant can find. I can't fault someone else or a corporation from doing the same thing.

I also can't fault them for lobbying...because everytime someone writes a letter to their congressmen...they are lobbying. The only way to stop lobbying is to ban all communication from EVERYONE towards lawmakers.

I think people have a misconception on what "lobbying" is...the money spent isn't money they are just paying to congressmen...it is money they pay firms for research, for going to washington and making presentations, for running ads on TV, for paying people to go on TV/Radio shows to talk about how a law would effect an industry. They aren't just sending envelopes of money to senators with a note saying "Vote no on this bill, thanks".

So if you want to outlaw lobbying, you have to outlaw it for everyone. And you have to allow the government to tell you what you can and can't spend your money on and what you can or can't say. So much for our "freedoms"...huh?



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


They are just confused over the terms used, they do not see the difference between a refund and a benefit and they do not see the difference between federal tax and federal income tax.
edit on 7-12-2011 by PrimalRed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrimalRed
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


They are just confused over the terms used, they do not see the difference between a refund and a benefit and they do not see the difference between federal tax and federal income tax.
edit on 7-12-2011 by PrimalRed because: (no reason given)



no one is confused you are trying to change definitions and using excuses to back up your argument.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by -W1LL
 


I have never changed definitions nor have i made any excuses
Refund ≠ benefit
Federal tax ≠ strictly "Federal income tax"
edit on 7-12-2011 by PrimalRed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by PrimalRed

"the 99%" do not all pay income tax, many of "the 99%" do not make enough money to pay income tax.
Personally I am against federal income tax so i say more power to them.



I again bring up your response you areso willfully ignoring you are the 99% even though you support corporate greed and overseas labor.



edit on 12/7/2011 by -W1LL because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join