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

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

What happens when you over pay your taxes...you get it returned...correct? This isn't the government PAYING you money...it is the government giving you the money back that you over paid.

It's also about qualifying for enough deductions and by how much you can multiply those deductions by, it's not just necessarily refunding how much you over-paid. GE has a whole lot of people hired simply to find a way to get these enormous refunds (or whatever term you would like to use).

You are oversimplifying things to make it look like the government is PAYING these corporations money...and that is just untrue.

I did not write the many news articles calling out Corporations on this issue, I did not write the three year study by CTJ. I'm only relaying them. Forgive me if I take the Citizens For Tax Justice's "oversimplifying" as opposed to your scrambles to not be wrong.

reply to post by Kali74

It's also about qualifying for enough deductions and by how much you can multiply those deductions by, it's not just necessarily refunding how much you over-paid. GE has a whole lot of people hired simply to find a way to get these enormous refunds (or whatever term you would like to use).

Do you take deductions and tax credits that are available to you? Have you ever hired an accountant to help maximize your return...or use Turbo Tax to do the same thing?

If you do this...why do you have an issue with others doing it?

I did not write the many news articles calling out Corporations on this issue, I did not write the three year study by CTJ. I'm only relaying them. Forgive me if I take the Citizens For Tax Justice's "oversimplifying" as opposed to your scrambles to not be wrong.

Everything I just wrote you can find in your CTJ report...but in the footnotes...for example from your own CTJ report.

www.ctj.org...

Corporations can receive outright rebates by “carrying back” excess tax benefits to earlier years, and thereby getting
a cash refund from the IRS for taxes paid in the past. In addition, companies sometimes obtain favorable settlements
of tax disputes with the IRS covering past years. Companies then recognize tax benefits that they did not disclose in
their prior financial reports to shareholders because they expected that the IRS would not allow them to keep the
money. These settlements can produce what are essentially tax rebates, as the appendix on page 21 explains. In
reporting their “current” income taxes paid, companies do not distinguish between the two types of tax benefits.

They call them "rebates" and "excess" in the exact same sentence...so which is it...is it "excess" or a "rebate"??? They are mixing words and calling things "essentially tax rebates"...but if you read it and understand it you will see that the money is NEVER from the government...it is just money already paid by the corporation and re-defined or applied to different years.

You don't have to believe me...believe your own source...if you understand it.

What about government grants?

How does that affect a company?

Is it taxable income?


from Oct 11, 2010

(CNSNews.com) - The Obama administration gave corporate giant General Electric—the parent company of NBC--$24.9 million in grants from the $787-billion economic “stimulus” law President Barack Obama signed in February 2009, according to records posted by the administration at Recovery.gov.

Despite getting $24.9 million from U.S. taxpayers, GE decreased its U.S.-based employees by 18,000 in 2009, according to the company’s 2009 annual report.

Obama Administration Gave General Electric—Parent Company of NBC--$24.9 Million in ‘Stimulus’ Grants


were all those GE grants a result of lobbying?

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


I understand the footnotes, apparently you don't. All the footnotes are saying is that Corporations can go back over previous years and apply further credits etc, to receive more money. Yes, I do claim deductions on my tax returns I qualify for two, myself and my child. I qualify for one credit, my child. I do not make billions of dollars so I don't qualify for the hundreds of credits, benefits and deductions and I have no loopholes to jump through, I do not have millions of dollars to pay my elected officials to ensure that I have all of those things either.

reply to post by Kali74

I understand the footnotes, apparently you don't. All the footnotes are saying is that Corporations can go back over previous years and apply further credits etc

LOL....ok.

You go ahead and continue believing that the government is paying money to GE...I honestly don't care.

Even though I have provided sources that say it is false...you go ahead...I'm sure you are smarter than the people at CNN.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


And I have provided sources that say that it is the truth.

Did GE get a $3.2 billion tax refund? No.

That's could be true if only because 4.7B over 3 years can be divided up many ways.

Did GE pay U.S. income taxes in 2010? Yes, it paid estimated taxes for 2010, and also made payments for previous years. Think of it as your having paid withholding taxes on your salary in 2010, and sending the IRS a check on April 15, 2010, covering your balance owed for 2009.

GE paid estimated taxes, that does not mean it didn't recieve those estimated taxes back plus some.

Both quotes from your source which by the way is a blog. Opinion, not fact. Also from your source:

The company says that it's not getting any refund for 2010 -- validating Outslay's analysis. Its 2010 tax situation? "We expect to have a small U.S. income tax liability for 2010," GE chief spokesman Gary Sheffer told us. How big is small? GE declined to say. The number is unlikely to ever be disclosed unless GE goes public with it, or is forced to do so.

This really isn't saying much about 2008 or 2009 since the sum of 4.7B can be divided by 2 years.

reply to post by Kali74


Yes...it's a blog...by:

By Allan Sloan, senior editor-at-large, Fortune, and Jeff Gerth, senior reporter, ProPublica

But I'm sure you are smarter than they are I mean...he's just the senior editor at large for Fortune magazine...but hey...it's "just a blog".

Like I said Kali...I really don't care...you have proven yourself to be extremely uninformed in many areas...why should this be any different???

And no...you don't understand the footnotes. Continue thinking in your head that the government is paying GE money...you'll blend right in with the rest of the uninformed...they'll even praise you for being "awake".

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


You're getting repetative now, you can't win so you infer that I'm the one who doesn't understand and thus stupid. Classy.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by davespanners

 

Isn't it great when people admit when their wrong rather then banging on over and over and constantly changing goalpost

I agree dave...I wish more people would do it rather than just backing up their friends even when they are wrong.

But we know that is never gonna happen

Irony.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by Kali74

 

Yes...it's a blog...by:

By Allan Sloan, senior editor-at-large, Fortune, and Jeff Gerth, senior reporter, ProPublica

But I'm sure you are smarter than they are

I mean...he's just the senior editor at large for Fortune magazine...but hey...it's "just a blog".

Like I said Kali...I really don't care...you have proven yourself to be extremely uninformed in many areas...why should this be any different???

And no...you don't understand the footnotes. Continue thinking in your head that the government is paying GE money...you'll blend right in with the rest of the uninformed...they'll even praise you for being "awake".

you keep insulting people, and you fail to see you are the minority and just maybe WRONG.

if they'd pay more, you'd pay less. if government wasted less, everybody pays less.

since the supreme court ruled corporations are people, they should pay the same rate as a person in that tax bracket.

in the united states it's 35%. g.e. made $10,460,000,000. at 35% they would have to pay $3,661,000,000.

about 120 million people pay taxes each year. if g.e paid it's share, it would save tax payers $30.

it's not a big savings. but add the entire fortune 500 and you're talking some serious cash.

if anything the tax bracket should be amended. you can't lump someone make $350,000 with billionaires.

at the same time the middle class bracket is the most unfair. they lump someone making $33,000 with someone making $85,000 at a 25% rate.

in the real world, those $50,000+ makes a big difference. that difference should be made up by billion dollar corporations.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

You're getting repetative now, you can't win so you infer that I'm the one who doesn't understand and thus stupid. Classy.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by davespanners

 

Isn't it great when people admit when their wrong rather then banging on over and over and constantly changing goalpost

I agree dave...I wish more people would do it rather than just backing up their friends even when they are wrong.

But we know that is never gonna happen

Irony.

edit on 7-12-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)

When you are dealing with people who ignore and don't understand facts...what else is there to do?

Have you ever tried to teach a child math who just doesn't get it...you just have to keep repeating it over and over. I'm really talking to walls here....walls with a poor understanding of taxes.

And yes...you clearly don't understand overpayments, carry back, and "dubious tax benefits"...all explained in your own sources...all legal...and all of them create overpayments that can be credited to previous years...which creates the illusion of a negative tax rate for a year.



It's simple...please just go show me a source that says how much GE received from the federal government for 2010. You are so confident that they did...yet you have no source for it.

reply to post by -W1LL

you keep insulting people, and you fail to see you are the minority and just maybe WRONG.

Being in the majority doesn't mean you are right.

It just means you have surronded yourself with equally uninformed people.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


When did I say anything about 2010? I've been talking about from 2008-2010 all along. If they say they didn't get a tax rebate/refund/benefit blah blah blah in 2010 then okay they didn't....doesn't mean they didn't get a sum total of 4.7B over that period of time studied. You continue to accuse me of not understanding this or that, you continue with personal attacks yet you are that one that has failed and it's pretty obvious.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

When did I say anything about 2010? I've been talking about from 2008-2010 all along. If they say they didn't get a tax rebate/refund/benefit blah blah blah in 2010 then okay they didn't....doesn't mean they didn't get a sum total of 4.7B over that period of time studied. You continue to accuse me of not understanding this or that, you continue with personal attacks yet you are that one that has failed and it's pretty obvious.

Please give me all the details of that 4.7 Billion.

Please show me the profits and taxes paid or "refunds" given each year.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


How bout instead of being on my ass all the time, you take it up with the people who make the reports? The reports I'm relating are saying exactly that, there's absolutely nothing wrong with my reading comprehension despite how badly you wish there was.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

How bout instead of being on my ass all the time, you take it up with the people who make the reports? The reports I'm relating are saying exactly that, there's absolutely nothing wrong with my reading comprehension despite how badly you wish there was.

If you can't explain what you believe...maybe you don't understand what you believe???

I can explain anything that I state as fact or that I state that I believe...it just seems like an honest thing to do.

It is quite simple...you are claiming these things to be true...you are using this report as a source. But your source doesn't explain things fully...and as I have pointed out...they are even mixing terms and claiming things are "essentially tax rebates" when they are nothing of the sort. A return of an overpayment....yes...a payment from the government...NO.


Just back up your claims...the burden is on you. Go through that report and show me exactly what they got paid and when.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


You're getting so beyond ridiculous, I've argued every single point you've brought up based on what I believe to be true, backed up by facts. You want to be right and I can't make that happen for you so you're getting nasty. I've pointed out the flaws in your arguments and weakspots in your linked material, what else do you want from me?

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by OutKast Searcher

 

You're getting so beyond ridiculous, I've argued every single point you've brought up based on what I believe to be true, backed up by facts. You want to be right and I can't make that happen for you so you're getting nasty. I've pointed out the flaws in your arguments and weakspots in your linked material, what else do you want from me?

You are simply not backing up your claims. You don't understand how a "negative" tax rate over a period of years is created, and you won't admit that there is no proof the government has paid money to a corporation...specifically GE.

I've asked simple questions...you don't appear to be able to answer them.

It still all comes down to you and others confusing the term "tax benefit" to mean that the government paid the compnay money. When in fact the term "tax benefit" is nothing of the sort.

You also realize that these studies don't look at the corporations tax returns, right? Those aren't public information. They look at their regulatory filings that show tax benefits and tax expenses...that's it. There is NO way from the information that is available for any study to know exactly how much a corporation paid or didn't pay. And also no way at all to prove if they ever recieved a payment back from the government.

So please...knowing that information....go find your proof.

Originally posted by PrimalRed
reply to post 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.

If I live, work, and spend all my money overseas but remain a US citizen, I STILL have to pay US income tax!

Originally posted by Mutant

Originally posted by PrimalRed
reply to post 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.

If I live, work, and spend all my money overseas but remain a US citizen, I STILL have to pay US income tax!

If you have a job overseas, the money you make is subject to the countries laws you make it in. You don't pay US income tax if you are working in England.