Welcome to PatsFans.com

Boeing, BOA, Wells Fargo, Exxon, GE,Citigroup all pay no federal taxes..

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Feb 27, 2011.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    While the assault continues on the middle class in Wisconsin, and unions are demonized as the sole source of our economic woes, some of the biggest companies in the US pay no taxes.. interesting that we allow these folks to get away with this travesty, but blame the janitors and secretaries of Wisconsin for our budget woes..

    As far as I know state taxes are pretty much determined by how much taxable income you report, so take it from there..

    The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer.. how much did the prez of BOA make last year, something like 30 Million.. something is very wrong here.

    ThinkProgress Home Page

    The Main Street Movement sounds interesting.. a very novel concept, everyone pay their fair share of taxes, fat cats also.
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2011
  2. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    *sigh*

    The income tax is a travesty on our constitution.

    The IRS is an illegal shakedown service.

    Since this system isn't going away, a flat tax needs to be installed to replace the current formula. That would really benefit the true middle class most.
  3. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:

    The IRS code is 12k+ pages who do you think pays for that?

    Again businesses don't pay taxes, they collect taxes by building the taxes into the prices of their goods and services.

    I agree with shirtsleeve that the Income tax is horrible and the 16th amendment should be repealed IMO.

    Given that won't happen go to a Flat Tax a la Steve Forbes. Tax profits once by taxing the capital gains/dividends paid to shareholders as income. Tax the rich at the same time.

    But this would get rid of the class warfare canard the left loves so much.
  4. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Lets also consider that the Argicultural business, Oil Industry and other Corporate power systems, all pay "DUES" to companies to lobby on their behalf for more subsides, more tax breaks, and more money.

    How is that any different than a Union?
  5. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:






    The union is seeking benefits/money from their employer (the taxpayer) and 99% of their political contributions go to 1 political party.

    Corporations are 'bribing' pols for competitive advantage (tax create regulatory barriers for my competitor not me) and protection from government. Their contributions are pretty much split to cover their bases no matter who is on power.

    This is why a flat tax would solve a lot of the business side of the corruption equation.

    Get rid of the tax code now.
  6. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    But it's the same idea...
    They lobby for more money and benefits, which comes back to them through government projects, which feeds more money into the corporation which they take those profits to buy more influence to ensure they get more breaks and projects, etc...

    There is no difference, the end result is the tax payer is the one who losses and the special interest wins.

    I agree we need a change in the tax code, why can't we the people get that moving forward???

    But I hate the way the media deominzes the Protests in WI, but doesn't give a damn how those same corporations who want to end Unions, act in the same exact way towards us the people when it comes to themselves getting tax payer money.
  7. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I favor Steve Forbes Proposal.. very simple, accomplish two things seriously downsize the agencies involved with taxes and secondly, provide some equity to this incredibly inequitable system..

    If everyone paid their fair share, would there be a budget problem???
  8. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,225
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -2

    My Jersey:



    Businesses pay over $500B/yr complying with the tax code. This would also encourage businesses to come here creating jobs/wages for the middle class.

    I remember a few years ago R Perot paid 8% of income in taxes, Buffet has said he pays a lower rate than his sect. A flat tax would have them paying 17% and the 60k sect paying ~7%. Politicians don't want it because it doesn't allow them to dole out breaks reducing their power.
  9. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    Meanwhile, we fight along party lines and forget what the actual issues are. We're too busy fighting among ourselves to get anything accomplished.

    Shame on us...
  10. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,371
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Just b/c a company doesn't pay taxes doesn't mean the employees and shareholders aren't. The taxes paid by BofA is a separate issue from the taxes paid by its president and other "fat cats."
  11. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,371
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I think you guys are putting a little too much faith in any "flat tax" proposal.

    The only good thing about the ones I've read is that they would be a "re-set" from the horrible system in place today.

    But have no misconceptions -- from the very start, poiticians, including these plans' creators, will start us down the road toward the system in place today, as tey try to address what they perceive as inequities, try to discourage things they don't like, encourage things they do, appease constituencies, etc.
  12. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,226
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Your right and thats they way they want it. Simple divide and conquer.
  13. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    It is a only a suggestion, that might provide equitable tax burden that is all..

    It needs some tweaking, but the current system is seriously broken and favors the wealthiest taxpayers..

    All we have is a bureaucratic nightmare, laced with breaks, loopholes and a whole lot of bureaucrats..
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2011
  14. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    A wealthy person (say a celebrity singer) can legally declare themselves to be a corporation and get all the tax benefits a corp. gets, while an average Joe or Jane who works for the man can't.

    That's crap and has to be changed.
  15. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,315
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +19 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Just did my taxes and tried to imagine a the deductions that a wealthy dude has if he has one of those million dollar mansions.. imagine the tax deduction, interest deduction, the prerequisite home office deduction and the cost of the schools he sends his kids to...

    It goes on and on, but the inequity is quite obvious...
  16. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,226
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    They same people you speak of will pour a ton of money into making sure that things don't change.
  17. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    FYI...not many bother to deduct home office expenses any more. The laws changed so that if you deduct for home office expenses, you'll have to pay extra taxes when/if you sell your home.

    I work from home and I looked into it...not worth the write-off.
  18. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,279
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    This is somewhat of an intellectually flawed argument being put forth. First of all, a company like BoA has nothing to do with what's going on in Wisconsin. Also, the businesses in question probably pay more in taxes in a given year than the entire state of Wisconsin's population combined. A business pays matching payroll taxes which are unavoidable. It pays property taxes, real estate taxes, excise taxes, taxes on goods, etc. Furthermore, as Chico mentioned, it's shareholders and bonus babies (who are employees) pay taxes on whatever is paid to them. This is all an aside to the basic principle that businesses never truly do pay taxes. That whatever "taxes" they pay, as is the case with any operating expense a company deals with, is simply passed on to the consumer.
  19. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    But...corporations are E-V-I-L RW. Can't you see that? It's them against us and we're not gonna take it anymore. Whatever "it" is...
  20. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,527
    Likes Received:
    41
    Ratings:
    +44 / 0 / -1

    My Jersey:

    Yeah see, this is why I say "why bother" with various flat tax proposals (PS, how can there be various proposals if it is "flat?" There can't be. You start off knowing you're not getting taxes up to a certain dollar amount, and it's not worth trying. The money's not there. Then you start down the road of the breaks you have to give to the wealthy to "make up for it," blah blah blah.) You never get to agreement on what "flat" means.

    Here's one aspect that immediately comes to mind, from the blowback from the right:

    When you decide on your flat tax, since we're in a bigger slump than at any other time during our lifetimes, you'll start off by not upsetting the fat cats by actually collecting their corporate taxes. You'll give them a "temporary" break, because otherwise you'll lose jobs overseas. Then you'll extend their "temporary" break once the economy is truly back, on the premise that the "bad old days" will return if you don't.

    Don't think that'll happen? Read up on the "temporary" Bush tax breaks for the rich that we still can't allow to sunset. And it's still the merely middle-class who argue that their corporate masters must be coddled, or all the jobs go poof. News flash: they go poof anyway. That's what corporations do: maximize profits, and minimize costs, including labor costs. Offshore jobs, hire immigrant labor, bash unions, automate. That's how you get profits. Yet, the big players are still large employers domestically. And so, they will continue to have that gun to our heads. And mark my words, the RWs of the world will be crying the blues for their corporate masters until the day they offshore the last U.S. job, and possibly after that too.

    Want a sliver of what's to come on this proposal? Just propose that you tax market gains like you tax income.

    Make people pay capital gains at the same rate they pay income... as if they actually worked for the money, rather than claimed it as their rightful, tax-free birthright, based on the fact that they did nothing to get it but take risk -- risk that turned out to be subsidized by the rest of us in the first place.

    See where that gets you. I'll give you the answer if you've got too thin a skin to try the experiment (again.) What actually happened is what I just described: arguments that jobs will go poof if we tell people they have to pay their fair share whether they worked for the money or whether it was essentially given them through public subsidy of their risk-taking behavior.

    And of course, we also get the arguments about how corporations get to own things and pay no taxes, because individuals working for that corporation pay no taxes.

    Bogus. Who owns the land? The headquarters building? Who has the payroll obligations, and what entity owns and controls the enterprise's capital assets? Not the shareholders. They are held by the corporation itself; the shareholders can reap dividends, but do not and cannot sell their 1/300,000th of the headquarters building (just for example.) The ongoing gains from operations of the corporation go into the going concern of the corporation. When shareholders take profits, that is only the skimming off the top of what is produced in a year. The rest goes back into the corporation as a going concern.

    So, you say, we should treat them like someone who sells a house. We tax them when they cash out.

    Nut uh, no we don't. Because if a Corporation is cashing out, it is going through our corporation-friendly bankruptcy code. Not only don't we tax them like we tax individuals, we line up to get stiffed by liquidating and reorganizing corporations. If anybody gets anything out of a company going through chapter 11 or chapter 13, it's pennies on the dollar.

    So when, exactly, does the corporation pay taxes on the fruits of the company's gain, if they pay no corporate taxes?

    PFnV
  21. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,371
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I agree with you completely regarding the current situation.

    All I'm saying is that the various proposals re "flat taxes" that people frequently recommend as a solution already are starting down the same path and, imo, inevitably will continue in that direction.

    so I'm OK with the notion as a better alternative, and as a "re-set" of sorts, but let's not hold it out as some magical answer.

    --------

    re equitable tax burdens, I'm hoping you realize that cuts in both directions, and honestly, I'm not sure all the flat tax proposals do that.

    Some exempt capital gains, dividends, interest income, etc., as I recall -- why should that be, if we're talking about being equitable? In that kind of scenario, the Buffetts of the world would continue to pay a tiny % of their income (and their assets) in tax, while blue-collar laborers would pay a much higher %.

    In the other direction, how many adults currently pay no taxes? I don't think the poor or near-poor should have substantial tax burdens, but I do think everybody should contribute something. Even if it's $25, $10, I think everybody should contribute something toward a government that (in theory?) serves us all.
  22. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    RW brought up a great point...

    So it makes me wonder just how much corporations actually already pay in taxes. If I'm paying $25k in federal taxes and my company has to match that, imagine how much taxes they're already paying in just payroll taxes.

    And if taxing corp's will just result in higher prices, would it be worth it to the rest of us?

  23. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,371
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    anybody can declare themselves a corporation -- and not sure what benefits you're referring to, but they also then need to pay the related fees and make the required filings that a corporation needs to make.

    Yes, the wealthy are much more able to do that, since they can afford it, but anybody can do it.

    So, what tax benefits are you referring to?
  24. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    If it wasn't beneficial, no one would do it. I saw a comedian who favored raising taxes and he said how f'd up this country was and how good the wealthy had it. Then he told the audience that he was in fact a corporation.

    Finally, he said when his accountants showed him his tax filing, all he could say to them was "Is this really legal?"

    So the benefits must be pretty significant without even knowing the details.
  25. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,371
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    tax deduction -- not sure what you're referring to, specifically

    interest deduction -- I've always thought the mortgage deduction is bs, but neither party will get rid of it

    home office deduction -- if people abide by the rules, this deduction is virtually nothing, since the office must be used for pretty much nothing but work, can't just be a 2nd office for the person and is limited by a square foot percentage and what a reasonable office expense would be -- granted, plenty of people will cheat, but (i) that's getting in to a different issue and (ii) I'm guessing most people who cheat on home office deductions aren't the rich

    schools -- perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think school tuition is tax-deductible
  26. chicowalker

    chicowalker Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,371
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I'm not sure I'd take a comedian at face value.

    If you're a c-corp -- which no knowledgeavle accountant / attorney would have a client do -- you'd pay twice (corporate and personal)

    In other "passthrough" structures, there is a small corporate tax (and fees and filings, as I mentioned), and then the income is passed through to the owner(s), so taxes are essentially the same. The most important aspect of having a corporation is protection from liability, but even then, the corporation can't just be a shell for that purpose.

    I'm not a tax attorney or accountant, but I'd really need to hear more about how this supposedly works. My clients in the past have generally been extremely wealthy business owners selling their companies -- people worth anywhere from $20mm to $200mm -- and not one was incorporated (for tax purposes or other purposes) as an individual.

    There are ways to decrease tax liability, but it's actually fairly difficult if you play by the rules. Tax structures that only have the purpose of recusing taxes aren't allowed, transactions require one side to get taxed if the other isn't, etc.

    And believe it or not, many, if not most, wealthy people do play by the rules -- reason being that it's not worth it to screw around on taxes given the potential downside. If you're worth $100mm, you generally (not always, I know) just want to enjoy life and be free of hassles, whether it's waiting in a security line at an airport or dealing with potential prosecution for tax evasion.
  27. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,279
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +18 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    I hate "corporate" America with every fiber of my being. That doesn't mean that I'm blind to how the Real World works. :D

    To add to Chico's post, here is a broad outline of S vs C corp:

  28. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    24,998
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +39 / 0 / -5

    My Jersey:

    I'm just speculating, but a singer or comedian travels extensively, so maybe being a corp allows them to deduct 100% of travel costs, etc. Which must be incredibly extensive.
  29. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    Isn't this because they lost money in the US last year? How do you pay taxes on negative earnings? Now, I'm sure they made money overseas (and paid taxes on it overseas where applicable), should they be "double taxed" on those earnings? Its a legit question and I'm not sure.
  30. shirtsleeve

    shirtsleeve Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,730
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    My Jersey:

    This is key. Who says we dont have a VAT? WE are already dealing with it from the corporations, so why not repeal the 16th and install a VAT. The more one consumes, the more he/she pays in taxes.

Share This Page