|
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
(CBS News)
Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. Of those 280 companies, 78 corporations had at least one year during which their U.S. federal tax was zero or less, and many had more than one year paying no tax, despite recording profits; many of these companies also received tax rebates. In 2009 alone, 49 companies earned combined profits of $78.6 billion, yet paid no taxes - and collected tax rebates totaling $10.8 billion. The study also disputes claims that the U.S. charges excessive corporate tax rates compared to other countries: Two-thirds of the corporations studied which earned significant foreign AND U.S. profits over the same three-year period paid higher tax rates to foreign governments on their foreign profits than they paid to the U.S. government on their domestic profits. The study, conducted by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy and published Thursday, examined the tax payments of 280 companies from the Fortune 500 - those that recorded profits in 2008, 2009 and 2010. (Companies that registered a loss for at least one year were not included in the study.) These companies reported total pre-tax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion, and many of the companies examined did pay close to the official corporate tax rate of 35 percent. But because of tax breaks and loopholes, many paid little or nothing. In the aggregate, these 280 companies actually paid about half the official corporate tax rate - 18.5 percent over the 2008-10 period, and slightly less (17.3 percent) over the last two years. In all, the tax breaks that reduced these companies' payments to the Treasury Department cost the United States more than $200 billion over three years. "Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10" The analyses are based on financial data from SEC filings. The variation in tax payments did not correspond with profits: In some cases comparable companies with comparable U.S. pretax profits made wildly different tax payments. General Dynamics, on 3-year profits of $9.147 billion, paid an effective tax rate of 27 percent, while Boeing, on profits of $9.735 billion, paid -1.8 percent tax. According to the report: A quarter of the companies (71) paid more than 30 percent (averaging 32.3%) in corporate taxes over the three years. Another quarter (67) paid effective three-year tax rates of less than 10 percent, with the average effective tax rate being zero. Thirty of these companies paid LESS than zero. The following 30 profitable corporations paid no U.S. income tax from 2008-2010: Company / 2008-10 Profits ($ millions) / 2008-10 Taxes ($ millions) / Effective 2008-10 Rate Pepco Holdings $ 882 / $ -508 / -57.6% General Electric 10,460 / -4,737 / -45.3% Paccar 365 / -112 / -30.5% PG&E Corp. 4,855 / -1,027 / -21.2% Computer Sciences 1,666 / -305 / -18.3% NiSource 1,385 / -227 / -16.4% CenterPoint Energy 1,931 / -284 / -14.7% Tenet Healthcare 415 / -48 / -11.6% Atmos Energy 897 / -104 / -11.6% Integrys Energy Group 818 / -92 / -11.3% American Electric Power 5,899 / -545 / -9.2% Con-way 286 / -26 / -9.1% Ryder System 627 / -46 / -7.3% Baxter International 926 / -66 / -7.1% Wisconsin Energy 1,725 / -85 / -4.9% Duke Energy 5,475 / -216 / -3.9% DuPont 2,124 / -72 / -3.4% Consolidated Edison 4,263 / -127 / -3.0% Verizon Communications 32,518 / -951 / -2.9% Interpublic Group 571 / -15 / -2.6% CMS Energy 1,292 / -29 / -2.2% NextEra Energy 6,403 / -139 / -2.2% Navistar International 896 / -18 / -2.0% Boeing 9,735 / -178 / -1.8% Wells Fargo 49,370 / -681 / -1.4% El Paso 4,105 / -41 / -1.0% Mattel 1,020 / -9 / -0.9% Honeywell International 4,903 / -34 / -0.7% DTE Energy 2,551 / -17 / -0.7% Corning 1,977 / -4 / -0.2% TOTAL: On $160.341 billion in profits, they paid $ -10.742 billion in taxes, for an average effective tax rate of -6.7%. In some cases corporations may realize tax benefits for past years through rebates, or may win disputes with the IRS for previous tax periods, thereby accruing tax benefits not recorded in earlier financial reports. Of the companies receiving what the report terms "tax subsidies" - the difference between what they would have paid for their profits at the 35 percent rate and what they actually paid during the 2008-10 period - the largest subsidies went to Wells Fargo ($17.960 billion); AT&T ($14.491 billion); Verizon ($12.332 billion); General Electric ($8.398 billion); IBM ($8.265 billion); ExxonMobil ($4.096 billion); Boeing ($3.585 billion); PNC Financial Services ($3.354 billion); Goldman Sachs ($3.178 billion); and Procter & Gamble ($3.158 billion). More than half (56 percent) of tax subsidies were gained by four industries: Financial; utilities; telecommunications; and oil, gas & pipelines. There is also a wide range of tax payments between industry sectors. While retailers and health care paid an average effective tax rate of 30 percent or more, oil, gas & pipeline companies averaged 15.7 percent. Financial companies averaged 15.5 percent. Telecom companies averaged 8.2 percent. Gas and electric utilities paid an average effective tax rate of 3.7 percent. The lowest average rate was paid by the industrial machine sector, of -13.5 percent. There was wide variance within each sector: For example, pharmaceutical company Amgen paid 28 percent, while its competitor Baxter paid -7.1 percent. United Parcel Service paid 24.1 percent, while FedEx paid 0.9 percent. Elements of the U.S. tax code that have allowed companies to defer or reduce their tax burdens include accelerated depreciation of capital investments; research and experimentation tax credits; non-cash goodwill impairments; stock options; tax breaks awarded to specific industries; and offshore tax shelters. The report's authors (Robert S. McIntyre and Rebecca J. Wilkins of Citizens for Tax Justice, and Matthew Gardner and Richard Phillips for The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) write that lawmakers should enact corporate tax reform, focusing on what are officially known as "corporate tax expenditures"; reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax; revise how stock options are treated; adopt restrictions on abusive tax sheltering; reform how multi-national companies assign profits between foreign and domestic divisions; and repeal the rule allowing U.S. corporations to "defer" their U.S. taxes on their offshore profits, to end the incentive for shifting profits overseas. "Unfortunately," the report states, "corporate tax legislation now being promoted by many in Congress seems stuck on the idea that as a group, corporations are now either paying the perfect amount in federal income taxes or are paying too much. ... Meanwhile, GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely." The report's authors call on elected officials to stop "kowtowing to the loophole lobbyists" and enact corporate tax reform that benefits the majority of Americans. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/3/2011 6:50 AM, X ` Man wrote:
(CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. I wonder why corporations leave the US tax haven and move to far off places? Harry knows the answer but he won't admit it. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 03/11/2011 4:50 AM, X ` Man wrote:
(CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. Funny how that fleabagger greed works eh? You dumb ****s blinded with envy and greed can't see how it really works. You like denial of reality like an addictive drug. Lower interest rates to zero means lower dividend and company earnings are needed to keep share holders happy. So lower dividend and earnings generates less taxes. Yep, just government shooting itself in the foot with fraud low interest rates. Bottom line for many, no profit from US domestic operations means no taxes. Because they paid taxes in other countries that were profitable, those are tax credits domestically. Take 0bama Government Motors, they don't pay taxes and will not for a very long time. Yep, the bailout criminals left enough loss carry forwards it is unlikely GM will pay federal income taxes in our lifetime. 0bama Solyndra didn't pay taxes, better yet got government bailouts. Government streak on betting on losers and bailout buddies is astounding. What? You fleabaggers things rich and companies should pay taxes when they loose money or have loss carry forwards like Warren Buffet? Bet you didn't pay much in taxes, just a fleabagger mushroom a whining. Hey, you would be rich if fleabbagger bull**** was worth anything. Got some good news, I might be able to get all my USA investments out of the USA by January, seeing a tax guru next week. Have some etter places than USA to plant the money and watch it grow as opposed to shrink. See, not being stuck in the USA has its advantages. -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 03/11/2011 6:42 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 11/3/2011 6:50 AM, X ` Man wrote: (CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. I wonder why corporations leave the US tax haven and move to far off places? Harry knows the answer but he won't admit it. Yep, fleabaggers need to understand that there is no reason a US corp should be paying double taxes to DC. Say a product is made in China, sold in China then Chinese profit taxes paid. Then greedy fleabaggers think DC should double tax the US corp for non-domestic profits. So to solve the problem they just move the head office offshore and only account for US taxes on US operations, which is fair. Means less revenue for DC and the fat taxable exec salaries and economic activity of a head office is no longer in the USA. Screwing themselves with their own greed. But no one ever accused a fleabagger of using their brains for anything other than envy, lust and greed of others. Sinful bunch really, putting all that debt on our grand kids like they are debt-corruption-tax slaves. -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:42:39 -0400, Drifter wrote:
I wonder why corporations leave the US tax haven and move to far off places? Harry knows the answer but he won't admit it. ====== It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/3/11 1:32 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:42:39 -0400, wrote: I wonder why corporations leave the US tax haven and move to far off places? Harry knows the answer but he won't admit it. ====== It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/3/2011 1:53 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/3/11 1:32 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:42:39 -0400, wrote: I wonder why corporations leave the US tax haven and move to far off places? Harry knows the answer but he won't admit it. ====== It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. Wayne made an intelligent assumption and you made a fool of yourself, AGAIN. Way to go WAFA. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:53:59 -0400, Drifter wrote:
It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. Wayne made an intelligent assumption and you made a fool of yourself, AGAIN. Way to go WAFA. ========= Proving once again that you can't educate those who already know everything, or those who don't know what they don't know. :-) |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/3/11 4:07 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:53:59 -0400, wrote: It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. Wayne made an intelligent assumption and you made a fool of yourself, AGAIN. Way to go WAFA. ========= Proving once again that you can't educate those who already know everything, or those who don't know what they don't know. :-) The only thing that you've proven in all your corporationist posts, Beardsley, is that no matter what excesses corporations commit, you'll favor them. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:10:04 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: On 11/3/11 4:07 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:53:59 -0400, wrote: It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. Wayne made an intelligent assumption and you made a fool of yourself, AGAIN. Way to go WAFA. ========= Proving once again that you can't educate those who already know everything, or those who don't know what they don't know. :-) The only thing that you've proven in all your corporationist posts, Beardsley, is that no matter what excesses corporations commit, you'll favor them. ======== Usually when I run into someone with attitudes similar to yours it turns out that they were never able to get, or hold, a job with a corporation. Frequently the reason is related to personality, skills (lack thereof) or work ethic. I'd guess that in your case it's a personality issue. Hopefully Ms. Greer will be willing to keep you on a while longer as CEO job at Harry Krause & Associates. That would be the pits getting fired from your own company. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/3/11 5:50 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:10:04 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 11/3/11 4:07 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:53:59 -0400, wrote: It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. Wayne made an intelligent assumption and you made a fool of yourself, AGAIN. Way to go WAFA. ========= Proving once again that you can't educate those who already know everything, or those who don't know what they don't know. :-) The only thing that you've proven in all your corporationist posts, Beardsley, is that no matter what excesses corporations commit, you'll favor them. ======== Usually when I run into someone with attitudes similar to yours it turns out that they were never able to get, or hold, a job with a corporation. Frequently the reason is related to personality, skills (lack thereof) or work ethic. I'd guess that in your case it's a personality issue. Hopefully Ms. Greer will be willing to keep you on a while longer as CEO job at Harry Krause& Associates. That would be the pits getting fired from your own company. Oh, Beardsley,...give it up. I'm simply not a fan of the sort of corporate abuse that has been perpetrated on this country since the 1980's. I've worked for corporations, and I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. In fact, I just finished a draft of a speech one of my clients will be presenting and will get paid in the five figures for it. You seem to be "stuck" on a Florida corporation that hasn't been active for well over a decade. That's your problem, not mine. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/3/2011 5:59 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/3/11 5:50 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:10:04 -0400, X ` Man wrote: On 11/3/11 4:07 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:53:59 -0400, wrote: It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. Wayne made an intelligent assumption and you made a fool of yourself, AGAIN. Way to go WAFA. ========= Proving once again that you can't educate those who already know everything, or those who don't know what they don't know. :-) The only thing that you've proven in all your corporationist posts, Beardsley, is that no matter what excesses corporations commit, you'll favor them. ======== Usually when I run into someone with attitudes similar to yours it turns out that they were never able to get, or hold, a job with a corporation. Frequently the reason is related to personality, skills (lack thereof) or work ethic. I'd guess that in your case it's a personality issue. Hopefully Ms. Greer will be willing to keep you on a while longer as CEO job at Harry Krause& Associates. That would be the pits getting fired from your own company. Oh, Beardsley,...give it up. I'm simply not a fan of the sort of corporate abuse that has been perpetrated on this country since the 1980's. I've worked for corporations, and I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. In fact, I just finished a draft of a speech one of my clients will be presenting and will get paid in the five figures for it. You seem to be "stuck" on a Florida corporation that hasn't been active for well over a decade. That's your problem, not mine. There you go Mr. Pufferfish. You've puffed yourself way up for that little skirmish. Careful; you might explode. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man
wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/3/11 6:38 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? Certainly not a corporate apologist like you. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 06:50:28 -0400, X ` Man wrote:
(CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. Of those 280 companies, 78 corporations had at least one year during which their U.S. federal tax was zero or less, and many had more than one year paying no tax, despite recording profits; many of these companies also received tax rebates. In 2009 alone, 49 companies earned combined profits of $78.6 billion, yet paid no taxes - and collected tax rebates totaling $10.8 billion. The study also disputes claims that the U.S. charges excessive corporate tax rates compared to other countries: Two-thirds of the corporations studied which earned significant foreign AND U.S. profits over the same three-year period paid higher tax rates to foreign governments on their foreign profits than they paid to the U.S. government on their domestic profits. The study, conducted by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy and published Thursday, examined the tax payments of 280 companies from the Fortune 500 - those that recorded profits in 2008, 2009 and 2010. (Companies that registered a loss for at least one year were not included in the study.) These companies reported total pre-tax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion, and many of the companies examined did pay close to the official corporate tax rate of 35 percent. But because of tax breaks and loopholes, many paid little or nothing. In the aggregate, these 280 companies actually paid about half the official corporate tax rate - 18.5 percent over the 2008-10 period, and slightly less (17.3 percent) over the last two years. In all, the tax breaks that reduced these companies' payments to the Treasury Department cost the United States more than $200 billion over three years. "Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10" The analyses are based on financial data from SEC filings. The variation in tax payments did not correspond with profits: In some cases comparable companies with comparable U.S. pretax profits made wildly different tax payments. General Dynamics, on 3-year profits of $9.147 billion, paid an effective tax rate of 27 percent, while Boeing, on profits of $9.735 billion, paid -1.8 percent tax. According to the report: A quarter of the companies (71) paid more than 30 percent (averaging 32.3%) in corporate taxes over the three years. Another quarter (67) paid effective three-year tax rates of less than 10 percent, with the average effective tax rate being zero. Thirty of these companies paid LESS than zero. The following 30 profitable corporations paid no U.S. income tax from 2008-2010: Company / 2008-10 Profits ($ millions) / 2008-10 Taxes ($ millions) / Effective 2008-10 Rate Pepco Holdings $ 882 / $ -508 / -57.6% General Electric 10,460 / -4,737 / -45.3% Paccar 365 / -112 / -30.5% PG&E Corp. 4,855 / -1,027 / -21.2% Computer Sciences 1,666 / -305 / -18.3% NiSource 1,385 / -227 / -16.4% CenterPoint Energy 1,931 / -284 / -14.7% Tenet Healthcare 415 / -48 / -11.6% Atmos Energy 897 / -104 / -11.6% Integrys Energy Group 818 / -92 / -11.3% American Electric Power 5,899 / -545 / -9.2% Con-way 286 / -26 / -9.1% Ryder System 627 / -46 / -7.3% Baxter International 926 / -66 / -7.1% Wisconsin Energy 1,725 / -85 / -4.9% Duke Energy 5,475 / -216 / -3.9% DuPont 2,124 / -72 / -3.4% Consolidated Edison 4,263 / -127 / -3.0% Verizon Communications 32,518 / -951 / -2.9% Interpublic Group 571 / -15 / -2.6% CMS Energy 1,292 / -29 / -2.2% NextEra Energy 6,403 / -139 / -2.2% Navistar International 896 / -18 / -2.0% Boeing 9,735 / -178 / -1.8% Wells Fargo 49,370 / -681 / -1.4% El Paso 4,105 / -41 / -1.0% Mattel 1,020 / -9 / -0.9% Honeywell International 4,903 / -34 / -0.7% DTE Energy 2,551 / -17 / -0.7% Corning 1,977 / -4 / -0.2% TOTAL: On $160.341 billion in profits, they paid $ -10.742 billion in taxes, for an average effective tax rate of -6.7%. In some cases corporations may realize tax benefits for past years through rebates, or may win disputes with the IRS for previous tax periods, thereby accruing tax benefits not recorded in earlier financial reports. Of the companies receiving what the report terms "tax subsidies" - the difference between what they would have paid for their profits at the 35 percent rate and what they actually paid during the 2008-10 period - the largest subsidies went to Wells Fargo ($17.960 billion); AT&T ($14.491 billion); Verizon ($12.332 billion); General Electric ($8.398 billion); IBM ($8.265 billion); ExxonMobil ($4.096 billion); Boeing ($3.585 billion); PNC Financial Services ($3.354 billion); Goldman Sachs ($3.178 billion); and Procter & Gamble ($3.158 billion). More than half (56 percent) of tax subsidies were gained by four industries: Financial; utilities; telecommunications; and oil, gas & pipelines. There is also a wide range of tax payments between industry sectors. While retailers and health care paid an average effective tax rate of 30 percent or more, oil, gas & pipeline companies averaged 15.7 percent. Financial companies averaged 15.5 percent. Telecom companies averaged 8.2 percent. Gas and electric utilities paid an average effective tax rate of 3.7 percent. The lowest average rate was paid by the industrial machine sector, of -13.5 percent. There was wide variance within each sector: For example, pharmaceutical company Amgen paid 28 percent, while its competitor Baxter paid -7.1 percent. United Parcel Service paid 24.1 percent, while FedEx paid 0.9 percent. Elements of the U.S. tax code that have allowed companies to defer or reduce their tax burdens include accelerated depreciation of capital investments; research and experimentation tax credits; non-cash goodwill impairments; stock options; tax breaks awarded to specific industries; and offshore tax shelters. The report's authors (Robert S. McIntyre and Rebecca J. Wilkins of Citizens for Tax Justice, and Matthew Gardner and Richard Phillips for The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) write that lawmakers should enact corporate tax reform, focusing on what are officially known as "corporate tax expenditures"; reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax; revise how stock options are treated; adopt restrictions on abusive tax sheltering; reform how multi-national companies assign profits between foreign and domestic divisions; and repeal the rule allowing U.S. corporations to "defer" their U.S. taxes on their offshore profits, to end the incentive for shifting profits overseas. "Unfortunately," the report states, "corporate tax legislation now being promoted by many in Congress seems stuck on the idea that as a group, corporations are now either paying the perfect amount in federal income taxes or are paying too much. ... Meanwhile, GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely." The report's authors call on elected officials to stop "kowtowing to the loophole lobbyists" and enact corporate tax reform that benefits the majority of Americans. And what, dear Harry, has 'Bama and his congress done about this during the years after 'they won'? Nothing, nada, zero, zilch. You must be proud of him! Hypocritical bunch of liberals. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 03/11/2011 5:25 PM, John H wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 06:50:28 -0400, X ` wrote: (CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. Of those 280 companies, 78 corporations had at least one year during which their U.S. federal tax was zero or less, and many had more than one year paying no tax, despite recording profits; many of these companies also received tax rebates. In 2009 alone, 49 companies earned combined profits of $78.6 billion, yet paid no taxes - and collected tax rebates totaling $10.8 billion. The study also disputes claims that the U.S. charges excessive corporate tax rates compared to other countries: Two-thirds of the corporations studied which earned significant foreign AND U.S. profits over the same three-year period paid higher tax rates to foreign governments on their foreign profits than they paid to the U.S. government on their domestic profits. The study, conducted by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation& Economic Policy and published Thursday, examined the tax payments of 280 companies from the Fortune 500 - those that recorded profits in 2008, 2009 and 2010. (Companies that registered a loss for at least one year were not included in the study.) These companies reported total pre-tax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion, and many of the companies examined did pay close to the official corporate tax rate of 35 percent. But because of tax breaks and loopholes, many paid little or nothing. In the aggregate, these 280 companies actually paid about half the official corporate tax rate - 18.5 percent over the 2008-10 period, and slightly less (17.3 percent) over the last two years. In all, the tax breaks that reduced these companies' payments to the Treasury Department cost the United States more than $200 billion over three years. "Corporate Taxpayers& Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10" The analyses are based on financial data from SEC filings. The variation in tax payments did not correspond with profits: In some cases comparable companies with comparable U.S. pretax profits made wildly different tax payments. General Dynamics, on 3-year profits of $9.147 billion, paid an effective tax rate of 27 percent, while Boeing, on profits of $9.735 billion, paid -1.8 percent tax. According to the report: A quarter of the companies (71) paid more than 30 percent (averaging 32.3%) in corporate taxes over the three years. Another quarter (67) paid effective three-year tax rates of less than 10 percent, with the average effective tax rate being zero. Thirty of these companies paid LESS than zero. The following 30 profitable corporations paid no U.S. income tax from 2008-2010: Company / 2008-10 Profits ($ millions) / 2008-10 Taxes ($ millions) / Effective 2008-10 Rate Pepco Holdings $ 882 / $ -508 / -57.6% General Electric 10,460 / -4,737 / -45.3% Paccar 365 / -112 / -30.5% PG&E Corp. 4,855 / -1,027 / -21.2% Computer Sciences 1,666 / -305 / -18.3% NiSource 1,385 / -227 / -16.4% CenterPoint Energy 1,931 / -284 / -14.7% Tenet Healthcare 415 / -48 / -11.6% Atmos Energy 897 / -104 / -11.6% Integrys Energy Group 818 / -92 / -11.3% American Electric Power 5,899 / -545 / -9.2% Con-way 286 / -26 / -9.1% Ryder System 627 / -46 / -7.3% Baxter International 926 / -66 / -7.1% Wisconsin Energy 1,725 / -85 / -4.9% Duke Energy 5,475 / -216 / -3.9% DuPont 2,124 / -72 / -3.4% Consolidated Edison 4,263 / -127 / -3.0% Verizon Communications 32,518 / -951 / -2.9% Interpublic Group 571 / -15 / -2.6% CMS Energy 1,292 / -29 / -2.2% NextEra Energy 6,403 / -139 / -2.2% Navistar International 896 / -18 / -2.0% Boeing 9,735 / -178 / -1.8% Wells Fargo 49,370 / -681 / -1.4% El Paso 4,105 / -41 / -1.0% Mattel 1,020 / -9 / -0.9% Honeywell International 4,903 / -34 / -0.7% DTE Energy 2,551 / -17 / -0.7% Corning 1,977 / -4 / -0.2% TOTAL: On $160.341 billion in profits, they paid $ -10.742 billion in taxes, for an average effective tax rate of -6.7%. In some cases corporations may realize tax benefits for past years through rebates, or may win disputes with the IRS for previous tax periods, thereby accruing tax benefits not recorded in earlier financial reports. Of the companies receiving what the report terms "tax subsidies" - the difference between what they would have paid for their profits at the 35 percent rate and what they actually paid during the 2008-10 period - the largest subsidies went to Wells Fargo ($17.960 billion); AT&T ($14.491 billion); Verizon ($12.332 billion); General Electric ($8.398 billion); IBM ($8.265 billion); ExxonMobil ($4.096 billion); Boeing ($3.585 billion); PNC Financial Services ($3.354 billion); Goldman Sachs ($3.178 billion); and Procter& Gamble ($3.158 billion). More than half (56 percent) of tax subsidies were gained by four industries: Financial; utilities; telecommunications; and oil, gas& pipelines. There is also a wide range of tax payments between industry sectors. While retailers and health care paid an average effective tax rate of 30 percent or more, oil, gas& pipeline companies averaged 15.7 percent. Financial companies averaged 15.5 percent. Telecom companies averaged 8.2 percent. Gas and electric utilities paid an average effective tax rate of 3.7 percent. The lowest average rate was paid by the industrial machine sector, of -13.5 percent. There was wide variance within each sector: For example, pharmaceutical company Amgen paid 28 percent, while its competitor Baxter paid -7.1 percent. United Parcel Service paid 24.1 percent, while FedEx paid 0.9 percent. Elements of the U.S. tax code that have allowed companies to defer or reduce their tax burdens include accelerated depreciation of capital investments; research and experimentation tax credits; non-cash goodwill impairments; stock options; tax breaks awarded to specific industries; and offshore tax shelters. The report's authors (Robert S. McIntyre and Rebecca J. Wilkins of Citizens for Tax Justice, and Matthew Gardner and Richard Phillips for The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) write that lawmakers should enact corporate tax reform, focusing on what are officially known as "corporate tax expenditures"; reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax; revise how stock options are treated; adopt restrictions on abusive tax sheltering; reform how multi-national companies assign profits between foreign and domestic divisions; and repeal the rule allowing U.S. corporations to "defer" their U.S. taxes on their offshore profits, to end the incentive for shifting profits overseas. "Unfortunately," the report states, "corporate tax legislation now being promoted by many in Congress seems stuck on the idea that as a group, corporations are now either paying the perfect amount in federal income taxes or are paying too much. ... Meanwhile, GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely." The report's authors call on elected officials to stop "kowtowing to the loophole lobbyists" and enact corporate tax reform that benefits the majority of Americans. And what, dear Harry, has 'Bama and his congress done about this during the years after 'they won'? Nothing, nada, zero, zilch. You must be proud of him! Hypocritical bunch of liberals. Not entirely true. 0bama will have added at least $6 trillion of debt for you, your kids and grand kids to become debt-tax slaves. 0bama's legacy of debt will be with America for longer than we will live. As if to destroy USA with envy, greed and debt. The 0bama way. -- The reason government can't fix the economic problems is government is the problem. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 19:25:02 -0400, John H wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 06:50:28 -0400, X ` Man wrote: (CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. Of those 280 companies, 78 corporations had at least one year during which their U.S. federal tax was zero or less, and many had more than one year paying no tax, despite recording profits; many of these companies also received tax rebates. In 2009 alone, 49 companies earned combined profits of $78.6 billion, yet paid no taxes - and collected tax rebates totaling $10.8 billion. The study also disputes claims that the U.S. charges excessive corporate tax rates compared to other countries: Two-thirds of the corporations studied which earned significant foreign AND U.S. profits over the same three-year period paid higher tax rates to foreign governments on their foreign profits than they paid to the U.S. government on their domestic profits. The study, conducted by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy and published Thursday, examined the tax payments of 280 companies from the Fortune 500 - those that recorded profits in 2008, 2009 and 2010. (Companies that registered a loss for at least one year were not included in the study.) These companies reported total pre-tax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion, and many of the companies examined did pay close to the official corporate tax rate of 35 percent. But because of tax breaks and loopholes, many paid little or nothing. In the aggregate, these 280 companies actually paid about half the official corporate tax rate - 18.5 percent over the 2008-10 period, and slightly less (17.3 percent) over the last two years. In all, the tax breaks that reduced these companies' payments to the Treasury Department cost the United States more than $200 billion over three years. "Corporate Taxpayers & Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10" The analyses are based on financial data from SEC filings. The variation in tax payments did not correspond with profits: In some cases comparable companies with comparable U.S. pretax profits made wildly different tax payments. General Dynamics, on 3-year profits of $9.147 billion, paid an effective tax rate of 27 percent, while Boeing, on profits of $9.735 billion, paid -1.8 percent tax. According to the report: A quarter of the companies (71) paid more than 30 percent (averaging 32.3%) in corporate taxes over the three years. Another quarter (67) paid effective three-year tax rates of less than 10 percent, with the average effective tax rate being zero. Thirty of these companies paid LESS than zero. The following 30 profitable corporations paid no U.S. income tax from 2008-2010: Company / 2008-10 Profits ($ millions) / 2008-10 Taxes ($ millions) / Effective 2008-10 Rate Pepco Holdings $ 882 / $ -508 / -57.6% General Electric 10,460 / -4,737 / -45.3% Paccar 365 / -112 / -30.5% PG&E Corp. 4,855 / -1,027 / -21.2% Computer Sciences 1,666 / -305 / -18.3% NiSource 1,385 / -227 / -16.4% CenterPoint Energy 1,931 / -284 / -14.7% Tenet Healthcare 415 / -48 / -11.6% Atmos Energy 897 / -104 / -11.6% Integrys Energy Group 818 / -92 / -11.3% American Electric Power 5,899 / -545 / -9.2% Con-way 286 / -26 / -9.1% Ryder System 627 / -46 / -7.3% Baxter International 926 / -66 / -7.1% Wisconsin Energy 1,725 / -85 / -4.9% Duke Energy 5,475 / -216 / -3.9% DuPont 2,124 / -72 / -3.4% Consolidated Edison 4,263 / -127 / -3.0% Verizon Communications 32,518 / -951 / -2.9% Interpublic Group 571 / -15 / -2.6% CMS Energy 1,292 / -29 / -2.2% NextEra Energy 6,403 / -139 / -2.2% Navistar International 896 / -18 / -2.0% Boeing 9,735 / -178 / -1.8% Wells Fargo 49,370 / -681 / -1.4% El Paso 4,105 / -41 / -1.0% Mattel 1,020 / -9 / -0.9% Honeywell International 4,903 / -34 / -0.7% DTE Energy 2,551 / -17 / -0.7% Corning 1,977 / -4 / -0.2% TOTAL: On $160.341 billion in profits, they paid $ -10.742 billion in taxes, for an average effective tax rate of -6.7%. In some cases corporations may realize tax benefits for past years through rebates, or may win disputes with the IRS for previous tax periods, thereby accruing tax benefits not recorded in earlier financial reports. Of the companies receiving what the report terms "tax subsidies" - the difference between what they would have paid for their profits at the 35 percent rate and what they actually paid during the 2008-10 period - the largest subsidies went to Wells Fargo ($17.960 billion); AT&T ($14.491 billion); Verizon ($12.332 billion); General Electric ($8.398 billion); IBM ($8.265 billion); ExxonMobil ($4.096 billion); Boeing ($3.585 billion); PNC Financial Services ($3.354 billion); Goldman Sachs ($3.178 billion); and Procter & Gamble ($3.158 billion). More than half (56 percent) of tax subsidies were gained by four industries: Financial; utilities; telecommunications; and oil, gas & pipelines. There is also a wide range of tax payments between industry sectors. While retailers and health care paid an average effective tax rate of 30 percent or more, oil, gas & pipeline companies averaged 15.7 percent. Financial companies averaged 15.5 percent. Telecom companies averaged 8.2 percent. Gas and electric utilities paid an average effective tax rate of 3.7 percent. The lowest average rate was paid by the industrial machine sector, of -13.5 percent. There was wide variance within each sector: For example, pharmaceutical company Amgen paid 28 percent, while its competitor Baxter paid -7.1 percent. United Parcel Service paid 24.1 percent, while FedEx paid 0.9 percent. Elements of the U.S. tax code that have allowed companies to defer or reduce their tax burdens include accelerated depreciation of capital investments; research and experimentation tax credits; non-cash goodwill impairments; stock options; tax breaks awarded to specific industries; and offshore tax shelters. The report's authors (Robert S. McIntyre and Rebecca J. Wilkins of Citizens for Tax Justice, and Matthew Gardner and Richard Phillips for The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) write that lawmakers should enact corporate tax reform, focusing on what are officially known as "corporate tax expenditures"; reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax; revise how stock options are treated; adopt restrictions on abusive tax sheltering; reform how multi-national companies assign profits between foreign and domestic divisions; and repeal the rule allowing U.S. corporations to "defer" their U.S. taxes on their offshore profits, to end the incentive for shifting profits overseas. "Unfortunately," the report states, "corporate tax legislation now being promoted by many in Congress seems stuck on the idea that as a group, corporations are now either paying the perfect amount in federal income taxes or are paying too much. ... Meanwhile, GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely." The report's authors call on elected officials to stop "kowtowing to the loophole lobbyists" and enact corporate tax reform that benefits the majority of Americans. And what, dear Harry, has 'Bama and his congress done about this during the years after 'they won'? Nothing, nada, zero, zilch. You must be proud of him! Hypocritical bunch of liberals. ~~~~crickets~~~~ |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/4/11 7:51 AM, John H wrote:
On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 19:25:02 -0400, John wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 06:50:28 -0400, X ` wrote: (CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. Of those 280 companies, 78 corporations had at least one year during which their U.S. federal tax was zero or less, and many had more than one year paying no tax, despite recording profits; many of these companies also received tax rebates. In 2009 alone, 49 companies earned combined profits of $78.6 billion, yet paid no taxes - and collected tax rebates totaling $10.8 billion. The study also disputes claims that the U.S. charges excessive corporate tax rates compared to other countries: Two-thirds of the corporations studied which earned significant foreign AND U.S. profits over the same three-year period paid higher tax rates to foreign governments on their foreign profits than they paid to the U.S. government on their domestic profits. The study, conducted by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation& Economic Policy and published Thursday, examined the tax payments of 280 companies from the Fortune 500 - those that recorded profits in 2008, 2009 and 2010. (Companies that registered a loss for at least one year were not included in the study.) These companies reported total pre-tax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion, and many of the companies examined did pay close to the official corporate tax rate of 35 percent. But because of tax breaks and loopholes, many paid little or nothing. In the aggregate, these 280 companies actually paid about half the official corporate tax rate - 18.5 percent over the 2008-10 period, and slightly less (17.3 percent) over the last two years. In all, the tax breaks that reduced these companies' payments to the Treasury Department cost the United States more than $200 billion over three years. "Corporate Taxpayers& Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10" The analyses are based on financial data from SEC filings. The variation in tax payments did not correspond with profits: In some cases comparable companies with comparable U.S. pretax profits made wildly different tax payments. General Dynamics, on 3-year profits of $9.147 billion, paid an effective tax rate of 27 percent, while Boeing, on profits of $9.735 billion, paid -1.8 percent tax. According to the report: A quarter of the companies (71) paid more than 30 percent (averaging 32.3%) in corporate taxes over the three years. Another quarter (67) paid effective three-year tax rates of less than 10 percent, with the average effective tax rate being zero. Thirty of these companies paid LESS than zero. The following 30 profitable corporations paid no U.S. income tax from 2008-2010: Company / 2008-10 Profits ($ millions) / 2008-10 Taxes ($ millions) / Effective 2008-10 Rate Pepco Holdings $ 882 / $ -508 / -57.6% General Electric 10,460 / -4,737 / -45.3% Paccar 365 / -112 / -30.5% PG&E Corp. 4,855 / -1,027 / -21.2% Computer Sciences 1,666 / -305 / -18.3% NiSource 1,385 / -227 / -16.4% CenterPoint Energy 1,931 / -284 / -14.7% Tenet Healthcare 415 / -48 / -11.6% Atmos Energy 897 / -104 / -11.6% Integrys Energy Group 818 / -92 / -11.3% American Electric Power 5,899 / -545 / -9.2% Con-way 286 / -26 / -9.1% Ryder System 627 / -46 / -7.3% Baxter International 926 / -66 / -7.1% Wisconsin Energy 1,725 / -85 / -4.9% Duke Energy 5,475 / -216 / -3.9% DuPont 2,124 / -72 / -3.4% Consolidated Edison 4,263 / -127 / -3.0% Verizon Communications 32,518 / -951 / -2.9% Interpublic Group 571 / -15 / -2.6% CMS Energy 1,292 / -29 / -2.2% NextEra Energy 6,403 / -139 / -2.2% Navistar International 896 / -18 / -2.0% Boeing 9,735 / -178 / -1.8% Wells Fargo 49,370 / -681 / -1.4% El Paso 4,105 / -41 / -1.0% Mattel 1,020 / -9 / -0.9% Honeywell International 4,903 / -34 / -0.7% DTE Energy 2,551 / -17 / -0.7% Corning 1,977 / -4 / -0.2% TOTAL: On $160.341 billion in profits, they paid $ -10.742 billion in taxes, for an average effective tax rate of -6.7%. In some cases corporations may realize tax benefits for past years through rebates, or may win disputes with the IRS for previous tax periods, thereby accruing tax benefits not recorded in earlier financial reports. Of the companies receiving what the report terms "tax subsidies" - the difference between what they would have paid for their profits at the 35 percent rate and what they actually paid during the 2008-10 period - the largest subsidies went to Wells Fargo ($17.960 billion); AT&T ($14.491 billion); Verizon ($12.332 billion); General Electric ($8.398 billion); IBM ($8.265 billion); ExxonMobil ($4.096 billion); Boeing ($3.585 billion); PNC Financial Services ($3.354 billion); Goldman Sachs ($3.178 billion); and Procter& Gamble ($3.158 billion). More than half (56 percent) of tax subsidies were gained by four industries: Financial; utilities; telecommunications; and oil, gas& pipelines. There is also a wide range of tax payments between industry sectors. While retailers and health care paid an average effective tax rate of 30 percent or more, oil, gas& pipeline companies averaged 15.7 percent. Financial companies averaged 15.5 percent. Telecom companies averaged 8.2 percent. Gas and electric utilities paid an average effective tax rate of 3.7 percent. The lowest average rate was paid by the industrial machine sector, of -13.5 percent. There was wide variance within each sector: For example, pharmaceutical company Amgen paid 28 percent, while its competitor Baxter paid -7.1 percent. United Parcel Service paid 24.1 percent, while FedEx paid 0.9 percent. Elements of the U.S. tax code that have allowed companies to defer or reduce their tax burdens include accelerated depreciation of capital investments; research and experimentation tax credits; non-cash goodwill impairments; stock options; tax breaks awarded to specific industries; and offshore tax shelters. The report's authors (Robert S. McIntyre and Rebecca J. Wilkins of Citizens for Tax Justice, and Matthew Gardner and Richard Phillips for The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) write that lawmakers should enact corporate tax reform, focusing on what are officially known as "corporate tax expenditures"; reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax; revise how stock options are treated; adopt restrictions on abusive tax sheltering; reform how multi-national companies assign profits between foreign and domestic divisions; and repeal the rule allowing U.S. corporations to "defer" their U.S. taxes on their offshore profits, to end the incentive for shifting profits overseas. "Unfortunately," the report states, "corporate tax legislation now being promoted by many in Congress seems stuck on the idea that as a group, corporations are now either paying the perfect amount in federal income taxes or are paying too much. ... Meanwhile, GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely." The report's authors call on elected officials to stop "kowtowing to the loophole lobbyists" and enact corporate tax reform that benefits the majority of Americans. And what, dear Harry, has 'Bama and his congress done about this during the years after 'they won'? Nothing, nada, zero, zilch. You must be proud of him! Hypocritical bunch of liberals. ~~~~crickets~~~~ As I posted yesterday, Herring, I don't engage racists in polite conversation. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/4/2011 7:57 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/4/11 7:51 AM, John H wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 19:25:02 -0400, John wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 06:50:28 -0400, X ` wrote: (CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. Of those 280 companies, 78 corporations had at least one year during which their U.S. federal tax was zero or less, and many had more than one year paying no tax, despite recording profits; many of these companies also received tax rebates. In 2009 alone, 49 companies earned combined profits of $78.6 billion, yet paid no taxes - and collected tax rebates totaling $10.8 billion. The study also disputes claims that the U.S. charges excessive corporate tax rates compared to other countries: Two-thirds of the corporations studied which earned significant foreign AND U.S. profits over the same three-year period paid higher tax rates to foreign governments on their foreign profits than they paid to the U.S. government on their domestic profits. The study, conducted by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation& Economic Policy and published Thursday, examined the tax payments of 280 companies from the Fortune 500 - those that recorded profits in 2008, 2009 and 2010. (Companies that registered a loss for at least one year were not included in the study.) These companies reported total pre-tax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion, and many of the companies examined did pay close to the official corporate tax rate of 35 percent. But because of tax breaks and loopholes, many paid little or nothing. In the aggregate, these 280 companies actually paid about half the official corporate tax rate - 18.5 percent over the 2008-10 period, and slightly less (17.3 percent) over the last two years. In all, the tax breaks that reduced these companies' payments to the Treasury Department cost the United States more than $200 billion over three years. "Corporate Taxpayers& Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10" The analyses are based on financial data from SEC filings. The variation in tax payments did not correspond with profits: In some cases comparable companies with comparable U.S. pretax profits made wildly different tax payments. General Dynamics, on 3-year profits of $9.147 billion, paid an effective tax rate of 27 percent, while Boeing, on profits of $9.735 billion, paid -1.8 percent tax. According to the report: A quarter of the companies (71) paid more than 30 percent (averaging 32.3%) in corporate taxes over the three years. Another quarter (67) paid effective three-year tax rates of less than 10 percent, with the average effective tax rate being zero. Thirty of these companies paid LESS than zero. The following 30 profitable corporations paid no U.S. income tax from 2008-2010: Company / 2008-10 Profits ($ millions) / 2008-10 Taxes ($ millions) / Effective 2008-10 Rate Pepco Holdings $ 882 / $ -508 / -57.6% General Electric 10,460 / -4,737 / -45.3% Paccar 365 / -112 / -30.5% PG&E Corp. 4,855 / -1,027 / -21.2% Computer Sciences 1,666 / -305 / -18.3% NiSource 1,385 / -227 / -16.4% CenterPoint Energy 1,931 / -284 / -14.7% Tenet Healthcare 415 / -48 / -11.6% Atmos Energy 897 / -104 / -11.6% Integrys Energy Group 818 / -92 / -11.3% American Electric Power 5,899 / -545 / -9.2% Con-way 286 / -26 / -9.1% Ryder System 627 / -46 / -7.3% Baxter International 926 / -66 / -7.1% Wisconsin Energy 1,725 / -85 / -4.9% Duke Energy 5,475 / -216 / -3.9% DuPont 2,124 / -72 / -3.4% Consolidated Edison 4,263 / -127 / -3.0% Verizon Communications 32,518 / -951 / -2.9% Interpublic Group 571 / -15 / -2.6% CMS Energy 1,292 / -29 / -2.2% NextEra Energy 6,403 / -139 / -2.2% Navistar International 896 / -18 / -2.0% Boeing 9,735 / -178 / -1.8% Wells Fargo 49,370 / -681 / -1.4% El Paso 4,105 / -41 / -1.0% Mattel 1,020 / -9 / -0.9% Honeywell International 4,903 / -34 / -0.7% DTE Energy 2,551 / -17 / -0.7% Corning 1,977 / -4 / -0.2% TOTAL: On $160.341 billion in profits, they paid $ -10.742 billion in taxes, for an average effective tax rate of -6.7%. In some cases corporations may realize tax benefits for past years through rebates, or may win disputes with the IRS for previous tax periods, thereby accruing tax benefits not recorded in earlier financial reports. Of the companies receiving what the report terms "tax subsidies" - the difference between what they would have paid for their profits at the 35 percent rate and what they actually paid during the 2008-10 period - the largest subsidies went to Wells Fargo ($17.960 billion); AT&T ($14.491 billion); Verizon ($12.332 billion); General Electric ($8.398 billion); IBM ($8.265 billion); ExxonMobil ($4.096 billion); Boeing ($3.585 billion); PNC Financial Services ($3.354 billion); Goldman Sachs ($3.178 billion); and Procter& Gamble ($3.158 billion). More than half (56 percent) of tax subsidies were gained by four industries: Financial; utilities; telecommunications; and oil, gas& pipelines. There is also a wide range of tax payments between industry sectors. While retailers and health care paid an average effective tax rate of 30 percent or more, oil, gas& pipeline companies averaged 15.7 percent. Financial companies averaged 15.5 percent. Telecom companies averaged 8.2 percent. Gas and electric utilities paid an average effective tax rate of 3.7 percent. The lowest average rate was paid by the industrial machine sector, of -13.5 percent. There was wide variance within each sector: For example, pharmaceutical company Amgen paid 28 percent, while its competitor Baxter paid -7.1 percent. United Parcel Service paid 24.1 percent, while FedEx paid 0.9 percent. Elements of the U.S. tax code that have allowed companies to defer or reduce their tax burdens include accelerated depreciation of capital investments; research and experimentation tax credits; non-cash goodwill impairments; stock options; tax breaks awarded to specific industries; and offshore tax shelters. The report's authors (Robert S. McIntyre and Rebecca J. Wilkins of Citizens for Tax Justice, and Matthew Gardner and Richard Phillips for The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) write that lawmakers should enact corporate tax reform, focusing on what are officially known as "corporate tax expenditures"; reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax; revise how stock options are treated; adopt restrictions on abusive tax sheltering; reform how multi-national companies assign profits between foreign and domestic divisions; and repeal the rule allowing U.S. corporations to "defer" their U.S. taxes on their offshore profits, to end the incentive for shifting profits overseas. "Unfortunately," the report states, "corporate tax legislation now being promoted by many in Congress seems stuck on the idea that as a group, corporations are now either paying the perfect amount in federal income taxes or are paying too much. ... Meanwhile, GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely." The report's authors call on elected officials to stop "kowtowing to the loophole lobbyists" and enact corporate tax reform that benefits the majority of Americans. And what, dear Harry, has 'Bama and his congress done about this during the years after 'they won'? Nothing, nada, zero, zilch. You must be proud of him! Hypocritical bunch of liberals. ~~~~crickets~~~~ As I posted yesterday, Herring, I don't engage racists in polite conversation. That's OK. We don't engage assholes in conversation.......period. But it sure is fun toying with them from time to time. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
In article ,
says... On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? I take it that Harry's little consulting business is a not for profit..... |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Fri, 4 Nov 2011 08:57:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? I take it that Harry's little consulting business is a not for profit..... ====== If so it is no doubt unintentional. Most people with out of state corporations are trying to hide something, either taxable revenue or assets. I originally assumed revenue but it might be assets. That could explain why the house is in his wife's name also. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/4/11 11:21 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 4 Nov 2011 08:57:31 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? I take it that Harry's little consulting business is a not for profit..... ====== If so it is no doubt unintentional. Most people with out of state corporations are trying to hide something, either taxable revenue or assets. I originally assumed revenue but it might be assets. That could explain why the house is in his wife's name also. You obviously need an "I'm an Asshole Obsessed with Harry" membership card. Maybe I'll send you one, Beardsley. |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 08:39:00 -0400, Drifter wrote:
On 11/4/2011 7:57 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/4/11 7:51 AM, John H wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 19:25:02 -0400, John wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 06:50:28 -0400, X ` wrote: (CBS News) Advocates for reducing U.S. corporate tax rates argue that lower corporate rates charged in other countries impede American competitiveness. Yet a new study finds that many of the nation's top companies are already paying less in U.S. taxes on their pretax profits than they do overseas. In a study comprising more than half of the Fortune 500 list of the largest U.S. corporations, a quarter of those examined paid little or nothing in federal income taxes during the 2008-2010 period, despite registering profits in all three years. Of those 280 companies, 78 corporations had at least one year during which their U.S. federal tax was zero or less, and many had more than one year paying no tax, despite recording profits; many of these companies also received tax rebates. In 2009 alone, 49 companies earned combined profits of $78.6 billion, yet paid no taxes - and collected tax rebates totaling $10.8 billion. The study also disputes claims that the U.S. charges excessive corporate tax rates compared to other countries: Two-thirds of the corporations studied which earned significant foreign AND U.S. profits over the same three-year period paid higher tax rates to foreign governments on their foreign profits than they paid to the U.S. government on their domestic profits. The study, conducted by Citizens for Tax Justice and the Institute on Taxation& Economic Policy and published Thursday, examined the tax payments of 280 companies from the Fortune 500 - those that recorded profits in 2008, 2009 and 2010. (Companies that registered a loss for at least one year were not included in the study.) These companies reported total pre-tax U.S. profits of $1.4 trillion, and many of the companies examined did pay close to the official corporate tax rate of 35 percent. But because of tax breaks and loopholes, many paid little or nothing. In the aggregate, these 280 companies actually paid about half the official corporate tax rate - 18.5 percent over the 2008-10 period, and slightly less (17.3 percent) over the last two years. In all, the tax breaks that reduced these companies' payments to the Treasury Department cost the United States more than $200 billion over three years. "Corporate Taxpayers& Corporate Tax Dodgers 2008-10" The analyses are based on financial data from SEC filings. The variation in tax payments did not correspond with profits: In some cases comparable companies with comparable U.S. pretax profits made wildly different tax payments. General Dynamics, on 3-year profits of $9.147 billion, paid an effective tax rate of 27 percent, while Boeing, on profits of $9.735 billion, paid -1.8 percent tax. According to the report: A quarter of the companies (71) paid more than 30 percent (averaging 32.3%) in corporate taxes over the three years. Another quarter (67) paid effective three-year tax rates of less than 10 percent, with the average effective tax rate being zero. Thirty of these companies paid LESS than zero. The following 30 profitable corporations paid no U.S. income tax from 2008-2010: Company / 2008-10 Profits ($ millions) / 2008-10 Taxes ($ millions) / Effective 2008-10 Rate Pepco Holdings $ 882 / $ -508 / -57.6% General Electric 10,460 / -4,737 / -45.3% Paccar 365 / -112 / -30.5% PG&E Corp. 4,855 / -1,027 / -21.2% Computer Sciences 1,666 / -305 / -18.3% NiSource 1,385 / -227 / -16.4% CenterPoint Energy 1,931 / -284 / -14.7% Tenet Healthcare 415 / -48 / -11.6% Atmos Energy 897 / -104 / -11.6% Integrys Energy Group 818 / -92 / -11.3% American Electric Power 5,899 / -545 / -9.2% Con-way 286 / -26 / -9.1% Ryder System 627 / -46 / -7.3% Baxter International 926 / -66 / -7.1% Wisconsin Energy 1,725 / -85 / -4.9% Duke Energy 5,475 / -216 / -3.9% DuPont 2,124 / -72 / -3.4% Consolidated Edison 4,263 / -127 / -3.0% Verizon Communications 32,518 / -951 / -2.9% Interpublic Group 571 / -15 / -2.6% CMS Energy 1,292 / -29 / -2.2% NextEra Energy 6,403 / -139 / -2.2% Navistar International 896 / -18 / -2.0% Boeing 9,735 / -178 / -1.8% Wells Fargo 49,370 / -681 / -1.4% El Paso 4,105 / -41 / -1.0% Mattel 1,020 / -9 / -0.9% Honeywell International 4,903 / -34 / -0.7% DTE Energy 2,551 / -17 / -0.7% Corning 1,977 / -4 / -0.2% TOTAL: On $160.341 billion in profits, they paid $ -10.742 billion in taxes, for an average effective tax rate of -6.7%. In some cases corporations may realize tax benefits for past years through rebates, or may win disputes with the IRS for previous tax periods, thereby accruing tax benefits not recorded in earlier financial reports. Of the companies receiving what the report terms "tax subsidies" - the difference between what they would have paid for their profits at the 35 percent rate and what they actually paid during the 2008-10 period - the largest subsidies went to Wells Fargo ($17.960 billion); AT&T ($14.491 billion); Verizon ($12.332 billion); General Electric ($8.398 billion); IBM ($8.265 billion); ExxonMobil ($4.096 billion); Boeing ($3.585 billion); PNC Financial Services ($3.354 billion); Goldman Sachs ($3.178 billion); and Procter& Gamble ($3.158 billion). More than half (56 percent) of tax subsidies were gained by four industries: Financial; utilities; telecommunications; and oil, gas& pipelines. There is also a wide range of tax payments between industry sectors. While retailers and health care paid an average effective tax rate of 30 percent or more, oil, gas& pipeline companies averaged 15.7 percent. Financial companies averaged 15.5 percent. Telecom companies averaged 8.2 percent. Gas and electric utilities paid an average effective tax rate of 3.7 percent. The lowest average rate was paid by the industrial machine sector, of -13.5 percent. There was wide variance within each sector: For example, pharmaceutical company Amgen paid 28 percent, while its competitor Baxter paid -7.1 percent. United Parcel Service paid 24.1 percent, while FedEx paid 0.9 percent. Elements of the U.S. tax code that have allowed companies to defer or reduce their tax burdens include accelerated depreciation of capital investments; research and experimentation tax credits; non-cash goodwill impairments; stock options; tax breaks awarded to specific industries; and offshore tax shelters. The report's authors (Robert S. McIntyre and Rebecca J. Wilkins of Citizens for Tax Justice, and Matthew Gardner and Richard Phillips for The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy) write that lawmakers should enact corporate tax reform, focusing on what are officially known as "corporate tax expenditures"; reinstate a strong corporate Alternative Minimum Tax; revise how stock options are treated; adopt restrictions on abusive tax sheltering; reform how multi-national companies assign profits between foreign and domestic divisions; and repeal the rule allowing U.S. corporations to "defer" their U.S. taxes on their offshore profits, to end the incentive for shifting profits overseas. "Unfortunately," the report states, "corporate tax legislation now being promoted by many in Congress seems stuck on the idea that as a group, corporations are now either paying the perfect amount in federal income taxes or are paying too much. ... Meanwhile, GOP candidates for president are all promoting huge cuts in the corporate tax or, in several cases, even elimination of the corporate income tax entirely." The report's authors call on elected officials to stop "kowtowing to the loophole lobbyists" and enact corporate tax reform that benefits the majority of Americans. And what, dear Harry, has 'Bama and his congress done about this during the years after 'they won'? Nothing, nada, zero, zilch. You must be proud of him! Hypocritical bunch of liberals. ~~~~crickets~~~~ As I posted yesterday, Herring, I don't engage racists in polite conversation. That's OK. We don't engage assholes in conversation.......period. But it sure is fun toying with them from time to time. QED, again! |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Fri, 04 Nov 2011 11:24:36 -0400, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/4/11 11:21 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Fri, 4 Nov 2011 08:57:31 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? I take it that Harry's little consulting business is a not for profit..... ====== If so it is no doubt unintentional. Most people with out of state corporations are trying to hide something, either taxable revenue or assets. I originally assumed revenue but it might be assets. That could explain why the house is in his wife's name also. You obviously need an "I'm an Asshole Obsessed with Harry" membership card. Maybe I'll send you one, Beardsley. More name-calling, Harry? Is that the best you can do? |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/4/2011 11:24 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/4/11 11:21 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Fri, 4 Nov 2011 08:57:31 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? I take it that Harry's little consulting business is a not for profit..... ====== If so it is no doubt unintentional. Most people with out of state corporations are trying to hide something, either taxable revenue or assets. I originally assumed revenue but it might be assets. That could explain why the house is in his wife's name also. You obviously need an "I'm an Asshole Obsessed with Harry" membership card. Maybe I'll send you one, Beardsley. Singling out one guy for the honor? That's not fair. Why not put a copy up on your photobucket so we can all download a copy. -- 1-20-13 The end of an error |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
|
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseas profits
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 21:24:10 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 05 Nov 2011 13:29:15 -0400, Drifter wrote: On 11/5/2011 12:19 PM, wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:53:59 -0400, wrote: On 11/3/2011 1:53 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 11/3/11 1:32 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:42:39 -0400, wrote: I wonder why corporations leave the US tax haven and move to far off places? Harry knows the answer but he won't admit it. ====== It's not that simple. A lot of Fortune 500 companies are multi-nationals meaning that they do business internationally and generate profits in different countries/currencies. If they repatriate that money back to the US they get hit with double taxation, first where they earned it, and again here when they bring it back. A lot of them would like to bring profits back but not at the cost of double taxation. Beardsley's corporate apologetica continues. Wayne made an intelligent assumption and you made a fool of yourself, AGAIN. Way to go WAFA. And we should adopt that ASSUMPTION as fact? Why? I don't know. Should you? You tell me. OK, I'll play. I'd never make an argument based on the "intelligent assumption" of another person. Intelligent is subjective and assumption is, well: arrogance; presumption, presumptuousness, effrontery, forwardness, gall. But, go ahead, stick it out there with subjective effrontery and see if you don't get it sliced off.... ========= Not sure exactly what your point is but you don't have to take my word for it: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3441 http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/11/04/Can-Corporate-Tax-Reform-Really-Be-Revenue-Neutral.aspx#page1 http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/2011/06/chuck_schumers_amazing_double-.php http://www.fiscalaccountability.org/index.php?content=cog09-15# |
Many companies pay less in US taxes than they do on overseasprofits
On 11/4/2011 11:24 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 11/4/11 11:21 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Fri, 4 Nov 2011 08:57:31 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Thu, 03 Nov 2011 17:59:10 -0400, X ` Man wrote: I still have as clients several corporations with whom I have been doing business for decades. ======== You have evil corporations as clients? Wow, that's just a bit of hypocrisy don't you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy We all know that prostitutes do it for money, but Harry Krause? The shame of it all. Who can you trust these days? I take it that Harry's little consulting business is a not for profit..... ====== If so it is no doubt unintentional. Most people with out of state corporations are trying to hide something, either taxable revenue or assets. I originally assumed revenue but it might be assets. That could explain why the house is in his wife's name also. You obviously need an "I'm an Asshole Obsessed with Harry" membership card. Maybe I'll send you one, Beardsley. Methinks Wayne hit the truth... |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:41 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com