Sun Jul 26, 2015, 03:50 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
Bernie Sanders: Top 10 Corporate Tax CheatsGeneral Electric
From 2008 to 2013, while GE made over $33.9 billion in United States profits, it received a total tax refund of more than $2.9 billion from the Internal Revenue Service. Boeing From 2008 to 2013, while Boeing made over $26.4 billion in U.S. profits, it received a total tax refund of $401 million from the IRS. Boeing’s effective U.S. corporate income tax rate over this six-year period was -2 percent. Verizon From 2008 to 2013, while Verizon made over $42.4 billion in U.S. profits, it received a total tax refund of $732 million from the IRS. Bank of America Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS in 2010, even though it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of more than $1.3 trillion http://www.sanders.senate.gov/top-10-corporate-tax-avoiders These Corps are raiding the wealth of America's Working Class just to stash profits made in America in offshore bank accounts. What is even worse most of the $MultiMillion dollar CEOs want to see the eligibility age for social security and Medicare raised to 70. Got to admit "Bernie gets it"
|
84 replies, 9234 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | OP |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #1 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #2 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #5 | |
sabrina 1 | Jul 2015 | #10 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #12 | |
udbcrzy2 | Jul 2015 | #20 | |
restorefreedom | Jul 2015 | #3 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #6 | |
restorefreedom | Jul 2015 | #9 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #11 | |
restorefreedom | Jul 2015 | #35 | |
7962 | Jul 2015 | #66 | |
JaneyVee | Jul 2015 | #4 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #7 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #8 | |
JaneyVee | Jul 2015 | #25 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #30 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #34 | |
jwirr | Jul 2015 | #39 | |
RoccoR5955 | Jul 2015 | #14 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #16 | |
malokvale77 | Jul 2015 | #23 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #24 | |
beam me up scottie | Jul 2015 | #36 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #44 | |
beam me up scottie | Jul 2015 | #45 | |
RoccoR5955 | Jul 2015 | #47 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #48 | |
malokvale77 | Jul 2015 | #79 | |
7962 | Jul 2015 | #68 | |
RoccoR5955 | Jul 2015 | #69 | |
7962 | Jul 2015 | #70 | |
malokvale77 | Jul 2015 | #22 | |
rhett o rick | Jul 2015 | #51 | |
LeftOfWest | Jul 2015 | #54 | |
malokvale77 | Jul 2015 | #78 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #28 | |
rhett o rick | Jul 2015 | #50 | |
Cleita | Jul 2015 | #13 | |
SoapBox | Jul 2015 | #15 | |
MerryBlooms | Jul 2015 | #17 | |
udbcrzy2 | Jul 2015 | #18 | |
99th_Monkey | Jul 2015 | #21 | |
azmom | Jul 2015 | #19 | |
beam me up scottie | Jul 2015 | #26 | |
WillyT | Jul 2015 | #27 | |
KT2000 | Jul 2015 | #29 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #31 | |
KT2000 | Jul 2015 | #33 | |
DebJ | Jul 2015 | #74 | |
appalachiablue | Jul 2015 | #32 | |
cantbeserious | Jul 2015 | #37 | |
bananas | Jul 2015 | #38 | |
Enthusiast | Jul 2015 | #40 | |
Le Taz Hot | Jul 2015 | #41 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #42 | |
beam me up scottie | Jul 2015 | #43 | |
frazzled | Jul 2015 | #46 | |
Sheepshank | Jul 2015 | #52 | |
JDPriestly | Jul 2015 | #72 | |
Ed Suspicious | Jul 2015 | #49 | |
Scuba | Jul 2015 | #53 | |
Tommymac | Jul 2015 | #55 | |
PatrickforO | Jul 2015 | #56 | |
raouldukelives | Jul 2015 | #57 | |
lonestarnot | Jul 2015 | #58 | |
Diremoon | Jul 2015 | #59 | |
stevenleser | Jul 2015 | #75 | |
Chico Man | Jul 2015 | #60 | |
Ed Suspicious | Jul 2015 | #61 | |
Chico Man | Jul 2015 | #62 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #64 | |
Chico Man | Jul 2015 | #65 | |
L0oniX | Jul 2015 | #63 | |
MADem | Jul 2015 | #67 | |
StarzGuy | Jul 2015 | #71 | |
EndElectoral | Jul 2015 | #73 | |
WDIM | Jul 2015 | #76 | |
stuffmatters | Jul 2015 | #77 | |
FreakinDJ | Jul 2015 | #80 | |
beam me up scottie | Jul 2015 | #81 | |
stuffmatters | Aug 2015 | #83 | |
beam me up scottie | Aug 2015 | #84 | |
azmom | Jul 2015 | #82 |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 03:56 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
1. Holy Crap!
Last edited Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:47 PM - Edit history (1) Imagine what we could do with all those "refunds", just from these four
corporations ... roughly $4 BILLION .. I'm thinking jobs to rebuild infrastructure, paying back to SS what Bush2 plundered it for, single-payer health care 4 all <-- it would probably cover about all of these. Obviously I'm making very rough estimates here, but still .. $4 BILLION. |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #1)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 03:58 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
2. Total take is estimated at $225 Billion per year
Lost to "Tax Loop Hole Legislation" bought and paid for by these coprs
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #2)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:08 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
5. and "paid for" to whom, exactly?
It's high time to start naming names. Who voted for these loopholes?
Who was POTUS when they were signed into law, rather than vetoed, etc. |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #5)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:16 PM
sabrina 1 (62,325 posts)
10. Yes, name names. Who is voting for this stuff? Corporate funded candidates.
Not Bernie Sanders. And this is what all the distractions we are seeing are intended to prevent, discussion of this most important issue.
|
Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #10)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:28 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
12. Like we always like to say on the Left
follow the money, and the votes & vetoes --or lack there of.
There is some serious research here to be done, and I trust that Team Bernie is already on-it. There's gold in them thar' hills. |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #1)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:45 PM
udbcrzy2 (891 posts)
20. This ^^^^ n/t
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:01 PM
restorefreedom (12,655 posts)
3. would love to see which d candidates
they are giving $ to
well we know it is not bernie |
Response to restorefreedom (Reply #3)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:09 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
6. Damn Straight. Can we start naming names here?
This is going to be a very interesting Primary season.
Go Bernie Go!! ![]() |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #6)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:15 PM
restorefreedom (12,655 posts)
9. i would ,love to see the research
i am sure those numbers are somewhere.
|
Response to restorefreedom (Reply #9)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:21 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
11. MEMO to Team Bernie
If no one's already on this, please let us know, so we can
take it on at DU for Bernie Group. |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #11)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 06:12 PM
restorefreedom (12,655 posts)
35. good idea
maybe an xpost to the group?
|
Response to restorefreedom (Reply #3)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 12:31 PM
7962 (11,841 posts)
66. Beat me to it!
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:07 PM
JaneyVee (19,877 posts)
4. It's not really cheating because unfortunately it's all legal...
And companies like GE pay huge amounts in taxes, although it could be argued that they pay more.
|
Response to JaneyVee (Reply #4)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:10 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
7. I'm sure they pay taxes in China which they deduct from their US Tax burden
which is why they receive a "Tax Return" even when they pay No US Taxes
|
Response to JaneyVee (Reply #4)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:12 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
8. Of course "it's all legal". But that totally begs some pressing questions ...
It's high time to start naming names. Who voted for these loopholes?
Who was POTUS when they were signed into law, rather than vetoed, What's Hillary's and O'Malley's positions on these loopholes? what did I miss? ![]() |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #8)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:16 PM
JaneyVee (19,877 posts)
25. That was exactly my point...
Everything they do is legal, they can afford to hire armies of accountants.
|
Response to JaneyVee (Reply #25)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:29 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
30. I should have known better
yes, accountants, lawyers, lobbyists ,,, the same folks who sit around
behind closed doors to write crap into law, like the TPP, et. al. Sorry JaneyVee if I offended in any way. I need to check handles more closely before posting sometimes. ![]() |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #30)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:48 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
34. Yes they can afford to "Out Lobbyist the 99%" but is Representative Governance
only afforded to those that can hire the most lobbyist
Our Representatives - Congress-critters Senators, even the President, have a fiduciary duty to those they represent - "ALL of us" and that includes 99% of Americans So while YES the corporations have lobbied for and received the most lucrative tax loop holes imaginable - do we continue and condone this policy to the point it renders SSI merely a hidden tax platform raising the eligibility age to a point beyond the life span of 99% of those paying into the fund |
Response to JaneyVee (Reply #25)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 06:30 PM
jwirr (39,215 posts)
39. They have spent 30+ years making it legal for them to do this type of things. Reagan started
deregulating things and every president since then as contributed to this process. Some also lowered taxes in addition. We have been going down hill for a long time.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to JaneyVee (Reply #4)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:33 PM
RoccoR5955 (12,471 posts)
14. GE pays huge amounts in taxes?!?!?!?
I don't know where you got this information from, but it is out and out WRONG!
They paid a billion in taxes, but got a rebate of over THREE BILLION! Look it up for yourself, if you don't believe me, Unless you are living in Bizzaroland. |
Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #14)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:38 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
16. So you're defending GE's tax loop-holes
or so it would seem.
![]() |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #16)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:04 PM
malokvale77 (4,879 posts)
23. I could be wrong...
but I don't believe RoccoR5955 was defending GE.
|
Response to malokvale77 (Reply #23)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:09 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
24. I could be wrong too
but I'd like to hear exactly how I'm wrong from RoccoR5955 .
Either GE benefited hugely from a tax loophole or they didn't. I'm all ears. |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #24)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 06:19 PM
beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)
36. Looks like they were responding to JaneyVee's post #4
Saying she was wrong, not you.
![]() |
Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #36)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 07:23 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
44. That's a refreshing change
Everyone looking for common ground, not division & vitriol
I must be in the Bernie Sanders group. ![]() |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #44)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 07:25 PM
beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)
45. Yes it is.
![]() |
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #16)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 08:58 PM
RoccoR5955 (12,471 posts)
47. No I am not
I was merely citing the falsity that someone posted that GE pays taxes.
I wish to hell they paid all of their taxes, and had their loopholes plugged with cement! |
Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #47)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 09:08 PM
99th_Monkey (19,326 posts)
48. +100 nt
Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #48)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 06:33 PM
malokvale77 (4,879 posts)
79. +100
In this case we seem to all be on the same side of the issue.
It's not always easy to know here on the DU. ![]() |
Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #47)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 12:35 PM
7962 (11,841 posts)
68. MAke the corporate tax a flat rate 0 deductions and there wouldnt be any of this.
And there wouldnt be any armies of lawyers working to get out of paying either
|
Response to 7962 (Reply #68)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 12:37 PM
RoccoR5955 (12,471 posts)
69. A flat rate wouldn't do it.
Even though it would be an equal percentage, corporations with less money would feel it more than those with lots of money.
Same for the damn flat income tax. |
Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #69)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 12:42 PM
7962 (11,841 posts)
70. Well the current higher rate certainly isnt doing it either.
We've got the highest corp rate in the world, but nobody pays it.
Maybe start the tax above a certain level, just like what would have to be done for an income tax. Smaller corps may not even have to pay ANY tax and they wouldnt have to spend a ton of money on lawyers to do it for them. |
Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #14)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:03 PM
malokvale77 (4,879 posts)
22. Some here don't even bother to pretend anymore.
It is sad to see so called Democrats defend corporate greed.
|
Response to malokvale77 (Reply #22)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 12:45 AM
rhett o rick (55,981 posts)
51. It's authoritarianism. They think that big money is goodness and will take care of them. Afraid to
fight for freedoms and liberties.
|
Response to malokvale77 (Reply #22)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 05:09 AM
LeftOfWest (482 posts)
54. Why is that still happening?!!?
Why did it ever happen?!!?
I do not get that at all. Disgusting money for me and not you sell out crap. |
Response to LeftOfWest (Reply #54)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 06:19 PM
malokvale77 (4,879 posts)
78. "Why is that still happening?!!?"
Follow the money.
It is especially painful to see on DU. |
Response to JaneyVee (Reply #4)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:27 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
28. This is why $Romnie didn't want to release his Taxes during his campaign
Not that he cheated on his taxes - he probably didn't. But that 99% of Americans don't realize the massive tax loop holes they use to game the system
|
Response to JaneyVee (Reply #4)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 12:42 AM
rhett o rick (55,981 posts)
50. They get tax subsidies, they don't pay any taxes. Why are you defending these tax cheats? nm
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:36 PM
SoapBox (18,791 posts)
15. Arghhhhh...Grrrrrrrr....
Well this drives up my blood pressure.
![]() |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:39 PM
MerryBlooms (11,269 posts)
17. rec & kick
![]() |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 04:42 PM
udbcrzy2 (891 posts)
18. This is why Bernie matters and they will #FeelTheBern n/t
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:17 PM
beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)
26. KnR
Everyone needs to get it.
![]() |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:22 PM
WillyT (72,631 posts)
27. K & R !!!
![]() |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:28 PM
KT2000 (20,323 posts)
29. question about tax refunds
what does it mean when the corporation gets a tax refund? Does this mean the government is giving them money or is this a refund from what they have already paid?
|
Response to KT2000 (Reply #29)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:30 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
31. They can deduct Foriegn Taxes Paid even if they paid no US taxes
and receive a refund
- kinda like Free Money |
Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #31)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:33 PM
KT2000 (20,323 posts)
33. Thanks for quick reply!
Boeing makes me sick. They get state tax breaks too or they threaten to leave. Middle class picks up the tab.
|
Response to KT2000 (Reply #29)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 03:09 PM
DebJ (7,699 posts)
74. I think this was poorly stated, for the reason you gave. The effective tax rates in the negatives
are a much better statement.
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 05:31 PM
appalachiablue (38,336 posts)
32. K & R Unbelievable, corporate tax cheats. Go USA-
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 06:22 PM
cantbeserious (13,039 posts)
37. Why Settle For The Lesser Of Two Corporate Evils - Go Bernie Go
eom
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 06:35 PM
Enthusiast (50,983 posts)
40. Kicked and recommended!
Of course your GOP would insist these players are your job creators and as such are worthy of special consideration.
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 06:48 PM
Le Taz Hot (22,271 posts)
41. And each and every one of these would be just fine
with Hillary or the Clown Car as president. Bernie? Not so much.
|
Response to Le Taz Hot (Reply #41)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 06:56 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
42. ^^^ THIS ^^^
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 07:07 PM
beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)
43. Big Rec sent me here to kick this.
![]() |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 07:37 PM
frazzled (18,389 posts)
46. I think he forgot to mention the captive insurance industry
of which tiny Vermont is the national leader--second only to the Cayman Islands in offshore tax shelters.
At conferences of the offshore insurance industry, next to the booth for Bermuda, can often be found one promoting Vermont.
While that may seem strange for a chilly, landlocked state, Vermont is an offshore haven in one very real sense: It offers American companies lucrative tax breaks through unusual insurance arrangements. ... More than 560 United States companies, including Wal-Mart Stores, Starbucks and McGraw-Hill, have set up Vermont-based entities to insure their biggest risks and liabilities, giving them a tax benefit in the process. Vermont now rivals the Cayman Islands and Bermuda as the insurance destination of choice for American companies. The most recent arrival is Wells Fargo, which was granted a waiver by the federal Labor Department in February to provide life insurance and long-term disability insurance to its 153,000 employees through its own private unrated insurance company in Vermont. With its wholly owned insurer, known as a captive, Wells Fargo will benefit from improved cash flow, new investment income and tax breaks totaling at least hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 30 to 40 years, ... But Vermont’s success in attracting insurance captives also highlights the many ways that American corporations are allowed to minimize their tax bills by moving their profits, intellectual property or liabilities to places that provide substantial tax advantages, whether it is a Caribbean island, Ireland or Singapore. And while many states in the United States provide tax breaks and subsidies to companies that move or expand operations in state, the benefits offered by Vermont are much larger. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/business/04vermont.html?n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FSubjects%2FT%2FTaxes The IRS recently put captives on its "Dirty Dozen" list of tax abuses: http://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Abusive-Tax-Shelters-Again-on-the-IRS-Dirty-Dozen-List-of-Tax-Scams-for-the-2015-Filing-Season And yes, Bernie has pictures up of him meeting with the association of captive insurers, and he apparently didn't support the IRS attempt to tax these entities (and the ruling got scotched). I'm not saying he's responsible for all this. I am saying that things are complex, and no public figure is totally isolated from such issues. |
Response to frazzled (Reply #46)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 01:07 AM
Sheepshank (12,504 posts)
52. It is complicated and all politicians have a hand, or statement, or votes
That have enabled such corporate practices in one way or another. Thanks for trying to point it out.
|
Response to frazzled (Reply #46)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 02:05 PM
JDPriestly (57,936 posts)
72. Bernie is not in the Vermont state legislature.
He is a senator in the US Senate.
If someone in the Senate wants to present a bill to change insurance laws and that affects Vermont, they will. Then we can see how Bernie votes. But until that time, this is not his business. Delaware does similar things for corporate laws. When I think of insurance, I tend to think more of Connecticut, but I don't know why. I don't think of Vermont. |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Sun Jul 26, 2015, 09:56 PM
Ed Suspicious (8,879 posts)
49. K&R. These are the enemies!
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 08:54 AM
PatrickforO (13,953 posts)
56. He's the ONLY candidate who is talking about this!
That's why I support him.
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 09:58 AM
raouldukelives (5,178 posts)
57. K&R Some labor for the least, some for the most.
Every dollar in Wall St is a dollar against representative democracy for everyone but themselves.
If they can't recognize this by now, when thanks to them even corporations are more human than human, they never will. |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 10:08 AM
lonestarnot (77,097 posts)
58. K & R!
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 10:31 AM
Diremoon (86 posts)
59. Misleading figures.
Sorry, but I believe that the wording of the claims is misleading. In regard to GE, I believe that they paid Zero Federal Tax, and received an additional 2.9 billion. The wording could lead one to think that they overpaid their tax and received a refund on overpayment, like a person might do. Corporations are not people my friend.
|
Response to Diremoon (Reply #59)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 03:10 PM
stevenleser (32,886 posts)
75. I would like to see that info. It would make a stronger argument. I would also like to know what
loophole they used for taxes. Was it hiring disabled people or was it just accounting trickery? That answer matters.
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 10:37 AM
Chico Man (3,001 posts)
60. Should GE, Boeing, Verizon, BOA have lay offs?
GE employs > 130,000 in the US (not all have been moved to China :/)
I'm fairly certain the tax write-offs are helping to pay an American salary or two... Does that matter? Or should they be punished? What if they extended a job offer to you? Would you be righteous and deny it because they apparently don't pay taxes in an un-american sort of way? Maybe we should all work for non-profits. |
Response to Chico Man (Reply #60)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:11 AM
Ed Suspicious (8,879 posts)
61. Do you realize that every single dollar paid out in salary is money that is not taxed?
The greatest disincentive to hiring is to not make companies earn their tax breaks through reinvestment in their businesses.
|
Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #61)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:18 AM
Chico Man (3,001 posts)
62. I'm certain much of GE's tax break is due to investment and reinvestment in their business
That's the nature of the accounting behind tax breaks (some of which may be investment in staff).Much of the accounting is accomplished via write offs and depreciation.
Take the $1 billion + investment GE made in the Software Center of Excellence in San Ramon. Over 1000 data scientists and engineers have been hired thus far. You say "The greatest disincentive to hiring is to not make companies" So, it's the fault of the Government? I'm pretty sure Bernie called them cheats.. Is that really fair? |
Response to Chico Man (Reply #62)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:47 AM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
64. Inaccurate research
R&D is a right off
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #64)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:55 AM
Chico Man (3,001 posts)
65. ?
![]() Come again? |
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 11:47 AM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
63. kick ...rec
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 12:33 PM
MADem (135,425 posts)
67. Where's Lockheed Martin? nt
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 01:20 PM
StarzGuy (254 posts)
71. These Large Corporations Are..
...hollowing out America from the inside out with these tax refund takings. We need to elect people who will repeal these tax loopholes. Why raise the retirement age to 70? What extra profits are involved here? Why would this billionaires care about the retirement age? I'd like to know what's behind this push by these creeps.
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 02:41 PM
EndElectoral (4,213 posts)
73. Republican Response below:
"Why is an avowed Socialist picking on some of the most successful United States corporations? These small businesses are the heart and soul of the country. They create jobs. Sanders is trying the old tax and spend approach. Increase Tax rates for successful small businesses like Boeing and watch the layoffs and outsourcing to other countries. If the United States wants to compete abroad a better strategy is to reward these successful small businesses like GE and provide them more government tax cut incentives so that they can increase hiring and do not ship their jobs abroad. Frankly, it is much better to let the private sector handle these issues rather the government. Sanders would only take the hard-earned profits of small businesses and distribute them to the free loaders in our society. Our founding fathers believed that if you work hard you get ahead. Only a socialist like Sanders would try and turn this founding principle on its head. God Bless America, and Ronald Reagan for standing up to Socialism."
|
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 03:34 PM
WDIM (1,662 posts)
76. Criminal actions of the wealthy ignored. nt
Response to FreakinDJ (Original post)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 04:10 PM
stuffmatters (2,560 posts)
77. From Bernie: 6 Ex Actions could stop Corp Loopholes
I scribbled down this info from a Bernie Sanders campaign email a while ago.
He proposed that much of these tax cheating loopholes could be stopped by executive action, outlining "6 Executive Actions Obama could take to stop Corporate Loopholes." If executive actions are possible to close these loopholes, then Bernie certainly makes a compelling case for replacing a corporatist President with one who would restore fiscal sanity and justice to our corporate tax code. According to that Bernie email " in 1952 corporate taxes accounted for 32% of federal tax revenue. Today , despite record breaking profits & stagnant wages, only 11% of federal revenue is corporate taxes." 6 Executive Actions Obama (or a US President) Could Take to Stop Corporate Loopholes by ending: 1) Check the box loophole (offshoring profits to subsidiaries) 2) Hewlett-Packard loophole(using short term loans from foreign subsidiaries to avoid taxes) 3) Corporate inversion loophole (Merging with a foreign corp, reincorporating(TAXED) there while operating as usual in the US. 4) Carried interest loophole (the hedge fund et alios misnomer of "investment" ![]() 5) Valuation discounts (to keep business and property values artificially low for estate and gift tax transfers) 6) The REIT Loophole (where "rent income" loophole claimed by private prisons, casinos, even billboard owners.) I hope Bernie send this email out again. It was the clearest and best summary of these loopholes that cost the American Treasury & taxpayers hundreds of billions per year. And guess who pays and what safety net trust funds are "borrowed against" to make up the difference? |
Response to stuffmatters (Reply #77)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 10:06 PM
FreakinDJ (17,644 posts)
80. That deserves a thread of its own
Response to stuffmatters (Reply #77)
Mon Jul 27, 2015, 10:09 PM
beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)
81. I agree, that deserves its own thread.
Maybe you could find and repost the email?
![]() |
Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #81)
Sun Aug 2, 2015, 07:34 PM
stuffmatters (2,560 posts)
83. I received this on April 14 from [email protected]"Act now:close corporate loopholes"
It then asked to sign the petition where it explained those 6 corporate loopholes that could be done "by executive action without Congressional approval."
I'm not tech savvy, sorry, and not able to get this personal email & ensuing petition points to repost on DU. But I'm happy to forward the email to anyone who knows how to do it or can tell me steps to do it myself. Many people must have received the same email from bernie.org Lots important coming those days about opposing fast track/TPP so maybe this got overlooked in the flurry? |
Response to stuffmatters (Reply #83)
Mon Aug 3, 2015, 06:26 AM
beam me up scottie (57,349 posts)
84. I did a search and found this petition from Tax Day:
Sign the petition: Tell corporations to pay their fair share
I signed it and sent emails to my brothers. |
Response to stuffmatters (Reply #77)
Tue Jul 28, 2015, 09:00 PM
azmom (5,208 posts)
82. Private prisons claim rent income
Those are some evil motherfuckers.
|