Cynthetiq

link
This irritates me. I mean really really iritates me.

If you look at some of your bills, namely the telephone bill, look at for the GROSS RECIEPTS TAX. Know what that's for? It's the the CONSUMER paying the taxes on the total income of the phone companies profits. Yeah, I pay for it, you pay for it. WTF?

I read this and during the MOST PROFITABLE time in history almost NO taxes we paid??? I know there are some incentives etc to build business, but jeez, it just seems a little much.

Something to think about if you happen to be paying taxes in the next coming week.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

filtherton

Hooray for free market economics. Where the ethical finish last.
I wonder how much more we(the citizens) paid in taxes and whether it balances out with any miniscule savings that were passed on to us by the offending corporations?
This is what happens when we let industry self-regulate.

slimpi66y

buddy buddy, just to offer you some perspective, the most taxed people are those who earns around 35k to 80k, once you hit a 100g, you can start to afford tax consultants (not tax accountants), of course there are idiots who are still handling their own taxes even with the 100g in income,

secondly, the corporation, who can afford an army of tax accountants and lawyers, usually pays an effective 15% or less in federal tax. to put things in perspective, one of the largest banks in canada, paid $6m in taxes, with gross revenue of 46billion, now you do the math

another published case, my good buddy Edgar Brofman Sr and Jr, crystalized a 2billion family trust out of canada and into the US tax free, now that is slapping other taxpayers in the face...

so that's life

Xiomar

This is screwed up. I am not irritated. IM PISSED!!!

Mephisto2

What?

And you're surprised?

That's capitalism for you. That's the American "Free Market" for you.

That's Bush in the White House for you...


Mr Mephisto

PS - I'm fully aware Bush is only there for the past 3/4 years, but if anything I'm sure the current administration is MORE pro big business than the last.

Xiomar

I know... but when it's all pointed out. KRAP!!!

grayman

I just love how even though this ALL happened before Bush took office(1996-2000), he still managed to take the blame for it here. What a sweet deal, Clinton gets all the credit for the economic boom, but Bush takes the blame for the negative aspects that took place during it.

__________________
That's right - I'm a guy in a suit eating a Blizzard. F U.

onetime2

Yep.

__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

aurigus

I think you need to really take a look at those numbers there. The news media outlets are really cool at swiping some "stats" and making an article on it to suit their needs. For example, companies that have a 0 tax bill probably include those making a loss for the year. In the case of most of the internet boom companies of 2000, they never made a profit. Therefore they were not taxed. Of course I am not a tax accountant, so someone correct me if I am wrong.

Don't forget who makes up the directors of these same companies. Companies aren't these big bad autonomous units, they are made up of Joe and Susie for down the street making any decisions the company makes.

Cynthetiq

Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Mel Karmazin, Sumner Redstone, Dick Robinson, Micheal Eisner.... sorry they aren't Joe and Susie. They are smart and calculating business people.

Remeber that ENRON, TYCO, MCI Worldcom also fit into there...

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Mephisto2

Well "he" also included a smiley in his comment. Lighten up.

And "he" also specifically included a postscript that drew further attention to the timing.

Sheehs.

And, for the record, do you really think that the big corporations will turn out to have paid MORE tax under Bush? ROFL...


Mr Mephisto

ARTelevision

Personally, I'm not concerned about the amount of taxes companies pay. They do it legally - by the code - or they get busted.

Companies that do well help our economy. They pay their employees. The employees pay taxes - legally - by the code.

When companies don't prosper none of us prosper.

So called "inequities" in the tax code are a political issue.
If you're disturbed by the tax code, less socialism reduces taxes for all.

__________________
create evolution

Cynthetiq

When the employees are not employed within the US then it is a bit concerning because that model you speak about does not work.

When the are employed here, then I can see your point of view and agree with it to some point. Recall that incorporated companies are treated like "beings" and are subject to all the laws and regulations of such beings.

In fact the current tax code benifits companies for outsourcing labor at this point in time.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

ARTelevision

I also don't see a problem with outsourcing.
The simple fact is that the US imports more jobs than it exports.

Global companies invest heavily in US factories and infrastructure.
For example, Japanese car companies that assemble in the US employ US citizens here.

As you're introducing global economics into the discussion, the trend toward globalizing economies is inevitable. Perhaps you're suggesting a revision of the tax code in light of global realities. In any event, this doesn't change my initial point - it just complexifies it.

Thanks for the feedback, Cynthetiq. Discussing implications of the inevitable globalization of nations' economies is probably beyond the scope of this thread. What do you think?

__________________
create evolution

Astrocloud

Right, the US imports people from other countries to work here. When they do that, the usual and customary approach has been to give these foreign workers Visa's and tax them like any other workers.

NOW, the situation is different. Our government gives huge tax breaks (and sometimes subsidies) to companies which just take advantage the great American infrastructure to supply jobs to foreign workers in other countries.

The prime justification for corporate welfare -which you provided above; was that taxing the corporations that provide American Jobs is like double taxation. If the government is taxing job salaries and taxing the corporations that provide said salaries -then that is a kind of double taxation.

However, those crafty corporations have found a loophole. They don't have to hire people here and can take the government subsidies that they've been given and create jobs directly in India.

So the money earmarked to create jobs in America -ends up helping people in other countries.

ARTelevision

The US imports jobs - not people.
People do immigrate to the US.
That's a different thing.

__________________
create evolution

Astrocloud

In order to get an H1 visa you have to be sponsored by a company. Of course in outsourcing -nobody sponsors anyone to come here. They just remove the job here in the states and open up a job offshore.

If you know someone who is offshore and wants to come to the US -by all means point them here

http://www.h1visajobs.com/

Where companies are sponsoring foreigners to come here.

ARTelevision

http://www.adweek.com/aw/classifieds..._id=1000479111

http://www.wcit.org/topics/imports/imp_intro.htm

__________________
create evolution

Astrocloud

That's awsome. Now can you say with certainty that the companies which are outsourcing to the US are recieving government tax breaks from their own counties -to ship jobs to the US.

Cynthetiq

yeah, much further in scope, a whole different debacle, but a nod did need to be made towards it which was well put by you.

There are some interesting twists to the globalization of the marketplace. I'm wondering just how it works for some of the companies like Honda, Daimler Chrysler, et. al.

I know they pay American taxes, but they did get subsidies and breaks in order to build factories in the US. I'm not sure of how they pay taxes within their homelands.

America is one of the few if not only country that demands that it's citizens pay tax on income no matter where they live or where that income was derived.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Astrocloud

Describing the trend: 25% of all IT jobs offshore by 2010

http://www.silicon.com/management/ca...9119267,00.htm

twotimesadingo

I think, ART, you've made it more complex than it needs to be.

I read this article, and I don't think "this must be due to the globalization trends within industry, and the manufacture of comparative advantage which includes the current method of outsourcing labor," nor do I theorize "tax code law is as it is, and it's currently legality is not in question." I do think "huh, this seems like a lack of taxation. What in the hell? Regardless of your view concerning progressive/regressive/flat taxes, there is no tax here."
And to introduce my own personal bias, I think taxation should be applied based on ability to pay, rather than receipt of public good. Therefore, when the 1% of corporations that owns an astounding 93% of corporate assets does not pay anything, I get a bit miffed.

I view your position, ART, as an extension of the argument that the legality of something and the morality of something do not necesssarily have to coincide. That's a valid point; but when businesses, more than people, benefit from the public goods provided by government as much as, if not more than, the individual, and have the ability to pay, then they should. That is equal application of the legal taxation.

And if you really want to get into the legality of the situation, I'm more than willing to discussing GAAP, and what they do and do not cover, and the fucking expanse of space between what is legal and what it morally reprehensible, yet possible.

__________________
I'll be the one to protect you from your enemies and all your demons.
I'll be the one to protect you from a will to survive and voice of reason.
I'll be the one to protect you from your enemies and your choices, son.
They're one and the same I must isolate you, isolate and save you from yourself."
- A Perfect Circle

ARTelevision

It's such a complex subject that our laws haven't caught up with it. Neither have the news media. They sensationalize various aspects of this and don't deal with the real scope and scale of it all.

I appreciate your responses and I imagine you can also understand that if we attempt to forestall the inevitable flow of commerce, we will overprice our products, lose competitive edge, diminish our economic share in the world marketplace, and generally end up worse than we are now.

The giant leap forward toward globalization is clearly a historical paradigm shift. An important topic. Thanks.

__________________
create evolution

twotimesadingo

Absolutely, ART. In fact, on this issue, I couldn't agree more.

But, I don't think it's possible to generalize the facts brought up by the GOA and say that they are all an effect of globalization. I just dont think it's possible.

According to (granted, liberal) experts like Lori Wallach, while globalization in general, and NAFTA in particular, has created roughly 1000 net jobs in the U.S., they are mostly of the janitorial and lower-echelon serive nature.

Furthermore, I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the taxation of corporations. American nationals in other coutries often still pay American taxes; American companies outsourcing should still pay American taxes. This, to me, just makes sense.

And I'll make the dangerous assumption that this should make sense to conservative and liberal, alike. I don't think the current application of taxation is just or legal, I think it is deficient.

__________________
I'll be the one to protect you from your enemies and all your demons.
I'll be the one to protect you from a will to survive and voice of reason.
I'll be the one to protect you from your enemies and your choices, son.
They're one and the same I must isolate you, isolate and save you from yourself."
- A Perfect Circle

oberon

When I read this first, my reaction: So what?

Here's the thing. If companies paid more taxes, they'd pay their employees less. Which results in lower individual tax revenue and higher corporation tax revenue. It's simple macroeconomics - what goes around comes around. Of course, globalization makes things a little more complicated than that, but not much, really. If foreign companies make money in the US, they have to employ people here. Those people pay taxes. So what if they don't pay very much or any federal taxes? They brought jobs to the US.

So I think I agree with ART, this article sensationalizes the "issue" and misses the bigger picture. However, I do believe that middle-class people get screwed on taxes because it's far too complicated. Politicians aren't known for keeping things simple, and taxation wastes a lot of time.

__________________
"There are finer fish in the sea than have ever been caught." -- Irish proverb