GE make $5 billion in profits (in 2010, in the US alone) and pay no taxes

Danny Tse

Kinda amazing, isn't it?

New York Times article on how GE avoid paying any taxes

rooftop59

wow that is unbelievable. guess we should not tax the big corporations and let out kids die in the back of pickups. long live anarchy.

treitz3

Doesn't surprise me.

tonyb

A giant shell game is all it is.
Anyone want to take a stab at who's against a flat tax ?

slk55amg

I would like it better if GE paid its fair of taxes. I own a huge amount of shares, and would gladly give up some potential profits

BlueFox

Taxes are for you and me to pay.

unc2701

tonyb wrote: »

A giant shell game is all it is.
Anyone want to take a stab at who's against a flat tax ?

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/01/corporate_tax_rates

rooftop59

tonyb wrote: »

A giant shell game is all it is.
Anyone want to take a stab at who's against a flat tax ?

hmm flat tax lets see...ya sure, make the person who works at walmart for 9 bucks an hour with no health benefits and no education because of her dumbarse parents who drove her around in the back of a pickup truck pay the same percentage of taxes as the ceo who makes 17 million because he screws his workers by not paying a fair living wage or offering decent benefits. Oh wait, he probably doesn't pay taxes either...

slk55amg

A flat tax is yet another giveaway to the super rich. Its a very "regressive" way of taxation.

tonyb

rooftop59 wrote: »

hmm flat tax lets see...ya sure, make the person who works at walmart for 9 bucks an hour with no health benefits and no education because of her dumbarse parents who drove her around in the back of a pickup truck pay the same percentage of taxes as the ceo who makes 17 million because he screws his workers by not paying a fair living wage or offering decent benefits. Oh wait, he probably doesn't pay taxes either...

The whole point of a flat tax is to do away with all the loop holes that enable big corps to get away with that. You make x amount, you pay x amount. I'm sure below the poverty line would have some exceptions.
Regardless, I see your anti corporation. Makes me wonder who you would work for if they went away ? Or are you a share the wealth type ?

cnh

Danny Tse wrote: »

Kinda amazing, isn't it?

New York Times article on how GE avoid paying any taxes

Yeah Reality and Ideology aren't always the same? I'm sure you've all heard about how much HIGHER our TAX rate is for Corps. in the U.S.A.

But NO ONE ever provides real figures on what percentage of these 'super high taxes' the Big Boys actually pay. That doesn't play well...not good PRESS.

When I was a Grad Student Citi-Bank paid less in taxes than a poor semi-employed Student and still managed to charge that student enough fees for his account that he actually LOST money using their bank? I was that student!

Oh well.....


cnh

exalted512

'innovative accounting'

Sounds familiar...
-Cody

slk55amg

actually I spent my woking career on wall street. Does thatmake me anti-corporate?

Jstas

Didn't GE have a hand in the bailout honeypot?

unc2701

tonyb wrote: »

The whole point of a flat tax is to do away with all the loop holes that enable big corps to get away with that. You make x amount, you pay x amount. I'm sure below the poverty line would have some exceptions.
Regardless, I see your anti corporation. Makes me wonder who you would work for if they went away ? Or are you a share the wealth type ?

I see you struggle with your and you're. Additionally, corporate flat tax vs flat tax for personal income are two wildly different issues, a point that you've clearly missed. Please read the article I posted above and the article it references, then come back when you have some form of information on which to base your inaccurate opinions. (Note proper usage of "your").

slk55amg

Yes Ge did get money from TARP

Jstas

slk55amg wrote: »

Yes Ge did get money from TARP

Man, that's just not right. :frown:

tonyb

unc2701 wrote: »

I see you struggle with your and you're. Additionally, corporate flat tax vs flat for personal income are two wildly different issues, a point that you've clearly missed. Please read the article I posted above and the article it references, then come back when you have some form of information on which to base your inaccurate opinions. (Note proper usage of "your").

I did read it, agree with most of it. If you want to talk taxation, fairness, then explain to me what could be more fair than you pay x amount by income. Example being, you make 40g's a year, at a 10% rate, thats 4 g's. You make 40 million a year at the same rate, thats 4 million in taxes. Who pays more ? No deductions,no loop holes,straight up.

slk55amg

For whatever its worth, they were one of the first to pay it back,

unc2701

tonyb wrote: »

I did read it, agree with most of it. If you want to talk taxation, fairness, then explain to me what could be more fair than you pay x amount by income. Example being, you make 40g's a year, at a 10% rate, thats 4 g's. You make 40 million a year at the same rate, thats 4 million in taxes. Who pays more ? No deductions,no loop holes,straight up.

So, care to take a stab at who is against a corporate flat tax? (and I'm for it)

slk55amg

who is against it?

cnh

I've never quite understood the 'logic' of the flat tax.

Yeah, mathematically it's EQUAL in terms of ABSOLUTE numbers. But in terms of fairness?

Is it fair for someone who makes 40,000 to pay 4,000 (where 4,000 represents his car insurance, heating and cooling and utilities, etc.--essential life services?).

And someone who makes 10 million to pay only 1 million? As I said, mathematically, no one can argue that the PERCENTAGE is the SAME. But the EFFECT on the poor and middle-class is disproportionate and the load on the wealthy is (to me) too light. Just my view from the 'middle'.

cnh

WilliamM2

slk55amg wrote: »

who is against it?

Mostly lower income folks, who currently pay no taxes at all.

tonyb

unc2701 wrote: »

So, care to take a stab at who is against a corporate flat tax? (and I'm for it)

Generally speaking, all of them. The big corps,the little corps, the politicians because it takes lobbying money out of their pockets.

thuffman03

This will get very political and most of you will not like what I have to say but here is my opinion on the matter.

Corporations should not pay income taxes. The reason is that the profit from corporations will be paid to the owner/owners of the company which then will be taxed. If you tax "Corporate Profit" and then they pay dividends, the monies are then taxed twice.

It is like the Death tax. Your Mother/Father/relative dies. Leaves you a nice amount of money. This money already has been taxed during their lifetime. Then when you get it in an inheritance you have to pay a tax on it again.

The government is double dipping on taxes and you and I are paying for it in ways you don't even realize.

tonyb

cnh wrote: »

I've never quite understood the 'logic' of the flat tax.

Yeah, mathematically it's EQUAL in terms of ABSOLUTE numbers. But in terms of fairness?

Is it fair for someone who makes 40,000 to pay 4,000 (where 4,000 represents his car insurance, heating and cooling and utilities, etc.--essential life services?).

And someone who makes 10 million to pay only 1 million? As I said, mathematically, no one can argue that the PERCENTAGE is the SAME. But the EFFECT on the poor and middle-class is disproportionate and the load on the wealthy is (to me) too light. Just my view from the 'middle'.

cnh

As I said earlier, I'm sure once you get below the poverty line, no taxes would be imposed. But that example I gave, at 40 g's a year, you make it sound like he couldn't afford to live on 36 g's after taxes. Lots of people do. If you are so inclined, you too can aspire to pay 1 million in taxes.

unc2701

tonyb wrote: »

Generally speaking, all of them. The big corps,the little corps, the politicians because it takes lobbying money out of their pockets.

Ah. Sorry, I clearly misread your original post. My apologies. Anyhow, net effect of a corporate flat tax is that corporations in the US would pay more in taxes. So while the apparent tax rate would be lower, they would, in fact, be paying more. Just so we're on the same page.

Personal flat taxes are a slightly different matter, which I won't get into.

slk55amg

I live in Carmel California, its not possible to live here with a " low" income, I am opposed to it..........................................

tonyb

thuffman03 wrote: »

This will get very political and most of you will not like what I have to say but here is my opinion on the matter.

Corporations should not pay income taxes. The reason is that the profit from corporations will be paid to the owner/owners of the company which then will be taxed. If you tax "Corporate Profit" and then they pay dividends, the monies are then taxed twice.

It is like the Death tax. Your Mother/Father/relative dies. Leaves you a nice amount of money. This money already has been taxed during their lifetime. Then when you get it in an inheritance you have to pay a tax on it again.

The government is double dipping on taxes and you and I are paying for it in ways you don't even realize.

Thats a whole nutha subject matter, but agree on the double taxation thing. Heck, theirs even a push for the government to take everything when you die.

treitz3

....and we elect these people?

ARRRGH!!! *bangs head against wall*

tonyb

slk55amg wrote: »

I live in Carmel California, its not possible to live here with a " low" income, I am opposed to it..........................................

Carmel....going out there next month. A visit to Napa, a drive down your way. Maybe Clint will have me for lunch. I can dream,can't I.