Illinois Lawmakers Propose 75% Income Tax Hike

Conservative · Mar 26, 2011

buck said:
Market cap has little to do with the topic being discussed.

Gross Profit: 11.31B

By the way, I want to thank Caterpillar for moving two divisions out of Illinois to TX and creating jobs here for thousands of Texans.

Donc · Mar 26, 2011

buck said:
Market cap has little to do with the topic being discussed.

Gross Profit: 11.31B

The post I was responding to was this post by Maggie.

Originally Posted by MaggieD
I can't help but point out that that rate represents a tax bill of $1.9 billion. Not chump change...

With this post by me.

Cats market cap is $69.69B,about a weeks pay for them.

Now explain to me why

Market cap has little to do with the topic being discussed

in the context of what i was responding to.
:2wave:

buck · Mar 26, 2011

donc said:
The post I was responding to was this post by Maggie.

With this post by me.

Now explain to me why in the context of what i was responding to.
:2wave:

Because market cap has nothing to do with income tax, the tax rate a company paid or the "the weeks pay" a company took in. Market cap, at least my understanding, is just the value of the company based on the outstanding shares.

and I just looked it up to verify:

On-going market valuation of a public firm (whose shares are publicly traded) computed by multiplying the number of outstanding shares (held by the shareholders) with the current per share market price. It is, however, not necessarily the price a buyer would pay for the entire firm. And is not a realistic estimate of the firm's actual size, because a share's market price is based on trading in only a fraction of the firm's total outstanding shares.

You stated that "Cats market cap is $69.69B,about a weeks pay for them." referring, I assume, to the $1.9 billion in income tax Cat allegedly paid.

Maybe you can tell me what market cap has to do with the alleged 1.9bil state tax bill being equivalent of 1 weeks pay? It's possible I just completely misundertood your point.. Shrug?

Donc · Mar 26, 2011

buck said:
Because market cap has nothing to do with income tax, the tax rate a company paid or the "the weeks pay" a company took in. Market cap, at least my understanding, is just the value of the company based on the outstanding shares.

and I just looked it up to verify:

You stated that "Cats market cap is $69.69B,about a weeks pay for them." referring, I assume, to the $1.9 billion in income tax Cat allegedly paid.

Maybe you can tell me what market cap has to do with the alleged 1.9bil state tax bill being equivalent of 1 weeks pay? It's possible I just completely misundertood your point.. Shrug?

No,you understood what i said; what i should have said, instead of market cap was gross income which in 2010 was 11.53 B. Which means that about five weeks sales their tax is paid for the year.

Seeing as they are now viewed in the eyes of the law as people...pretty good tax rate if you ask me.:2wave:

buck · Mar 26, 2011

donc said:
No,you understood what i said; what i should have said, instead of market cap was gross income which in 2010 was 11.53 B. Which means that about five weeks sales their tax is paid for the year.

Seeing as they are now viewed in the eyes of the law as people...pretty good tax rate if you ask me.:2wave:

Thank you for clarifying. I really thought I was compeltely lost on your point.

I personally don't know the specifics of their tax return. So, I really can't say wether it was a good rate or not. Taking it from the very simplistic way your are illustrating it, it sure seems good.

buck · Mar 26, 2011

donc said:
Seeing as they are now viewed in the eyes of the law as people...pretty good tax rate if you ask me.:2wave:

Just to expand a little - corporations (just like people) have deductions that can be claimed. I have little doubt Catepillar (just like me and most likely you) made use of them in order to reduce their overal income tax.

Donc · Mar 26, 2011

buck said:
Just to expand a little - corporations (just like people) have deductions that can be claimed. I have little doubt Catepillar (just like me and most likely you) made use of them in order to reduce their overal income tax.

They would most likely be derelict in their duties to the companies/stockholders you and me if they didn’t. That being said, look at the CORP PEOPLES TAX RATE. :mrgreen:

CAT: CATERPILLAR INC DEL Income Statement

The Prof · Mar 26, 2011

we can do better elsewhere, seeya

whatcha gonna do, build a wall?

The Prof · Mar 26, 2011

let's ask jeffrey immelt about market cap

after all, he's obama's competitiveness czar

Nevergolfpar · Mar 27, 2011

donc said:
No,you understood what i said; what i should have said, instead of market cap was gross income which in 2010 was 11.53 B. Which means that about five weeks sales their tax is paid for the year.

Seeing as they are now viewed in the eyes of the law as people...pretty good tax rate if you ask me.:2wave:

Cat's pretax income was 3.74B for FY2010, of which they paid 968M in total world wide taxes. This puts Cat squarely in the 25.88% tax bracket. Keep in mind that the United States has the second highest corporate tax rate in the world (now the highest as Japan just lowed their CTR by 5% FOR 2011) for FY2010. Since a majority of the taxes Cat paid were in fact overseas, it's effective United States tax rate is in fact much higher than the 25.88% rate I quoted. This because the lower rates Cat enjoys elsewhere in the world are negatively impacted by the higher rates in the United States. In other words Cat is more than likely paying the 35% rate that it is suppose to.

I don't know where you get the 11 days, but the reality is, it takes Cat 128 days to pay its United States tax liability. Remember since Cat is dealing with large amounts of money a 1 or 2% in tax savings is often all that is needed to justify moving 2 new divisions to Texas. Couple the tax savings with less state wide regulation being imposed on it, coupled again with tax abatements and business friendly work laws, it is no wonder Cat moved.

A word of advice to those who disagree with the last paragraph; don't open a business because if you do, I assure you, you will fail.

VanceMack · Mar 27, 2011

Conservative said:
By the way, I want to thank Caterpillar for moving two divisions out of Illinois to TX and creating jobs here for thousands of Texans.

Dont thank Carepillar...thank the good people of Illinois that made it impossible for them to continue to do business there. Heck...we should just be glad they didnt relocate to mejico.

Conservative · Mar 27, 2011

VanceMack said:
Dont thank Carepillar...thank the good people of Illinois that made it impossible for them to continue to do business there. Heck...we should just be glad they didnt relocate to mejico.

Right, I agree and do thank the people of Illinois for their continued support of liberal social programs that continue to drive business out of Illinois and cuts off revenue to their state.

MaggieD · Mar 27, 2011

Conservative said:
Right, I agree and do thank the people of Illinois for their continued support of liberal social programs that continue to drive business out of Illinois and cuts off revenue to their state.

Thank the Democratic Machine in Illinois.

Caterpillar hasn't made the decision to move, by the way. Governor Quinn will do anything not to let that happen including putting more of the state's debt/tax burden on moms and dads.

Conservative · Mar 27, 2011

MaggieD said:
Thank the Democratic Machine in Illinois.

Caterpillar hasn't made the decision to move, by the way. Governor Quinn will do anything not to let that happen including putting more of the state's debt/tax burden on moms and dads.

Actually Caterpillar has moved a few divisions to TX already, not their main operation but a lot of jobs. TX has no state income taxes and is pro business.

haymarket · Mar 27, 2011

Corporations are in business to one thing and only one thing - make the most profit that they can possibly make. To do that they will do whatever they have to do to achieve that end.

What corporations have done, what they are doing now, and what they will continue to do in the future is to play each of the fifty states off against each other for maximum advantage. In addition to that, they will play communities within the states against each other for maximum advantage to the corporation.

This strategy is a proven winner for many corporations and decreases their tax liability, garners them infrastructure improvements paid for my government and the taxpayers, allows them to negotiate regulatory breaks, and other significant financial benefits to the corporation.

Every dollar they pay in less tax is harmful to the local community. Every dollar they gain in government picking up the tab for their own costs that they should have paid is harmful to the local community. Every dollar given to them in regulatory 'reform' or alleviation is harmful to the community. All this is only possible because the corporation has the jobs to dangle as bait before the community fathers.

We need ONE NATIONAL policy in effect over every square inch of America to prohibit such machinations from happening. Until we get such a policy, corporations will continue to be the winners, local communities continue to be the losers, and the American people played for suckers and chumps.

MaggieD · Mar 27, 2011

haymarket said:
We need ONE NATIONAL policy in effect over every square inch of America to prohibit such machinations from happening. Until we get such a policy, corporations will continue to be the winners, local communities continue to be the losers, and the American people played for suckers and chumps.

That way we can just chase 'em right out of the country. I love it.

Conservative · Mar 27, 2011

haymarket;1059373205]Corporations are in business to one thing and only one thing - make the most profit that they can possibly make. To do that they will do whatever they have to do to achieve that end.

True, and you have a problem with this because? What do corporations do with their money and how much do corporations contribute to the economy? You seem to believe it is the Federal Govt.(taxpayers) responsibility to do with corporations do, why?

What corporations have done, what they are doing now, and what they will continue to do in the future is to play each of the fifty states off against each other for maximum advantage. In addition to that, they will play communities within the states against each other for maximum advantage to the corporation.

As if that doesn't have any benefit to the citizens of the states. Corporations don't do what they do alone, they hire people, they are corporate citizens paying local and state taxes, they contribute to charity, and don't cost the taxpayers a dime.

This strategy is a proven winner for many corporations and decreases their tax liability, garners them infrastructure improvements paid for my government and the taxpayers, allows them to negotiate regulatory breaks, and other significant financial benefits to the corporation.

How is decreasing tax liability hurt the economy? What percentage of the workforce works for those evil large corporations? You seem to believe it is the role of govt. to provide what corporations do without taxpayer money.

Every dollar they pay in less tax is harmful to the local community. Every dollar they gain in government picking up the tab for their own costs that they should have paid is harmful to the local community. Every dollar given to them in regulatory 'reform' or alleviation is harmful to the community. All this is only possible because the corporation has the jobs to dangle as bait before the community fathers.

Typical liberal spin as if the govt. needs the money more than the company. What does the corporation do with that money they make? Govt. doesn't pick up the tab since allowing companies to keep more of what they earn isn't an expense to the govt. How is employing people, contributing to charity, and paying local taxes detrimental to the community? Dangling jobs seems to be bad for liberals.

We need ONE NATIONAL policy in effect over every square inch of America to prohibit such machinations from happening. Until we get such a policy, corporations will continue to be the winners, local communities continue to be the losers, and the American people played for suckers and chumps.

Strong central govt? That is what our Founders got away from in breaking off from England and what made this country great. Power belongs at the state and local level, not the Federal level. I doubt that many local communities have a problem with jobs being created by those evil corporations and the dollars they pay to charity and in taxes.

Nevergolfpar · Mar 27, 2011

The Preacher said:
Simply put, they earned it. Why should their employer get to renege on promises that were made at the beginning of employment?
The trade-off for lower pay was benefits, including a pension.
It would be the same as you paying your mortgage for thirty years and the bank owning your home anyway.

Bad analogy. With my mortgage I entered into this contract with full faith and disclosure. All parties knew everything going in and everything was based on my ability to pay. With public employee pensions there has always been a quid pro quo involved. Politicians kicked the issue down the line, knowing full well that the someone else would be left holding the bag for promises that could never be kept. The states ability to pay was never part of the equation. Furthermore pension padding being more the norm, than the exception and you have a system ripe full of corruption.

Now I agree with you that a promise is a promise, but only within reason. As an employee of any state, you have both a moral and ethical duty to have that states best interests in mind. This includes a fiduciary responsibility as well. Failure to adhere to such a standard and putting self interest in front of the public interest is nothing more than a dereliction of ones responsibility. With that said, a State has a similar responsibility to its employees as well. Yes, I agree that pension's should be paid to all employees whom played by the rules. However, any employee whom engaged in unethical pension padding practices, or knowingly participated in a quid pro quo should be held accountable and forfeit their inflated pensions. Instead, such employees should have their pensions re calibrated to reflect lifetime earnings and a reasonable rate of return on their investment. If all sates adopted such a policy, my guess is that each state would reduce its pension liability by at least 40%. Could we agree on those terms?

buck · Mar 27, 2011

haymarket said:
Corporations are in business to one thing and only one thing - make the most profit that they can possibly make.

You mean someone decisdes to take all of the financial risk of starting a business to (gasp!) make money? I'm shocked. It's a good thing you're a union member, you apparently wouldn't be able to survive otherwise.

Every dollar they pay in less tax is harmful to the local community. Every dollar they gain in government picking up the tab for their own costs that they should have paid is harmful to the local community. Every dollar given to them in regulatory 'reform' or alleviation is harmful to the community. All this is only possible because the corporation has the jobs to dangle as bait before the community fathers.

Every dollar they pay in less tax means a chance for more jobs for the community. Every dollar they pay in less tax means lower prices for the consumer. Every dollar they pay in less tax means people will be more likely to take the risk to meet the reward of starting their own business. Corp. taxes are necessary. To raise them to a point that will finally make you happy is not.

Conservative · Mar 27, 2011

buck said:
You mean someone decisdes to take all of the financial risk of starting a business to (gasp!) make money? I'm shocked. It's a good thing you're a union member, you apparently wouldn't be able to survive otherwise.

Every dollar they pay in less tax means a chance for more jobs for the community. Every dollar they pay in less tax means lower prices for the consumer. Every dollar they pay in less tax means people will be more likely to take the risk to meet the reward of starting their own business. Corp. taxes are necessary. To raise them to a point that will finally make you happy is not.

Buck, you have to understand that many here are dependent on the taxpayer for their paycheck, pension, and healthcare benefits as they are public employees. They could never make it in the private sector thus have to support a large central govt. funded by the taxpayer in order to survive.

The Prof · Mar 27, 2011

haymarket said:
This strategy is a proven winner for many corporations and decreases their tax liability, garners them infrastructure improvements paid for my government and the taxpayers, allows them to negotiate regulatory breaks, and other significant financial benefits to the corporation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html?hp=&pagewanted=all

The head of [GE's] tax team, Mr. Samuels, met with Representative Charles B. Rangel, then chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which would decide the fate of the tax break. As he sat with the committee’s staff members outside Mr. Rangel’s office, Mr. Samuels dropped to his knee and pretended to beg for the provision to be extended — a flourish made in jest, he said through a spokeswoman.

That day, Mr. Rangel reversed his opposition to the tax break, according to other Democrats on the committee.

The following month, Mr. Rangel and Mr. Immelt stood together at St. Nicholas Park in Harlem as G.E. announced that its foundation had awarded $30 million to New York City schools, including $11 million to benefit various schools in Mr. Rangel’s district. Joel I. Klein, then the schools chancellor, and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who presided, said it was the largest gift ever to the city’s schools.

Haymarket said:
Every dollar they pay in less tax is harmful to the local community.

General Electric Paid No Federal Taxes in 2010 - ABC News

Obama Asks GE's Immelt to Head Economic Advisory Panel, Replacing Volcker - Bloomberg

We need ONE NATIONAL policy in effect over every square inch of America to prohibit such machinations from happening.

better start building that WALL

ich bin ein berliner

deltabtry · Mar 27, 2011

haymarket said:
Corporations are in business to one thing and only one thing - make the most profit that they can possibly make. To do that they will do whatever they have to do to achieve that end.

What corporations have done, what they are doing now, and what they will continue to do in the future is to play each of the fifty states off against each other for maximum advantage. In addition to that, they will play communities within the states against each other for maximum advantage to the corporation.

This strategy is a proven winner for many corporations and decreases their tax liability, garners them infrastructure improvements paid for my government and the taxpayers, allows them to negotiate regulatory breaks, and other significant financial benefits to the corporation.

Every dollar they pay in less tax is harmful to the local community. Every dollar they gain in government picking up the tab for their own costs that they should have paid is harmful to the local community. Every dollar given to them in regulatory 'reform' or alleviation is harmful to the community. All this is only possible because the corporation has the jobs to dangle as bait before the community fathers.

We need ONE NATIONAL policy in effect over every square inch of America to prohibit such machinations from happening. Until we get such a policy, corporations will continue to be the winners, local communities continue to be the losers, and the American people played for suckers and chumps.

As long as people such as yourself and others want corporations to be the losers the people who support this will continue to be unemployed. The sympathy for the unemployed who advocate this policy is on the decline.

haymarket · Mar 27, 2011

MaggieD said:
That way we can just chase 'em right out of the country. I love it.

I do not know why you would jump to that extreme conclusion.

from delta

As long as people such as yourself and others want corporations to be the losers the people who support this will continue to be unemployed. The sympathy for the unemployed who advocate this policy is on the decline.

I do not know why you would jump to that extreme conclusion. I would hope we all can be involved in a win-win situation.

from the Prof

better start building that WALL

I do not know what you mean.

Nevergolfpar · Mar 27, 2011

haymarket said:
Corporations are in business to one thing and only one thing - make the most profit that they can possibly make. To do that they will do whatever they have to do to achieve that end.

What corporations have done, what they are doing now, and what they will continue to do in the future is to play each of the fifty states off against each other for maximum advantage. In addition to that, they will play communities within the states against each other for maximum advantage to the corporation.

This strategy is a proven winner for many corporations and decreases their tax liability, garners them infrastructure improvements paid for my government and the taxpayers, allows them to negotiate regulatory breaks, and other significant financial benefits to the corporation.

Every dollar they pay in less tax is harmful to the local community. Every dollar they gain in government picking up the tab for their own costs that they should have paid is harmful to the local community. Every dollar given to them in regulatory 'reform' or alleviation is harmful to the community. All this is only possible because the corporation has the jobs to dangle as bait before the community fathers.

We need ONE NATIONAL policy in effect over every square inch of America to prohibit such machinations from happening. Until we get such a policy, corporations will continue to be the winners, local communities continue to be the losers, and the American people played for suckers and chumps.

For someone, such as yourself so well written and obviously intelligent, I fail to understand your logic. I agree completely with your first three paragraphs (though I would add countries to your list in the 2nd paragraph, which corporations leverage for advantage). However, your last two paragraphs are not correct. You state that less in corporate taxes is harmful to the local communities. Tax receipts, like any revenue generating endeavor, are not a zero sum game. Giving a corporation a 10 year tax abatement does not mean that no tax monies are collected. On the contrary, the local employees that are hired will shop in the local community. Homes will be purchased generating tax revenues, restaurants will be frequented employing more people, ancillary businesses will flourish all generating the mighty tax dollar on an exponential basis. You see while Caterpillar may have a short term benefit, it will be the people in the community whom will be the real winners in terms of jobs and purchasing power. Additionally, the local government will enjoy increased tax receipts far exceeding what the absence of a corporation like Caterpillar would cost. Like all things in life, one must measure the cost/benefit relationship against the opportunity cost of not aggressively seeking and marketing to big and small business. Punish these employers though increased tax rates, you punish the people. Once more people understand this, then and only then will this country ever be an economic super power again. I do admit I am pessimistic about our future.

VanceMack · Mar 27, 2011

MaggieD said:
That way we can just chase 'em right out of the country. I love it.

Its the mindless union way doncha know...hell...they destroyed the auto industry...why not destroy all industrial jobs. The union leaders dont care, as long as they can 'organize' the food handlers, they'll be aiiight.

Illinois Lawmakers Propose 75% Income Tax Hike

Conservative

Donc

buck

Donc

buck

buck

Donc

The Prof

The Prof

Nevergolfpar

Member

VanceMack

Less like the tiger...more like the lion.

Conservative

MaggieD

Conservative

haymarket

MaggieD

Conservative

Nevergolfpar

Member

buck

Conservative

The Prof

deltabtry

haymarket

Nevergolfpar

Member

VanceMack

Less like the tiger...more like the lion.