• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

G.E.’s Strategies Let It Avoid Taxes Altogether

MaggieD said:
Those who can't think that far ahead are those that try to make a partisan issue out of what amounts to Congress' complete ineptitude and self-serving bull**** that's gotten us into this mess. What is so damned hard to admit about that??

It's Congress, people. Both parties. Each and every one of them. We're busy blaming Dems or Reps when we should be busy blaming both.
Click to expand...

Which is what my posts have tried to uncover - I'm not trying to make a partisan issue, if that is who you are directing the comment I made about not being able to think that far ahead. Cons have tried to insinuate that Immelt's appointment by Obama is somehow connected to GE paying Zero taxes - I'm trying to show them that Reps get more contributions than Dems from GE.

As usual, their insinuations are contradictory!
 
PeteEU said:
Does not matter. Maybe the very threat will make these corporations not use tax loops to avoid paying taxes. For all I care it could be sold back to the former owners/shareholders or random people. Point is these corporations have so much power in the US (and in other countries too btw), that they can form their own tax policy to avoid taxes and yet be a huge burden on the country on many fronts. They are in principle no different than the dead beat dads or single moms living of welfare.. with one exception.. these companies earn billions.

Do you really think that the corporations would allow lawmakers to gut the tax code so that they would be forced to pay their fair share of taxes? They would complain, threaten to pull funding to said politicians and what not.

But what I do admire is Wal-Mart.. seem they pay near their full share of taxes in the US... kudos.
Click to expand...

Yea, they just don't pay their fair share of employees. How many lawsuits against GE have their been by employees being abused, not paid, etc etc? How many for Wal Mart?

Typical liberal, being proud of a company for giving money to daddy gov't but employees be damned. Good little company! Give give give! It's not hard to write the tax check when don't write the paycheck.
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
LOL!

ge's ace tax attorney goes on bended knee to CHARLIE RANGEL and gets his wish
Click to expand...
LOL is right! Who was granting wishes in 2007/2008? Check out their tax rate the last two years of the Bush admin.....

Avoiding taxes is nothing new for General Electric. In 2008 its effective tax rate was 5.3%; in 2007 it was 15%. The marginal U.S. corporate rate is 35%.
What The Top U.S. Companies Pay In Taxes - Forbes.com

But why the whining? I thought Reps/cons were in favor of millionaires getting tax cuts? They create the jobs, the less they pay the better, as far as conservatives are concerned, why the crying now? Are they crocodile tears?

ge makes 14B, 9B from operations moved OFFSHORE
Click to expand...
Guess under what administration outsourcing became popular?

Probably the question most people want to know is how many U.S. jobs have been lost to outsourcing? According to Techsunite.org, over 500,000 jobs have been outsourced since the year 2000. There have also been over 250,000 additional jobs lost due to outsourcing. The biggest culprits of outsourcing are IT companies.
Facts and Figures on Outsourcing | LoveToKnow

Guess who wants to keep tax breaks for companies that outsource?

Washington (CNN) – Senate Republicans successfully blocked a bill from coming to the Senate floor Tuesday that Democrats claim would help keep American jobs from going overseas.
Republicans call it nothing more than a pre-election political ploy.
The Democratic bill would have ended certain tax breaks for companies expanding overseas while giving new tax incentives to businesses bringing jobs home.

GOP blocks Democrats’ jobs outsourcing bill – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

and obama picks MR IMMELT to be his JOBS CZAR
Click to expand...
Maybe not so good, since Immelt tends to lean right? ROFLMAO!

no big deal, business as usual at obama's white house
Click to expand...
Not as long as Republicans block bills that would raise the tax rates for the wealthy!
They create the jobs, only there haven't been too many jobs created by these tax cuts? Hmmmmmmm
 
Troubadour said:
Of course it hasn't only been Republicans, it's just that it's the raison d'etre of today's Republican Party and at least philosophically antithetical to Democrats. But given that the GOP has been monotonously demanding and providing a bottomless supply of new corporate tax cuts for thirty years, and still claims that somehow we have a "hostile business climate" (i.e., they're not allowed to enslave people or hire 5-year-olds) what is the source of your doubt? I'll find the information if you can articulate what you're specifically asking for.



It's pretty simple: If you're rich, you can find a way to avoid paying taxes. And if anyone complains, they're a "socialist" who shouldn't be allowed to vote. That's the GOP's ongoing plan for America.
Click to expand...

So, what was your tax bill last year?
 
mertex said:
Which is what my posts have tried to uncover - I'm not trying to make a partisan issue, if that is who you are directing the comment I made about not being able to think that far ahead. Cons have tried to insinuate that Immelt's appointment by Obama is somehow connected to GE paying Zero taxes - I'm trying to show them that Reps get more contributions than Dems from GE.

As usual, their insinuations are contradictory!
Click to expand...


Not at all...Tell me do the individuals of any particular company reflect the ideology of their CEO? I'd bet you'd have one heck of a time proving that one.


j-mac
 
mertex said:
Maybe not so good
Click to expand...

maybe?

LOL!

jeffrey immelt, offshore tax avoider, one-kneed supplicant to the poster boy of dc corruption

and the man barack hussein obama promotes to be his COMPETITIVENESS CZAR!

party on, progressives
 
The Prof said:
maybe?

LOL!

jeffrey immelt, offshore tax avoider, one-kneed supplicant to the poster boy of dc corruption

and the man barack hussein obama promotes to be his COMPETITIVENESS CZAR!

party on, progressives
Click to expand...

Sounds like the kind of guy that would let Pelosi, Reid run roughshot, and let Samantha Power, and Hillary dictate foreign policy alright.

j-mac
 
SheWolf said:
Why wouldn't they be? If you report on the 1040, you'd be eligible for those credits... You might not be eligible for business credits, but you might still be eligible for personal credits on the 1040. I am not saying that every business will get a refund or should, and you can qualify for a credit but it may not be enough to net you a refund, just lowers your taxable income. Sometimes a company gets a refund though.

The tax form for large corporations, with publicly traded stock, is Form 1120.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1120.pdf

Refundable credit amounts are listed on lines 30 - 36 on that form..
Click to expand...

I see, so IOW, that one client you referenced got lucky and is in no way representitive of most businesses in the country and you were talking from where the sun doesn't shine?
 
j-mac said:
Not at all...Tell me do the individuals of any particular company reflect the ideology of their CEO? I'd bet you'd have one heck of a time proving that one.
Click to expand...

Proving what? That they do or they don't? I haven't commented either way, but you seem to have some idea, so why don't you enlighten me?
 
j-mac said:
Sounds like the kind of guy that would let Pelosi, Reid run roughshot, and let Samantha Power, and Hillary dictate foreign policy alright.

j-mac
Click to expand...


Yeah, I guess he only likes specific Republicans, has nothing to do with the party? That is too funny, please tell me another joke!

General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt is joining the Obama administration's effort to jumpstart job creation, but prior to that he was a generous donor to GOP candidates.

The White House announced early Friday that Immelt will be the chairman of Obama's new Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, but campaign finance records show that around two-thirds of the Cincinnati native's contributions over the years have been to Republicans.

Just last cycle, Immelt dipped into his pockets to help elect GOP majorities.

According to OpenSecrets.org, Immelt gave $4,800 to Ohio Sen. Rob Portman and $4,300 to Missouri Sen. Roy Blunt.
 
Marshabar said:
The United States, thanks to greedy politicians of all stripes, has become a Corporatocracy.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't corporations take advantage of a middle class dumb enough to lower corporate taxes for them and the taxes for the wealthy for the last 30 years thereby taking on more debt for ourselves?

We get the government we deserve. I don't have any unrealistic expectations for our leaders to be smarter than we are.
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
maybe?

LOL!

jeffrey immelt, offshore tax avoider, one-kneed supplicant to the poster boy of dc corruption

and the man barack hussein obama promotes to be his COMPETITIVENESS CZAR!

party on, progressives
Click to expand...

But you don't mind that he contributes more to Republicans? Of course not. LOL!
 
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.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all
 
mertex said:
Nothing new!
Click to expand...

not according to the times

the lady laments that charlie changed his mind on the very day mr samuels took a knee

of course that was more than a year before over-his-head obama promoted the ceo to JOBS CZAR

which was only a few months after orzsag, summers and romer all QUIT

i wonder why practically his entire economic team QUIT
 
PeteEU said:
Eh? I am bitching about a tax systems that makes it possible for massively profitable companies to avoid taxes all together. You did read the Economist link right? That Newscorp paid an effective tax of 6% world wide despite being registered in 4 different countries with tax rates going from 35% to 30ish%? Point is the tax system of the US and other countries is corrupt and pro business to the extreme (in the US).
Click to expand...

Actually I think you have it backwards here. The tax code is the opposite of pro business. These companies are obviously investing large amounts of money just to avoid taxes, that is not the way it should be. That is why all of these large companies are OFFSHORING their profits. They do not want to bring the profits to the US because then they will face one of the highest tax rates on corporate profits in the world.
 
mertex said:
Proving what? That they do or they don't? I haven't commented either way, but you seem to have some idea, so why don't you enlighten me?
Click to expand...


Proving that the strategy of many corporations is to give money to both sides in order to lobby them later. It has nothing to do with the ideology of any specific board member, or CEO necessarily. However, when that member then sits on a panel for a particular President, and makes himself known as a close friend and advisor to that President, well, we can see just fine where he stands politically.

Then he benefits directly, although see that part is not out in the open, think of liberal claims against Cheney when you mull this over in your head, all the sudden you want to bring up donations to GOP campaigns as though that exonerates this corrupt administration from the dirty, corrupt deals they are making?

j-mac
 
mertex said:
Bingo! Nothing new!


From your link:

The company has been cutting the percentage of its American profits paid to the Internal Revenue Service for years, resulting in a far lower rate than at most multinational companies.
Click to expand...

Just another smoke screen excuse. I think hearings are in order.


j-mac
 
Catawba said:
Why wouldn't corporations take advantage of a middle class dumb enough to lower corporate taxes for them and the taxes for the wealthy for the last 30 years thereby taking on more debt for ourselves?

We get the government we deserve. I don't have any unrealistic expectations for our leaders to be smarter than we are.
Click to expand...

We were stupid enough to vote in a flaming Liberal as president. Now, GE, one of the biggest domestic producers of overseas produced green energy junk has been green energy subsidized to the point we the government owes them a tax refund to the tune of of $3.2 billion.

When you consider that the Dems controlled Congress for a majority of the time that the tax code has existed, it is no wonder that the tax code is ****ed up 9 ways from sunday.
 
apdst said:
We were stupid enough to vote in a flaming Liberal as president. Now, GE, one of the biggest domestic producers of overseas produced green energy junk has been green energy subsidized to the point we the government owes them a tax refund to the tune of of $3.2 billion.
Click to expand...

You've missed a few posts. GE and other corporations have been getting tax breaks long before Obama became president.

When you consider that the Dems controlled Congress for a majority of the time that the tax code has existed, it is no wonder that the tax code is ****ed up 9 ways from sunday.
Click to expand...

We never had a problem with revenues until the tax rates for the wealthy were slashed by Reagan/Bush.
 
Catawba said:
You've missed a few posts. GE and other corporations have been getting tax breaks long before Obama became president.
Click to expand...

So, are you claiming that GE isn't getting sudsidized for their green energy projects? Do you oppose subsidizing green energy projects?



We never had a problem with revenues until the tax rates for the wealthy were slashed by Reagan/Bush.
Click to expand...

We didn't? So, tell us, if you please, how the economy went into the crapper before Reagan/Bush became presidents. Can't wait to hear this.
 
PeteEU said:
Eh? I am bitching about a tax systems that makes it possible for massively profitable companies to avoid taxes all together. You did read the Economist link right? That Newscorp paid an effective tax of 6% world wide despite being registered in 4 different countries with tax rates going from 35% to 30ish%? Point is the tax system of the US and other countries is corrupt and pro business to the extreme (in the US).
Click to expand...

No such tax code exists in the United States.

There are only two ways for a company to do what GE did, 1) report a loss and 2) huge government subsidies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom