In Study, Most Companies Reported No Taxes

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Michael
Jhhnn - The IRS is about to launch a massive campaign against the "non-witholders" (a complete farce). They just finished closing off the offshore credit card dodge that was being used. They're also slamming KPMG and a couple of other big accounting firms very hard over some of the avaoidance schemes they were peddling. The IRS used to do more, but the American people got their panties in a bunch and told their Congress to rein them in a little.

We're in agreement that it is complex. The reason why "off-shoring" is better right now was an attempt to arm American companies to better compete against foreign companies. This came as a result of strong competition from Japan and Europe well before the current "offshoring" problem hit. The laws have been messed with a few times as they were attacked under the WTO.

The problem is that any raises in tax simply make it even more expensive to do business in the USA.

I do agree that it is time to review the current set of tax breaks and to make sure they're all still needed. Same goes for the general code for individuals.

Michael

Ah I see, for Corporations paying their fair share is too high of a cost of doing business in the U.S.
Why pay anything when it all could be profits for personal execs pockets.

 

[Michael]

Dave,

Define "fair share"?

Remember, they pay Medicare and Social Security taxes on top of what every employee pays. The Corporate rate is in the 30's. Much of what they're not paying today because of accelerated depreciation is simply deferred income taxes and will come due if they stop investing. Corporations also pay property taxes and customs duties. They pay business license fees and registration fees to the states and localities they do business in.

Abd, yes, any raise in what they're currently paying will raise their expenses and put more pressure on them to earn income elsewhere or to raise prices and be less competitive (or not raise prices and have less to invest in the future with).

You're highly uneducated on this topic and have proposed zero concrete solutions other than whining that they're not paying enough.

Michael

 

[Jhhnn]

Jhhnn - I just looked up _Perfectly Legal_ on Amazon.com. I don't think that the book will tell me anything I don't already know.

Might be surprised, particularly given your comment about the AMT. The author explores the results of the Bush tax package and the AMT in some detail. He argues that the changes and the AMT in combination will further shift the tax burden from the ultra wealthy onto the upper middle class as the changes phase in on our way to 2010... He also points out that stock options are taxed at capital gains rates, and contends that the inheritance tax is often the only tax on some rather large chunks of tax-free income.

Johnston also points out the dearth of audits on upper bracket and corporate income, pointing out that earned income credit filers are a lot more likely to be audited than those in the upper.01%. So what happens is that a lot of creative minds are working hard to find "tax advantages" that may or may not actually be legal, while the likelihood of an audit is almost nil, the likelihood of any penalty even less. Congress defines the IRS mission via the detailed budget, and it seems clear that they've been sent on a snipe hunt...

OH, yeh, the offshore credit cards have been replaced with debit cards, and more new tax shelters are created than shut down...

Buzzflash recently had an interview with Johnston. I'd post a link, except that I'm away from home, on an annoyingly slow dialup connection. I'll do so later on this evening...

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Michael
Dave,

Define "fair share"?

Remember, they pay Medicare and Social Security taxes on top of what every employee pays. The Corporate rate is in the 30's. Much of what they're not paying today because of accelerated depreciation is simply deferred income taxes and will come due if they stop investing. Corporations also pay property taxes and customs duties. They pay business license fees and registration fees to the states and localities they do business in.

Abd, yes, any raise in what they're currently paying will raise their expenses and put more pressure on them to earn income elsewhere or to raise prices and be less competitive (or not raise prices and have less to invest in the future with).

You're highly uneducated on this topic and have proposed zero concrete solutions other than whining that they're not paying enough.

Michael

I never said they are not paying enough. CAD & Co are training you well too I see.

They are getting paid and subsidized to do business here and they are sending the fruits of that Tax payer money overseas, that is wrong. You will not be able to justify that no matter what.

Solution: Cut off their free money supply and watch them scatter like Rats when the light gets turned on.

 

[Michael]

>>>>sending the fruits of that Tax payer money overseas

Prove that. I'll give you a hint. If the biggest breaks they get is from accelerated depreciation, stock options being exercised, and R&D tax credits, then they're spending and earning that right in the USA and generating jobs while they're at it.

The parts of the tax law related to "off shore" were put into place because our tax structure made it much worse to be a USA company than a company somewhere else. Companies that American companies had to compete with.

For the most part, multi-nationals generate profits overseas and invest that overseas.

Again, you are ignorant and have provided nothing to this thread or topic other then whine about unfairness of something you don't understand.

Michael

 

[Fern]

As I beleive Mark Twain once said "there a lies, damn lies, and statics"


Allow me to interject a few facts that may be relevant here. I say "maybe" cuz there's no link and very little data provided hereon the assertion of "no taxes".

If this study was about the Fortune 500 or 1000 the above comments would some some relevance.

If it's ALL companies in the US, that number is what s/b expected. Why? simply cuz there are three types of companies under the US tax code:

1. S Corporations. Which by law do not pay taxes. Rather the income is reported on the shareholders' personal tax return via schedule K-1. The individuals pay the tax on the companies' profits

2. LLC Corporations. Although corporations by law, they are generally taxed as partnerships. Here again they pay no taxes, similar to an "S corp" the income is reported on the individuals' personal tax return.

3. Regular or "C Corp", like GM and IBM. These are the only corp.s which w/h to pay taxes if they had income.

BY FAR, #1 and #2 are the most prevelents forms of corporations in the US.


Unless and until the study comments on the above it is hard to come to any conclusions (validly) about corporate taxation.

 

[Michael]

And small C companies that never generate profits by far are the greatest number of C corps.

Michael

 

[Jhhnn]

Here's the link I promised earlier-

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=16668

 

[ElFenix]

yup, owning a small corporation is the biggest tax loophole in the world, and no one will ever close it.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Here's the link I promised earlier-

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=16668

"Most people making $60,000 pay a larger share of their income in federal taxes than the top 400 Americans, whose average income in 2000 was $174 million each. They paid just 22-cents on the dollar in federal taxes and under the Bush tax cuts would pay just 17.5 cents on the dollar."

Michael and CAD & Co must be proud.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Fern
As I beleive Mark Twain once said "there a lies, damn lies, and statics"

He actually said "there are lies, damned lies and statistics", statics is form of physics used in the analyzation of forces acting on a body.

Ignorance reigns supreme in this thread.