Author Topic: Largest US companies paying no taxes?  (Read 798 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Largest US companies paying no taxes?
« on: October 26, 2013, 11:46:58 PM »

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 19,995
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
    • The place where argument addicts can go
Re: Largest US companies paying no taxes?
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2013, 12:15:59 AM »
Much of what is bantied about called avoidance, is actually deferral.

Two such deferral situations:

--Completed contract method for taxes, percent complete for income and profit recognition.

--Foreign source profits not taxed until remitted to US.
"God must love the common man, he made so many of them.�  Abe Lincoln

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,259
  • TBR Illuminati
Re: Largest US companies paying no taxes?
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2013, 12:49:40 PM »
Much of what is bantied about called avoidance, is actually deferral.

Two such deferral situations:

--Completed contract method for taxes, percent complete for income and profit recognition.

--Foreign source profits not taxed until remitted to US.

And much of that is also thrown out there and impeached as some sort of tax evasion, some sort of illicit use of unintended loop-holes, when it's nothing more than standard, competent use of the tax rules Congress intentionally wrote into the tax code.

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 19,995
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
    • The place where argument addicts can go
Re: Largest US companies paying no taxes?
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2013, 02:05:19 PM »
And much of that is also thrown out there and impeached as some sort of tax evasion, some sort of illicit use of unintended loop-holes, when it's nothing more than standard, competent use of the tax rules Congress intentionally wrote into the tax code.

Deferring tax on unremitted foreign earnings was probably once enacted, to stimulate US companies to invest and become active internationally.

But much of the regulatory business is never "sunsetted." It becomes a permanent, "entitlement" to the benefits of a ton of money dumped into K-Street, and probably onward into the chambers of the US legislature.

Wall Street, and K Street accountants and lawyers can arrange things, such that a person comes into wealth.

Think Dick Cheney and his stint at Halliburton. I assure you he brought zero industry specific experience to the job. He was a crony-capitalist rainmaker, and nothing more.

And I say that, liking him.
"God must love the common man, he made so many of them.�  Abe Lincoln

Offline AbaraXas

  • ?? ??????? ?????
  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,262
  • Words full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Re: Largest US companies paying no taxes?
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2013, 02:06:45 PM »
And much of that is also thrown out there and impeached as some sort of tax evasion, some sort of illicit use of unintended loop-holes, when it's nothing more than standard, competent use of the tax rules Congress intentionally wrote into the tax code.

Absolutely.
We can't in one sentence decry the government's massive over-reach into business through regulation and taxes and in the next sentence, complain that businesses do everything in their power through legal means to avoid them.

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 48,259
  • TBR Illuminati
Re: Largest US companies paying no taxes?
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2013, 11:16:53 PM »
Deferring tax on unremitted foreign earnings was probably once enacted, to stimulate US companies to invest and become active internationally.

But much of the regulatory business is never "sunsetted." It becomes a permanent, "entitlement" to the benefits of a ton of money dumped into K-Street, and probably onward into the chambers of the US legislature.

Wall Street, and K Street accountants and lawyers can arrange things, such that a person comes into wealth.

Think Dick Cheney and his stint at Halliburton. I assure you he brought zero industry specific experience to the job. He was a crony-capitalist rainmaker, and nothing more.

And I say that, liking him.

That is, indeed, the other side of the coin.  However, much of the international tax provisions were enacted not to promote a rational, economically sound tax policy, but were enacted piecemeal in response to perceived "abuses" that really weren't.  If a US taxpayer is not taxable on the earnings of the corporations in which it owns stock until those earnings are distributed as a dividend, then there is no rational reason why that treatment should change simply because the corporation is a foreign corporation earning income in a foreign country.  And the result becomes even more perversely irrational when you put something like the CFC/subpart F rules into place.  Far from allowing companies to defer tax on foreign-earned income, the CFC/subpart F regime could just as easily have been aimed at forcing (or, as the government likes to think of it, "encouraging") companies to make their business investments in the US by allowing them to defer the second-level dividends tax on their investments in their nonconsolidated subsidiaries until those earnings are actually distributed while penalizing them for making their business investments through nonconsolidated foreign subsidiaries by extracting wealth from those companies in the form of taxes before they actually possess the cash necessary to fund those taxes.


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf