47% will pay zero federal income taxes

[3rdnlng]

Make a great big pile out of it and roll in it, then use it to exploit consumers.

 

I was just waiting for him to come up with an answer.

[DC Tom]

I was just waiting for him to come up with an answer.

 

Mine was more realistic.

[3rdnlng]

Mine was more realistic.

 

 

So, Connor has influenced you?

[John Adams]

One of these days you're going to read something before you link to it, and the rest of us will die from shock.

 

68% would count as "most", except that the GAO study shows that only 3% of domestically-owned US corporations didn't pay taxes, over an eight year span. I'm pretty sure 3% does not count as "most", even though it's "open to interpretation".

 

What's great is that I didn't have to click conner's link to prove him wrong. I knew he was wrong with more certainty than Joe in Mac believes in god.

 

It's shocking that companies paid few taxes in 2009. Did something happen that year?

[KD in CA]

Ok first you'll have to forgive me one sin. After looking it up, it was GE that paid no taxes, not GM. You'll have to excuse me for mixing up the two names.

Oh sure. Except that's wrong too. Apparently, the author of the article you put so much faith in is also too stupid to know how to read a company's financial statements. In fact, GE paid $2.5 billion in taxes last year, and nearly $9 billion over the last 3 years. GM discloses that they file over 7000 tax returns in over 250 jurisdictions every year.

 

Educate yourself

 

Well here is the big study

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/12/r...a_n_118455.html

I really wish you could bet on things like "connor will post a link to the huffington post as 'proof' of something."

 

I think we can safely assume that the conclusions certain people have drawn from the study are as flawed as your big example above since most people don't understand the difference between paying taxes and accounting for taxes.

 

 

GE is the big one, and then I think Bank of America and Wells Fargo I believe are two other big fish that didn't pay any taxes last year.

Except that they paid taxes too. I'll let you research the actual data on that one.

 

I believe 68% counts as "most".

Yeah. Too bad that doesn't even remotely apply to this situation.

 

 

But despite the fact that he doesn't have a clue about what he's talking about (as usual), let's give connor some credit, shall we? After all, there is no question that current corporate tax laws allow for massive tax deferral/avoidance through all sorts of tax strategies. Why, right there in the GE 10-K, they tell us in black and white one of the big ways they avoid taxes:

 

For example, GE's effective tax rate is reduced because active business income earned and indefinitely reinvested outside the United States is taxed at less than the U.S. rate. A significant portion of this reduction depends upon a provision of U.S. tax law that defers the imposition of U.S. tax on certain active financial services income until that income is repatriated to the United States as a dividend. This provision is consistent with international tax norms and permits U.S. financial services companies to compete more effectively with foreign banks and other foreign financial institutions in global markets.

 

Disgusting, isn't it? You would think that the beleaguered American taxpayer would elect some people to Congress to put a stop it this outrage! I know, let's give unchecked control to the Democrats, the party of the people, who will punish these corporate titans who don't pay their fair share! This sounds like a job for Charlie Rangel and the Most Ethical Congress in History!!!

 

Uh....

 

This provision, which expired at the end of 2009, has been scheduled to expire and has been extended by Congress on five previous occasions, including in October of 2008. A one-year extension was passed by the House of Representatives in 2009 and the Senate Finance Committee Chairman and Ranking Member have indicated an intention to extend the provision for one year retroactive to the beginning of 2010.

[drnykterstein]

Oh sure. Except that's wrong too. Apparently, the author of the article you put so much faith in is also too stupid to know how to read a company's financial statements. In fact, GE paid $2.5 billion in taxes last year, and nearly $9 billion over the last 3 years. GM discloses that they file over 7000 tax returns in over 250 jurisdictions every year.

 

Educate yourself

 

 

I really wish you could bet on things like "connor will post a link to the huffington post as 'proof' of something."

 

I think we can safely assume that the conclusions certain people have drawn from the study are as flawed as your big example above since most people don't understand the difference between paying taxes and accounting for taxes.

 

 

 

Except that they paid taxes too. I'll let you research the actual data on that one.

 

 

Yeah. Too bad that doesn't even remotely apply to this situation.

 

 

But despite the fact that he doesn't have a clue about what he's talking about (as usual), let's give connor some credit, shall we? After all, there is no question that current corporate tax laws allow for massive tax deferral/avoidance through all sorts of tax strategies. Why, right there in the GE 10-K, they tell us in black and white one of the big ways they avoid taxes:

 

For example, GE's effective tax rate is reduced because active business income earned and indefinitely reinvested outside the United States is taxed at less than the U.S. rate. A significant portion of this reduction depends upon a provision of U.S. tax law that defers the imposition of U.S. tax on certain active financial services income until that income is repatriated to the United States as a dividend. This provision is consistent with international tax norms and permits U.S. financial services companies to compete more effectively with foreign banks and other foreign financial institutions in global markets.

 

Disgusting, isn't it? You would think that the beleaguered American taxpayer would elect some people to Congress to put a stop it this outrage! I know, let's give unchecked control to the Democrats, the party of the people, who will punish these corporate titans who don't pay their fair share! This sounds like a job for Charlie Rangel and the Most Ethical Congress in History!!!

 

Uh....

 

This provision, which expired at the end of 2009, has been scheduled to expire and has been extended by Congress on five previous occasions, including in October of 2008. A one-year extension was passed by the House of Representatives in 2009 and the Senate Finance Committee Chairman and Ranking Member have indicated an intention to extend the provision for one year retroactive to the beginning of 2010.

 

I love TBD apologies. They are so indirect.

 

"You are dumb because you linked to news source I don't like"

 

"You are dumb"

 

"You are not wrong, and I'll indirectly confirm your statement was correct"

 

"Democrats suck"

 

... always have to get a shot in at the Dems, even though I don't care for them at all myself. Democrats suck. Also, Republicans suck, and so does GW Bush.

[Chef Jim]

I love TBD apologies. They are so indirect.

 

"You are dumb because you linked to news source I don't like"

 

"You are dumb"

 

"You are not wrong, and I'll indirectly confirm your statement was correct"

 

"Democrats suck"

 

... always have to get a shot in at the Dems, even though I don't care for them at all myself. Democrats suck.

 

Do you have any idea of what professions the people you're arguing with are in?

[drnykterstein]

Do you have any idea of what professions the people you're arguing with are in?

 

I'm guessing that you are a chef.

[KD in CA]

I love TBD apologies. They are so indirect.

 

"You are dumb because you linked to news source I don't like"

 

"You are dumb"

 

"You are not wrong, and I'll confirm your statement was correct"

 

"Democrats suck"

 

Does it help to just pretend? Or was the link to GE's SEC filing that proved they paid taxes just way too complicated for your feeble mind to understand?

 

The funny part is you still think a "news source" is proof of anything other than someone choose to write something down.

 

Time to go pat yourself on the back for another 'win'.

 

[Chef Jim]

I'm guessing that you are a chef.

 

Uhhhhh, no.

[erynthered]

Do you have any idea of what professions the people you're arguing with are in?

 

 

Do NOT tell him. connor's diarrhea of the mouth **** makes my day every day.

[drnykterstein]

Does it help to just pretend? Or was the link to GE's SEC filing that proved they paid taxes just way too complicated for your feeble mind to understand?

 

The funny part is you still think a "news source" is proof of anything other than someone choose to write something down.

 

Time to go pat yourself on the back for another 'win'.

 

 

I really don't understand what the problem is here. I said that most corporations don't pay taxes to the government. I was correct on that.

 

I said GM GE pays less taxes than you or I do. Perhaps I was wrong. You did however point out that "GE's effective tax rate is reduced". Which shows that my knowledge on the area was at least partially correct.

 

Now what is the problem?

[taterhill]

Do you have any idea of what professions the people you're arguing with are in?

you are a chef and I farm potatoes

[Joe Miner]

Now what is the problem?

 

You

[erynthered]

you are a chef and I farm potatoes on a hill

 

 

Fixed

[drnykterstein]

You

 

Well good. You are a dumb zombie republican. Being a problem to you is a joy and an honour.

[KD in CA]

I really don't understand what the problem is here. I said that most corporations don't pay taxes to the government. I was correct on that.

Uh, no, you weren't. A news story that misinterprets financial statements is not proof. You mentioned 3 examples are were wrong on all 3.

 

 

I said GM GE pays less taxes than you or I do. Perhaps I was wrong. You did however point out that "GE's effective tax rate is reduced". Which shows that my knowledge on the area was at least partially correct.

"Wrong" does not equal "partially correct". Except maybe in connerland.

 

 

Now what is the problem?

There's no problem. Your stupidity is comic relief.

[drnykterstein]

Uh, no, you weren't. A news story that misinterprets financial statements is not proof. You mentioned 3 examples are were wrong on all 3.

 

GAO report was what I was referring to.

 

 

"Wrong" does not equal "partially correct". Except maybe in connerland.

 

I'm sure I've educated at least one of the monkeys here.

 

 

 

Anyways this has hit DC Tom land and it's boring. My superior intellect has better things to do than fling poo with you.

[John Adams]

I really don't understand what the problem is here. I said that most corporations don't pay taxes to the government. I was correct on that.

 

I said GM GE pays less taxes than you or I do. Perhaps I was wrong. You did however point out that "GE's effective tax rate is reduced". Which shows that my knowledge on the area was at least partially correct.

 

Now what is the problem?

 

You claim that your knowledge was partially correct but you said GM/E pays less taxes than you or me. Unless you (or me) paid a few billion in taxes last year, you're not partially correct. You're 100% wrong.*

 

I know I didn't pay a few billion in taxes. I can't speak for you though it seems a safe bet.

[DC Tom]

GAO report was what I was referring to.

 

READ THE !@#$ING THING, YOU IDIOT!!! It manifestly does NOT say that only 68% of corporations pay taxes.