well, well, well

[ladiesbballcoach]

They are putting their money in off shore holding companies to keep from paying AMERICAN taxes. They paid NO AMERICAN INCOME TAX. What are you not getting from that?

 

Two articles were presented and one said they had none, another said they paid billions each quarter.

 

Again, I wonder if your article is meaning at the end of the year when they were doing their final tax liabilities instead of what they were paying on a quarterly basis.

 

Do corporations not pay their taxes on a quarterly basis?

 

So, if they paid each quarter, they would have no tax liability at the end of the year.

 

To have a good grasp on this, we need to know if your article is playing loose with the facts to make the point they want to make.

 

Is this including the taxes a corporation pays quarterly?

[UKMustangFan]

Actually, the company has to be located in Kentucky, doing business in kentucky, hiring employees in Kentucky - they may be headquartered somewhere else, but they have tax liabilities IN THIS STATE.

 

So how is that any different than a US company that does business in one of those foreign countries?

[75center]

Actually, the company has to be located in Kentucky, doing business in kentucky, hiring employees in Kentucky - they may be headquartered somewhere else, but they have tax liabilities IN THIS STATE.

 

How is that different than the Oil companies? THEY HAVE TAX LIABILITIES IN THIS COUNTRY. THEY HIRE EMPLOYEES IN THIS COUNTRY. THEY PAY PROPERTY TAXES IN THIS COUNTRY.

 

See, I can yell too. It doesn't make me any more right.

 

But I am.

[acemona]

How is that different than the Oil companies? THEY HAVE TAX LIABILITIES IN THIS COUNTRY. THEY HIRE EMPLOYEES IN THIS COUNTRY. THEY PAY PROPERTY TAXES IN THIS COUNTRY.

 

See, I can yell too. It doesn't make me any more right.

 

But I am.

 

the premise of the article was that they didn't have tax liabilities, but they do get subsidies.

[Hearsay]

the premise of the article was that they didn't have tax liabilities, but they do get subsidies.

 

No, it doesn't say that. The article said that ExxonMobil had $15 billion in pre-tax liabilities, but that was offset by foreign credits. ThinkProgress misquoted Forbes. You need to "click" on "published" in the ThinkProgress article to get to the Forbes article.

[All Tell]

Nearly half of US households escape fed income tax

 

The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners — households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 — paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

 

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

 

"We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing," said Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

 

I guess all of these people are just like that evil corporation.

[75center]

From a clarification article in Forbes today:

"And for all you commenters outraged that Exxon isn't paying taxes in the U.S., don't worry, it is. Our article only focused on income taxes, but it's worth noting that the 10-k also records $7.7 billion in other taxes in the U.S. (like sales taxes) and more than $50 billion of other taxes and duties paid (I mean recorded) overseas."

 

Big difference in taxes paid and taxes recorded.

[5wide]

Nearly half of US households escape fed income tax

 

 

 

I guess all of these people are just like that evil corporation.

 

Something a flat tax could easily eliminate. :idunno:

 

It could solve all these issues in one quick stroke. No more complaining about people beating the system...no more wasting oodles of money on the ridiculously unnecessary IRS...you buy something, you buy anything, in America, and you pay a set rate federal tax on it. No way to avoid it. No way to beat that system.

 

Can someone tell me what the downside is to a system like that?

[All Tell]

EVERYONE would pay. There would be no protected class.

 

FWIW I completely favor flat tax and elimination of pay roll withholding. Having it deducted from your paycheck makes it to painless. All taxes should be paid with an actual payment.

[5wide]

EVERYONE would pay. There would be no protected class.

 

FWIW I completely favor flat tax and elimination of pay roll withholding. Having it deducted from your paycheck makes it to painless. All taxes should be paid with an actual payment.

 

So, is there any downside to us normal folks?

 

BTW, I'm reading a historical fiction book about the American Revolution right now...fascinating. Taxes made me think of that.:idunno:

 

On the surface, it certainly seems like a flat tax would make perfect sense. You eliminate a huge government expenditure in the IRS and you get that missing 41% paying taxes. It seems like the government would come out way ahead financially on that front. Sounds like a good start to financial responsibility in America.

 

Too bad it makes sense...they might actually do it otherwise.

[5wide]

The difference, at least in my experience, to the two scenarios Ace has laid out is this. The people who speak out against government handouts generally complain about the system that allows and encourages it. The people who get upset about wealthy people beating the system generally lash out at the people.

 

If you're mad that someone can find away around paying taxes, target the system that allows that to happen. If you're made because there are people living off the government that shouldn't be, target a system that encourages that to occur. That's what needs to be fixed.

[rockmom]

EVERYONE would pay. There would be no protected class.

 

FWIW I completely favor flat tax and elimination of pay roll withholding. Having it deducted from your paycheck makes it to painless. All taxes should be paid with an actual payment.

 

 

I am fine with everything you say here, except the payroll witholding. The adminstrative costs for the government to recover the taxes not paid would be horrific. Keep it coming out of the paychecks. Then, the IRS only has to worry about those who didn't have enough withheld, or any withheld.

[rockmom]

The difference, at least in my experience, to the two scenarios Ace has laid out is this. The people who speak out against government handouts generally complain about the system that allows and encourages it. The people who get upset about wealthy people beating the system generally lash out at the people.

 

If you're mad that someone can find away around paying taxes, target the system that allows that to happen. If you're made because there are people living off the government that shouldn't be, target a system that encourages that to occur. That's what needs to be fixed.

 

 

Amen! That's what I've been preaching for years! And I think it applies to other issues such as abortion and gun laws/rights as well.

[94 Camel]

Holy Cow - THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PAY TAXES. They benefit from the system set up by the American people. Our government negotiates FOR EXXON with foreign nations. PAY YOUR DANG TAXES.

 

Possibly the only statement of yours that I have read and agreed with fully on this post.:thumb:

[The Scribe]

You'd be surprised at how many industries in your own home town don't pay some sort of tax (payroll, state, etc.). It's called incentive to locate and build.