Nearly 60 top corporations used loophole to avoid paying billions in US taxes

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,297
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com
Nearly 60 top corporations used loophole to avoid paying billions in US taxes



Verizon and News Corp. are among the dozens of companies listed on the Standard & Poor’s 500 that paid a zero percent tax rate in the last year. The so-called effective tax rate is how investors explain the tax a company pays compared to its profit.

While it is not illegal in any way for major companies to pay a zero percent tax rate - or in some cases even less - Friday’s analysis by USA Today does highlight some of the creative methods those corporations use to avoid dipping into their profit margins, and how that may ultimately impact national policy on corporate taxation.

The top federal income tax rate currently sits at 35 percent, a number that has been the source of public frustration for many company executives. Yet Seagate (a data storage manufacturer with a market value of $15.9 billion), Public Storage (the largest self-storage firm in the world with a $29.5 billion market value), and others pay a lower tax rate than most individual middle-class American families.

Investors hope company management is doing everything they can do to generate profit, legally,” Nick Yee of Gradient Analytics told USA Today. “But the tax code is gray, and there’s often no set guidance.”

Other notable companies on the list include MetLife (worth $53.9 billion), Regeneron Pharmaceuticals ($29.6 billion), Ventas ($19.3 billion), and Agilent Technologies ($16.9 billion).

Transferring payments to offshore accounts is one of the most popular ways for companies to avoid heavy tax burdens. For example, a company could organize foreign subsidiaries that make raw materials in countries with low tax rates. Executives would then buy the material from a foreign supplier at a price far above cost, according to USA Today, thus keeping a large profit.

The effective income and payroll tax rate for an American family that earns an average $64,500 a year stands at 12.7 percent, according to payroll tax statistics released in 2012.

The current federal tax code that applies to the corporations in question even allows them to avoid paying taxes in years when they earn a profit.

Sending finances offshore has become so commonplace that US officials have sought to work with international leaders to close the loophole. Tax avoidance cost the US approximately $300 billion last year and although much of that sum comes from individuals, cracking down on corporations could prove difficult because transfers of this sort are completely legal.

This tax analysis comes just months after a congressional investigation found that Apple had set up a complicated web of subsidiaries to avoid paying any taxes. Lawmakers found that some of Apple’s subsidiaries listed zero employees and were effectively stateless entities run from the company’s offices in California.

There is a technical term economists like to use for behavior like this,” Edward Kleinbard, a former staff director at the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, told the New York Times in May. “Unbelievable chutzpah.”

source: Nearly 60 top corporations used loophole to avoid paying billions in US taxes ? RT USA
 

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,297
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com
Gopher will wet his skirt when he sees this. :lol:

The very reason I posted it, after his rant in the Eliminate Welfare thread.. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, by all means - eliminate corporate welfare:



CORPORATE WELFARE vs. SOCIAL WELFARE SPENDING ... IT'S NOT JUST A $40 BILLION GAP


I have written about corporate welfare many times. I like to discuss this topic because almost every day we hear from conservative pundits and politicians that we need to end our culture of entitlements. The Republican Party has become particularly adept at getting America to believe that "dependence on government" is an economic and cultural sin that needs to be eradicated.


But, as I've pointed out in numerous posts (here, here, and here), government assistance comes in many forms, especially for the private sector.

FAVORABLE LEGISLATION: Market subsidies, market protections, market interventions, regulatory favors, favorable legislation, legal protections, ex-post facto reclassification's, government spending (Keynesian), artificially low interest rates (monetary policy), government takeovers of private sector "assets" (not what you think), and government bailouts (all discussed here and here) are only the tip of the ice berg.

SUBSIDIZING MARKET EFFICIENCY VIA SOCIAL POLICY: On a general level the state also has to protect freedom and individual rights, which subsidizes markets by helping markets function more efficiently. More specifically, as I've pointed elsewhere (and in my book), the modern state has to work consistently to remove or soften the impact of market enemies like market conspiracies (monopoly, oligopolies, etc.), societal prejudices (racism, sexism, etc.), government-corporate collusion or capture (favorable legislation, slavery, bailouts, regulatory capture, etc.), hereditary privileges (inheritances, wealth transfers, etc.), and outright corruption and theft.

HIDDEN GIFTS: Then we have "hidden" corporate subsidies that come in the form of tariff protections, dirt cheap land leases, royalty gifts to the oil industry, more than a trillion dollars in tax gifts, and increasingly longer copyright protections which are coupled with broader interpretations of what can be patented (especially good for drug and food manufacturers), which the New Yorker's James Surowiecki discusses here.

All of these subsidies, protections, and legislative gifts are backstopped and transferred by the state.


The reason I bring all of this up is because several of my conservative FB friends continue to point to the cost of government spending for housing and other welfare related expenditures. They claim it's busting the national bank. They're wrong.

The problem is that they never provide numbers and, quite frankly, don't know what the hell they're talking about (e.g. they like to conflate social security and Medicare with our budget mess when neither have anything to do with our current budget picture). My concern is that they choose to ignore (or never learn?) what Mike Sinn points out here.

Specifically, the almost $100 billion that we give as direct government subsidies for "corporate welfare" far outpaces the almost $60 billion we spend annually on traditional "social welfare" programs. Specifically, we spend $17.6 billion on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, (or TANF) and $41.7 billion on housing programs - where 54 percent of HUD-assisted households goes to the elderly or disabled - which adds up to $40 billion less than what we spend on direct corporate subsidies.



This corporate-social welfare gap explodes far beyond $40 billion if we consider the more than $4 trillion (yes, that's a trillion with a "t") that's been turned over to Wall Street and the financial sector since 2008, and the $16 trillion that we're now on the hook for as we continue to guarantee and subsidize our financial sectors economic recovery.

Here's what we should all understand from what's presented here. The GOP and their media noise machine on the right (Fox News is not alone) only want to cut welfare for the poor. They want you and everyone else to ignore corporate welfare for the private sector ($100 billion in subsidies + over a trillion in tax expenditure gifts + the trillions in post-2008 assistance).


The $40 billion gap between what we spend on direct corporate welfare ($100 billion) and traditional social welfare ($59.3 billion) is actually much larger. Much, much larger. The trillion dollars we give away in tax breaks (tax "expenditures") and the multi-trillion bailout program(s) that we crafted for Wall Street after 2008 should be ample evidence of this.




MARK MARTINEZ' BLOG: CORPORATE WELFARE vs. SOCIAL WELFARE SPENDING ... IT'S NOT JUST A $40 BILLION GAP




The sooner the better!
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,360
11,432
113
Low Earth Orbit
Profits are split by shareholders and are the ones who pay tax. Only revenues from shares held in Company Name are taxed.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
No mention of the collective salaries and the income taxes that are paid, let alone the payroll taxes, fees, permits, licenses and whatnot.

On another note, the IRS has allowed this loophole, so I fail to see why the corps are being vilified for taking advantage of it, over 50% of the workforce in the US are exempt from paying taxes, why should the companies be any different?
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
35
48
Toronto
[FONT=&quot]If your accountant can't find the loop holes then you know that you are paying too much taxes[/FONT]
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
No mention of the collective salaries and the income taxes that are paid, let alone the payroll taxes, fees, permits, licenses and whatnot.

On another note, the IRS has allowed this loophole, so I fail to see why the corps are being vilified for taking advantage of it, over 50% of the workforce in the US are exempt from paying taxes, why should the companies be any different?

That's a good question. I'm thinking you have formulated an answer that could be shared with the assembled experts for their insightful and innovative analysis. It's time to carry the ball to the infield or something.
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Remember the corporate welfare bums Steven Lewis used to talk about?
In Canada its happening too. Incentives for productive ends is not so bad
but just handing out tax breaks is not the way to go. For one thing these
people don't reinvest in production, they ship production jobs over seas
and pocket the money. It should be that there should be a specific number
of jobs per whatever the scale is created in America or Canada.
The time has come to scale back companies from manufacturing in Asia
and rebuild the middle class.
There are instances where assistance that is of benefit to the country and
I have no problem with that but using it as any means to avoid their taxes
with nothing to show should not be allowed
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
During the Bush years massive amounts were held overseas waiting for a 1 time tax reduction from Congress on profits returned to the US.
They waited, saved billions.
Change the law to limit the length of time it can be held offshore.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,650
6,989
113
B.C.
Remember the corporate welfare bums Steven Lewis used to talk about?
In Canada its happening too. Incentives for productive ends is not so bad
but just handing out tax breaks is not the way to go. For one thing these
people don't reinvest in production, they ship production jobs over seas
and pocket the money. It should be that there should be a specific number
of jobs per whatever the scale is created in America or Canada.
The time has come to scale back companies from manufacturing in Asia
and rebuild the middle class.
There are instances where assistance that is of benefit to the country and
I have no problem with that but using it as any means to avoid their taxes
with nothing to show should not be allowed
How many foreign nationals do you employ to harvest your fruit ?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
seems to me not too long ago we were discussing how something like fourty percent of US citizens paid no tax either. Unlike the shsreholders of these companies that must pay tax on their dividends.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
That's a good question. I'm thinking you have formulated an answer that could be shared with the assembled experts for their insightful and innovative analysis. It's time to carry the ball to the infield or something.

Yeah, it' hardly an amount worth mentioning.

Maybe you can lobby to have those companies shut-down entirely as it won't have any impact on the economy at all.

seems to me not too long ago we were discussing how something like fourty percent of US citizens paid no tax either. Unlike the shsreholders of these companies that must pay tax on their dividends.

I'm pretty sure that the companies (excepting select ones like REITS and certain Income Trusts) have to pay tax on the gross Op Profits and the dividends that get distributed to the shareholders get taxed as well (albeit at a lower rate than income).