Comments on: Most Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax

GAO Study Also Finds 68% Of Foreign Companies In U.S. Avoid Corporate Taxes

[libsluv2spit]

this is an incentive for businesses to remain in this country..the more money they make the more development and employment there is..in theory.

or we can try it the other way..tax the living sh*t out of these businesses and see them move to china or canada or india..when they do that..then unemployment rises..less money collecting salary..less money circulating..simple math..

[noloyalisti]

Amerika: capitalism for the poor and working class, socialism for the rich.

[caldwellptr]

As Leona Helmsley would have said, "These are my kind of companies!"

Oh, "And only the little people pay taxes."

[TommyCraig]

"TCANDREWS62, if you had a brain you would be dangerous, first the tax is not figured on gross income but net income in which all expense has been met"
Posted by frankbowers at 03:16 PM : Aug 12, 2008
FRANKBOWERS, What are you talking about???
Where did I say that taxes where figured on gross income in lieu of net?
Gee, you obviously hate your fellow statesmen President George Bush and I guess somehow you assimilate all corporations to republicans...
Just so you know...I am not a Republican.
I was only explaining how a corporation operates and the cost of corporate taxation.
Read-up a little. Maybe you could get your head out of your 6.

[payasyougo]

Credit to www.taxfoundation.org for the following:

Posted on August 12, 2008 by Josh Barro

The GAO has a report out today on corporations with zero corporate income tax liability. The upshot of the AP''s digest of the report is that corporations pay no taxes while their executives dine on grilled human flesh with biarnaise sauce, or something.

Unfortunately, the AP''s account is based in part on a serious misreading of one of the report''s tables. The AP notes:

About 25 percent of the U.S. corporations not paying corporate taxes [in 2005] were considered large corporations, meaning they had at least $250 million in assets or $50 million in receipts.

However, the actual report (Table 1, page 23) reflects that, of the 1.26 million U.S. corporations with no 2005 tax liability, just 3,565 were large. That''s 0.28%, or 89 times lower than the AP''s figure. Oops!

In fact, what the report shows is that only 25% of large U.S. corporations paid no corporate income tax in 2005. In 85% of those cases, the large corporation paid no income tax because it had zero or negative net income for 2005. No income, no income tax.

For example, in a "clever tax dodge", American Airlines avoided income tax for 2005 by losing $862 million. General Motors lost $10.5 billion in 2005; I bet those greedy fat cats didn''t pay any corporate income tax, either.

[rwassel]

Makes you wonder what party was in charge of Congress for those years...

Oh, wait...

[dan9111]

The taxes are being paid! The shareholders (profiteers)pay the taxes as it becomes income.

Posted by tcandrews62

Why can''t I do the same thing and wave a magic wand to declare the money for all the things I buy (food, etc.) as `not income`? The company who does this chooses to say it takes place before it is labelled `profit`, yet it is still money that can be leveraged.

I have no problem eliminating corporate tax. That is the only ethical solution. But some are suggesting tax must be paid only when an individual does the spending, and when companies spend the revenue it''s different. The revenue is still leveraged in a tax-free fashion while individuals will be threatened or gunned down if they behave exactly the same. That is blatantly illogical, and the lies that somehow taxation occurs the same without corporate tax and it works out `fairly and only once` must be exposed.

[frankbowers]

TCANDREWS62, if you had a brain you would be dangerous, first the tax is not figured on gross income but net income in which all expense has been met. It idiots like you and gw bush that has got our country in the problems it is at present. Please pull your head out of your rearend and get a glimse of life as it is for real, your body oder is the only thing that reaches futher than your arm and your intellegence does not even go for. Frank Bowers of Austin, TX

[TommyCraig]

"This is the lackieism to a sickning extent"
Posted by dinkydog1 at 01:23 PM : Aug 12, 2008
The taxes are being paid! The shareholders (profiteers)pay the taxes as it becomes income. Do you have a 401k or other savings plan from a company? This is usually comprised of stocks (you are a part owner), bonds, and other saving methods. If you own stocks, guess what, as you are requesting, you (part owner of the corporation) will be paying the taxes.
If you increase the tax rate on businesses, the only outcome will be higher prices for goods to offset the expenses...
I would think that you would be more concerned about how they take care of their employees...
Companies are providing jobs. Why do you feel that they should be penalized?

[omega39-2009]

. Just pass along all taxes to the middle class, you know, the people who get thier hands dirty.

The truth is this is a consumer economy, passing along the majority of the tax burden to the middle class does much more harm to the economy than taxing the investor class.

Posted by dinkydog1

And when the middle class is non existent, joining the ranks of the poor. They will not be able to carry the burden of supporting the country. Still, the responsibility won''t fall back on the shoulders of the rich, they will just institute a national sales tax.

[dan9111]

It''''s so that you don''''t have double taxation: tax on the company profits and then tax again on what''''s left, when it gets to the individual.

Posted by cdfoxtrot2

That assumes all the money is paid to individuals and none is spent by the company on `expenses`. To suppose all of it works that way, then if I pay somebody to mow my lawn, right now the money is double-taxed (me and the lawnmowerman both pay) and this shouldn''t this be remedied too?? Obviously there is a shell game being played.

[cdfoxtrot2]

The data reported are meaningless. LLC''s and S corporations are often treated as partnerships for tax purposes, so any income/profit the entity makes flows through to the individual owners. The individual owners pay personal income taxes on that. There''s nothing illegal or sinister about it. That''s the point of LLC''s and S corporations and why they were legislated for in the first place. It''s so that you don''t have double taxation: tax on the company profits and then tax again on what''s left, when it gets to the individual.

Whoever wrote the story doesn''t seem to understand basic facts about different forms of company incorporations.

[dan9111]

... The profits are taxed. ...

Posted by tcandrews62

That is only true for companies, but not individuals. When individuals are taxed, we are taxed on all revenue `derived from any source` and the only expenditures that are untaxed are those preferred by Congress. By that same standard, companies are not playing by the same rules, they are mathematically held to an alternate standard.

It is logically inescapable that both sides, pro-business and anti, are telling you lies. All taxation is theft anyway, we are only bickering about what are the best `rules` for theft. If you are to pretend the rules are uniform, then please don''t make the `profit tax` such an obvious hoax.

[dnsallday]

Also, how does that compare to other countries? If we taxed these companies, would they just uproot and move overseas? Then would we complain about out-sourcing and job loss?

Some people just like to whine and point the finger it seems. The only tax they consider fair is the "other guy tax".....

Posted by blazercoach1 at 01:43 PM : Aug 12, 2008
______________________________________________________
Why does it matter how it relates to other countries? These American corporations have already moved their jobs oversees. They get tax breaks and financial welfare subsidies from the U.S.Government to do it.
They take the money the middle class pays in taxes and give it to the corporations. It is an ongoing plan to transfer the wealth of this country into the hands of the most powerful.

[dinkydog1]

In the 1940-60''s corporations paid about 25% and the top income tax rate was about 70%. Now the middle class pays most of the tax burden and the dispairity between the rich and poor is growing. Sounds like 1929 economics again.

[blazercoach1]

I agree with DocAdams about the journalistic malpractice. So what if they companies had trillions in SALES...what was their expenditures? and profit?

Also, how does that compare to other countries? If we taxed these companies, would they just uproot and move overseas? Then would we complain about out-sourcing and job loss?

Some people just like to whine and point the finger it seems. The only tax they consider fair is the "other guy tax".....

[docadams3]

This story is so old that it borders on journalistic malpractice.

Read Showdown at Gucci Gulch (1988) for details.

[bretster7]

walt1944,
I think you are late for your shock treatment. Hatered that deep is highly unhealthy man, chill a while and let the systolic come down a bit babe.

[bretster7]

Articles like this and the response from the lapdog left, just illustrates how you are being manipulated by the MSM. As if this kind of behavior is something new, that it was implemented only 8 years ago. Grow up a little and put aside your seething hatred for just one second, if possible, and realize how you are being born out as the sheeple you are.

[toldyouso12]

Going to he11 in a handbasket.