Exxon/Mobil Paid No Federal Income Tax in 2009

[uscitizen]

Plenty to step into the gap?

How and why? What is the incentive for anyone to raise capital and invest it in the very expensive and risky venture of oil exploration and development if, when they are successful, the government will abuse its power to destroy his business?

That's a bunch of crap. Exxon/Mobil has always done quite well for itself and it's investors, thank you very much.

Are you really expecting anyone to feel sorry for Exxon Mobil because they have to pay their taxes?

Really?

If they don't want to pay taxes in the United States, they shouldn't have the ability to use our resources. It's just that simple.

Corporate welfare gravy trian. Are we still letting them have oil from leases at big discounts or free?

 

[boedicca]

Exxon's net profit was close to 7% last year - and nearly 10% in 2008 (which was an oil asset bubble year).

Return on Assets is 7.5%, not bad considering the intensive capital investment requirement - and certainly not exorbitant.

As to what rate they pay for leases, a better question is: why does the Federal Government own so much land? It would be better used and maintained in private hands.

 

[Jarhead]

Exxon's net profit was close to 7% last year - and nearly 10% in 2008 (which was an oil asset bubble year).

Return on Assets is 7.5%, not bad considering the intensive capital investment requirement - and certainly not exorbitant.

As to what rate they pay for leases, a better question is: why does the Federal Government own so much land? It would be better used and maintained in private hands.

Why is it that I when people were getting 25% returns on their money invested no one was complaining. Yet, when a company gets 7% return on their investment, the left goes batty?

 

[WillowTree]

so the headliner is about Exxon-Mobile but the first sentence is this:

Most egregious,” Forbes notes, is General Electric, which “generated $10.3 billion in pretax income, but ended up owing nothing to Uncle Sam

now GE is obamie's bestest buddy and owner of his tv network nbc and msnbc,,, so why isn't that the headliner???

Perhaps because the reason for GE's tax receipts is tax credits for their innovative initiatives into new technologies...

...While the reason for Exxon's is the fact that they're keeping their money in offshore accounts.

and what would their innovative and initiatives, and new technologies be?? doyathink? other than their lips planted firmly on you know who's azz?

 

[uscitizen]

Exxon's net profit was close to 7% last year - and nearly 10% in 2008 (which was an oil asset bubble year).

Return on Assets is 7.5%, not bad considering the intensive capital investment requirement - and certainly not exorbitant.

As to what rate they pay for leases, a better question is: why does the Federal Government own so much land? It would be better used and maintained in private hands.

so you support coorporate welfare for mega corporations?
Diversion attempt ignored.

 

[Jarhead]

Eisenhower was smart enough to sell the Interstate Highway System as vital for national defense.

The ever paranoid Conservatives will always piss away vast sums of money for so called "national defense".

Thanks to the ever paranoid Conservatives, your sorry ass has a country you can call home.

Of course, the conservatives at the time of the Revolution were Royalists.

At the time of the revolution?

Who the heck was talking about at the time of the revolution?

 

[Gatekeeper]

Why do people get so upset at the large corporations, no we don't like to be gouged at the pump and by others who are in business, but, they are only doing what the LAW allows them to do, by the very people WE elect to office, along with a few appointments here and there. If they know the tax laws and use them to their advantage, so what?

In a capitalist society businesses are out for profit, not loss, and also have a responsibility to their stockholders.

If anyone would like to channel their rage, go after the people who write the tax laws .

Then go after all those who continue to allow near monopolies to exist where companies flat out rip people off for goods and services. Nothing wrong with reasonable profits, what is allowed and encouraged by government apparently, is outrageous profits at the expense of the consumer.

Nothing is going to ever change. It has been, and will always be, that wealth controls all the pie and the people.
Now back to figuring out my income taxes, which percentage wise, I think I, and many of us, pay more than Exxon/Mobil does percentage wise, and that's not counting all the other 'taxes' throughout the year, some are called Tolls,Fees,Tariffs, and the list goes on. But then again I am not telling anyone in here anything new.

 

[Jarhead]

Exxon's net profit was close to 7% last year - and nearly 10% in 2008 (which was an oil asset bubble year).

Return on Assets is 7.5%, not bad considering the intensive capital investment requirement - and certainly not exorbitant.

As to what rate they pay for leases, a better question is: why does the Federal Government own so much land? It would be better used and maintained in private hands.

so you support coorporate welfare for mega corporations?
Diversion attempt ignored.

I did not at all see him saying that.
You opted to spin what he said.
Spin attempt identified.

 

[boedicca]

No. I don't support Corporate Welfare. (uscitizen clearly has a reading comprehension and retention issue.)

I'd prefer that Government stay out of picking winners and losers. Nor do I support having a Big Government that is powerful enough to pick winners and losers in the first place. The Feds have no business owning the land that is leased to oil companies.

 

[uscitizen]

No. I don't support Corporate Welfare. (uscitizen clearly has a reading comprehension and retention issue.)

I'd prefer that Government stay out of picking winners and losers. Nor do I support having a Big Government that is powerful enough to pick winners and losers in the first place. The Feds have no business owning the land that is leased to oil companies.

Please explain why the federal govt has no right to own the land that is leased to the oil companies?

Who bought Alaska?

Who bought the Louisiana purchase?

Who protects our waters out to the international boundaries?

 

[WillowTree]

Why do people get so upset at the large corporations, no we don't like to be gouged at the pump and by others who are in business, but, they are only doing what the LAW allows them to do, by the very people WE elect to office, along with a few appointments here and there. If they know the tax laws and use them to their advantage, so what?

In a capitalist society businesses are out for profit, not loss, and also have a responsibility to their stockholders.

If anyone would like to channel their rage, go after the people who write the tax laws . You want we should go after Charlie Rangel?? No? Really?

Then go after all those who continue to allow near monopolies to exist where companies flat out rip people off for goods and services. Nothing wrong with reasonable profits, what is allowed and encouraged by government apparently, is outrageous profits at the expense of the consumer.

Nothing is going to ever change. It has been, and will always be, that wealth controls all the pie and the people.
Now back to figuring out my income taxes, which percentage wise, I think I, and many of us, pay more than Exxon/Mobil does percentage wise, and that's not counting all the other 'taxes' throughout the year, some are called Tolls,Fees,Tariffs, and the list goes on. But then again I am not telling anyone in here anything new.

.

 

[boedicca]

Please explain why the federal govt has no right to own the land that is leased to the oil companies?

Who bought Alaska?

Who bought the Louisiana purchase?

Who protects our waters out to the international boundaries?

A better question is why should it own it in the first place?

(And TAXPAYERS paid for Alaska and the Louisiana Purchase - the Feds don't have any money except that which is taken from taxpayers.)

Protecting waters is a national defense issue - that is completely orthogonal to a business having a right to exploration and development thereof.

We are the United States of America - the Feds owning vast tracts of land within states' boundaries upsets the balance of power. There is also the moral hazard of the Feds accruing too many assets. Some here have questioned if Exxon got sweetheart deals on leases. There would be no possibility of such deals if the Feds didn't hold the land in the first place.

And then there is always The Tragedy of the Commons aspect. Lands that are privately owned are much better maintained than ones overseen by the government.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Thanks to the ever paranoid Conservatives, your sorry ass has a country you can call home.

Of course, the conservatives at the time of the Revolution were Royalists.

At the time of the revolution?

Who the heck was talking about at the time of the revolution?

I have no idea what you are talking about. Everybody wanted in on WWII, and that's the only time our safety really was ever threatened. All other wars were us meddling in other countries affairs. Cold war there was a threat but it wasn't an actual war.

so I fail to see how its conservatives solely we have to thank for our safety

 

[The T]

No. I don't support Corporate Welfare. (uscitizen clearly has a reading comprehension and retention issue.)

I'd prefer that Government stay out of picking winners and losers. Nor do I support having a Big Government that is powerful enough to pick winners and losers in the first place. The Feds have no business owning the land that is leased to oil companies.

Please explain why the federal govt has no right to own the land that is leased to the oil companies?

Who bought Alaska?

Who bought the Louisiana purchase?

Who protects our waters out to the international boundaries?

As to the HIGHLIGHTED?

First?
One must explain whom OWNS the Government to start with?

Are you able to accomplish that?

[Yeah, I know it requires a bit of thought].

 

[Mr Natural]

"Wingnuts" has always referred to the right wing, but I notice some right wingers have tried to rewrite that as well as most of history.
Yes, the "Socialism" that promoted the vast railroads this country once enjoyed was very successful, as was Eisenhower's program that created a wonderful network of highways. Both are dated now.

Eisenhower was smart enough to sell the Interstate Highway System as vital for national defense.

The ever paranoid Conservatives will always piss away vast sums of money for so called "national defense".

Thanks to the ever paranoid Conservatives, your sorry ass has a country you can call home.

Bullshit.

I have a country I can call home because an Army made up mostly of draftees led by Liberal Commanders-in-Chief defeated not one, but two military super powers led by extreme right-wing fanatics bent on world domination.

 

[uscitizen]

No. I don't support Corporate Welfare. (uscitizen clearly has a reading comprehension and retention issue.)

I'd prefer that Government stay out of picking winners and losers. Nor do I support having a Big Government that is powerful enough to pick winners and losers in the first place. The Feds have no business owning the land that is leased to oil companies.

Please explain why the federal govt has no right to own the land that is leased to the oil companies?

Who bought Alaska?

Who bought the Louisiana purchase?

Who protects our waters out to the international boundaries?

As to the HIGHLIGHTED?

First?
One must explain whom OWNS the Government to start with?

Are you able to accomplish that?

[Yeah, I know it requires a bit of thought].

corporations own our government.
That much is clear.
So corporations already own the land?

 

[Jarhead]

Eisenhower was smart enough to sell the Interstate Highway System as vital for national defense.

The ever paranoid Conservatives will always piss away vast sums of money for so called "national defense".

Thanks to the ever paranoid Conservatives, your sorry ass has a country you can call home.

Bullshit.

I have a country I can call home because an Army made up mostly of draftees led by Liberal Commanders-in-Chief defeated not one, but two military super powers led by extreme right-wing fanatics bent on world domination.

And that makes you proud, I am sure.

That liberal CiC. Exactly how many innocent civilians did his strategy wind up killing?

 

[amrchaos]

I have a great idea

Let us start up a really really really big War, then eliminate Taxes!!

That would be fun!!

 

[drsmith1072]

Now that corporations, erm.. these "persons" have deep, big voices and freedom of speech, they should share the tax burden like the rest of us "persons". They already get taxed FAR less than I do and they STILL get out of paying anything. You corporatist puppets are tres amusing. Idiots.

You economic illiterates would be amusing, if you provided any fresh material. But as all you do is burp up the same old tired bromides, you are boring.

LOL did you even bother reading what you posted in this thread before you started attaking others demanding fresh material??

Exxon paid $36.5B in income taxes in 2009. Isn't that enough? It's a global company - and has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders to apply the various tax codes in the most beneficial way possible. Do you pay more income tax than the legally required minimum?

How much money did the government earn off of the taxes it adds to every gallon of gas?

that's hardly new material.

and this followed up by this oldy.

Guess what, bub - All Taxes Are Eventually Paid For By Consumers.

Companies price their tax burden into their products and services.

You should really check your old material BEFORE you try to attack a poster, while avoiding the content of his post, for their material. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

You economic illiterates would be amusing, if you provided any fresh material. But as all you do is burp up the same old tired bromides, you are boring.

You don't think corporations that rake in TRILLIONS on our soil have a responsibility to the citizenry in the towns, states and country in which operate and make money? Really? You are a corporatist puppet. Dance puppet, dance! I think I'd rather be boring. Oh, and please refute anything that I've stated. You're OK with shell companies and loopholes and corporate welfare to the detriment of our country so that a few already obscenely rich white guys can make another billion, right?

Exactly. They want the benefits of being an American company with none of the responsibility.

Oh and I noticed how he avoided you content AGAIN and tried to sidetrack the debate by asking you questions when he refused to answer yours. LOL