Top 26 Companies Paid No Tax from 2008-2012

[Rshermr]

funny how cons hate taxes. And suggest that they want corporations to pay none.
But then, when you ask them to pay the corporation's taxes if the corporate taxes go away, they scream like crazy. And say cut the budget.
But when you say cut what, you can never get even a fraction of the cuts that corporation taxes equal. Never.
So, you are wasting everyone's time pushing the libertarian dream. And the dream of the tea baggers. No chance it will ever happen. Because, you see, libertarian economies ALWAYS FAIL and always will. Libertarian economies are among thinking people a joke.

 

[whitehall]

You almost gotta laugh. The source of the "study", the Citizens for Tax Justice is a 501c corporation that pays no taxes. CTJ isn't required to be tax exempt. The corporation had to file for the tax exempt status. I have no problem with the concept of paying only the taxes you are legally required to pay but why criticize corporations who take advantage of "loopholes" when 501c is technically a loophole created by the McCain-Feingold act?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

funny how cons hate taxes. And suggest that they want corporations to pay none.
But then, when you ask them to pay the corporation's taxes if the corporate taxes go away, they scream like crazy. And say cut the budget.
But when you say cut what, you can never get even a fraction of the cuts that corporation taxes equal. Never.
So, you are wasting everyone's time pushing the libertarian dream. And the dream of the tea baggers. No chance it will ever happen. Because, you see, libertarian economies ALWAYS FAIL and always will. Libertarian economies are among thinking people a joke.

 

[DGS49]

Dear Rshermr:

I haven't noticed your posts before. Perhaps you are having a bad day. Maybe you are an idiot. Maybe you are a troll. A little while ago you "corrected" me by repeating exactly what I wrote about Subchapter S corporations. Now you claim that Conservatives hate taxes.

I humbly suggest that Conservatives are quite happy to pay (Federal) taxes, to the extent that those taxes go to pay for things and activities that are authorized by the United States Constitution. Take a moment and peruse Article 1, Section 8. It contains, with useful specificity, EVERYTHING that Congress has the power to spend money on.

We Conservatives willingly pay for those things with our taxes.

You are welcome.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Rshermr is constantly wrong on these types of discussions. But will never admit to it. Will never back down and will never make sense. He's here for our amusement and isn't to be taken seriously. JimmieD just learned that with a lot of wasted time.

 

[Rshermr]

Let me try to help you.

Yes, please do, because that's exactly what I was asking for.

GE is an international company.

Thanks for the help on this one.



So who is "trying" to be dishonest? I guess I need further help with this one.



That's not what their financial statements say; and if you read them you would have seen that.

So you can make up your beliefs from whole cloth, or actually spend a bit of time out reading about it. From impartial sources. Up to you. But calling the citizens for tax justice a questionable source is stupid.

It's not stupid if you actually read the financial reports that GE is legally obligated to disclose. If GE is not reporting correctly (by the way, all their financial statements are independently audited by impartial sources, but you probably didn't bother to know about or read those either) then they can be in some serious legal trouble. Companies use independent auditors specifically to get an impartial source so they stay out of legal trouble.

Here is the auditor's summary of what they found:

"In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of General Electric Company and consolidated affiliates as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2012, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework issued by COSO." (2012 10-K, p 88)

So looks like I have my independent source who has actually spent time reading over their financial statements. Their entire 10-K has been independently audited.

What actually is stupid is pulling up some article and accepting it as gospel without investigating facts - especially when those facts are legal in nature and easy to find. There are items that companies like GE are legally obligated to accurately disclose. If they are "dishonest" (your term), then people end up in prison, companies are fined, CEOs/CFO's are fired, etc..

Heh, I would like to know how the NYT or Citizens for Tax Justice know anything about GE's financial condition without using GE's own reports as their primary source?

In fact, GE not only pays taxes to the US, but they have been audited by the IRS - who REDUCED the amount they already paid. GE seems to actually OVERPAY on their obligations:

Resolution of audit matters, including the IRS audit of our consolidated U.S. income tax returns for 2006-2007, reduced our 2011 consolidated income tax rate
by 2.3 percentage points. Resolution of audit matters, including the IRS audit of our consolidated U.S. income tax returns for 2003-2005, reduced our 2010
consolidated effective tax rate by 5.9 percentage points.
(GE, 10-K, p 149)

So yes, I question the source in the OP precisely because I have read up on it. Maybe you should too.

Nice try. First, no one is doubting that the 10K was accurate. Though in truth a 10K is a projection, not a final corporate financial statement. And thanks for quoting the statement of their accountants.

So let me try again to enlighten me. No one is saying that ge or the other 25 companies did anything illegal. Fact is, they have worked for years to get politicians to set up the laws to allow them to not pay income taxes. Now, me boy, pay attention to the word income. And the word US. What is being said is that ge and 25 other companies paid (now try to pay attention here) NO US INCOME TAXES.
That they paid US taxes is not in question. Local property taxes, for instance. So, hopefully you now can check on the facts. Should you care in the slightest what the facts are.
By the way, you say:
"So yes, I question the source in the OP precisely because I have read up on it. Maybe you should too."
First of it is not an OP. It is a study of the financial statements of a number of corporations. No opinion involved. I have indeed read up on it. And find the piece to be as accurate as they could make it. Now, what is your source, me poor ignorant con tool, for denigrating Citizens for Tax Justice as a valid source of information?? Since you have "read up on it", you surely have sources.

 

[whitehall]

The inside-out upside-down hypocritical argument from the left is that corporations like CTJ that produce nothing but opinion and take advantage of tax loopholes are free to criticize less noble corporations that produce a tangible product when they take advantage of tax loopholes.

 

[jasonnfree]

47% of all individuals paid zero federal income tax.

So what's your point?

I think some of the 47% that don't pay taxes would like to if there were more and better paying jobs. Many of the jobs people used to do here are now done in low wage countries. Nice profit increase for the companies and ceo's but screwed the american worker. Lately the financial sector has made most of the gains. Still, no gains for ordinary workers.

 

[GHook93]

Presumedly, since they didn't it was legal. So the objection and problem isn't that they have better accountants than other companies, but that the tax code is screwed up. But when you look at the writers of tax laws (corporate lobbyists) the reason it's screwed up is better understood.

You actually stated something intelligent. A corporation is going to take advantage the tax code, just as individuals do. However, corps have much more leverage than individuals do. If they don't like tax code, then they can relocate and pull their jobs along with it.

Smart taxation that creates a globally competitive tax structure and closes loop holes (saves the corp money on accounting and lawyer bills also).

I say either go with the ignorantly mocked, but actually brilliant, Herman Cain 9-9-9 plan or go with the Fair Tax.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Does, or does not the OP claim that the companies paid no taxes in the title?

 

[jasonnfree]

It's totally greedy to want to keep your own property. It's also heroic and morally sound to want to take property that doesnt' belong to you for purposes you deem "necessary" for a "civilized" society.

I know, right? Strange and ironic. To promote theft by force and then call it "civilized". But Statists do impressive verbal acrobatics when seeking rent.

You more or less said taxation is theft, just like the libertarians. Promoting theft by force. No?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It's totally greedy to want to keep your own property. It's also heroic and morally sound to want to take property that doesnt' belong to you for purposes you deem "necessary" for a "civilized" society.

I know, right? Strange and ironic. To promote theft by force and then call it "civilized". But Statists do impressive verbal acrobatics when seeking rent.

You more or less said taxation is theft, just like the libertarians. Promoting theft by force. No?

More or less? I came right out and said it. That's what it is, and that's how it works.

 

[jasonnfree]

Let me try to help you.

Yes, please do, because that's exactly what I was asking for.



Thanks for the help on this one.



So who is "trying" to be dishonest? I guess I need further help with this one.



That's not what their financial statements say; and if you read them you would have seen that.



It's not stupid if you actually read the financial reports that GE is legally obligated to disclose. If GE is not reporting correctly (by the way, all their financial statements are independently audited by impartial sources, but you probably didn't bother to know about or read those either) then they can be in some serious legal trouble. Companies use independent auditors specifically to get an impartial source so they stay out of legal trouble.

Here is the auditor's summary of what they found:

"In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of General Electric Company and consolidated affiliates as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2012, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control – Integrated Framework issued by COSO." (2012 10-K, p 88)

So looks like I have my independent source who has actually spent time reading over their financial statements. Their entire 10-K has been independently audited.

What actually is stupid is pulling up some article and accepting it as gospel without investigating facts - especially when those facts are legal in nature and easy to find. There are items that companies like GE are legally obligated to accurately disclose. If they are "dishonest" (your term), then people end up in prison, companies are fined, CEOs/CFO's are fired, etc..

Heh, I would like to know how the NYT or Citizens for Tax Justice know anything about GE's financial condition without using GE's own reports as their primary source?

In fact, GE not only pays taxes to the US, but they have been audited by the IRS - who REDUCED the amount they already paid. GE seems to actually OVERPAY on their obligations:

Resolution of audit matters, including the IRS audit of our consolidated U.S. income tax returns for 2006-2007, reduced our 2011 consolidated income tax rate
by 2.3 percentage points. Resolution of audit matters, including the IRS audit of our consolidated U.S. income tax returns for 2003-2005, reduced our 2010
consolidated effective tax rate by 5.9 percentage points.
(GE, 10-K, p 149)

So yes, I question the source in the OP precisely because I have read up on it. Maybe you should too.

Nice try. First, no one is doubting that the 10K was accurate. Though in truth a 10K is a projection, not a final corporate financial statement. And thanks for quoting the statement of their accountants.

So let me try again to enlighten me. No one is saying that ge or the other 25 companies did anything illegal. Fact is, they have worked for years to get politicians to set up the laws to allow them to not pay income taxes. Now, me boy, pay attention to the word income. And the word US. What is being said is that ge and 25 other companies paid (now try to pay attention here) NO US INCOME TAXES.
That they paid US taxes is not in question. Local property taxes, for instance. So, hopefully you now can check on the facts. Should you care in the slightest what the facts are.
By the way, you say:
"So yes, I question the source in the OP precisely because I have read up on it. Maybe you should too."
First of it is not an OP. It is a study of the financial statements of a number of corporations. No opinion involved. I have indeed read up on it. And find the piece to be as accurate as they could make it. Now, what is your source, me poor ignorant con tool, for denigrating Citizens for Tax Justice as a valid source of information?? Since you have "read up on it", you surely have sources.

So corporations have worked for years to influence politicians to set up tax laws in their favor? How cynical of you. Most cons say the corporations and billionaires just work harder and smarter than the rest of us. What's wrong with Apple corp. doing business here and living in Ireland for tax purposes.

 

[Rshermr]

So, DGS49 says:

I haven't noticed your posts before. Perhaps you are having a bad day. Maybe you are an idiot. Maybe you are a troll. A little while ago you "corrected" me by repeating exactly what I wrote about Subchapter S corporations.

If you have posted much, and cared to look, you would have seen that I was not responding to you. I did not correct you since I was not responding to you, me boy. I was responding to Iceweasel. Next time you have a question about who I am responding to, ask me and I will tell you how to understand.

Now you claim that Conservatives hate taxes.

I humbly suggest that Conservatives are quite happy to pay (Federal) taxes, to the extent that those taxes go to pay for things and activities that are authorized by the United States Constitution. Take a moment and peruse Article 1, Section 8. It contains, with useful specificity, EVERYTHING that Congress has the power to spend money on.

Uh, you need to get out some time. There is another element to the US Constitution, called the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Been around for over 100 years now, me boy. Nothing new. Pretty much everyone knows, except you. Take a moment to peruse it and you will find, to your dismay, I am sure, that congress is not much constrained at what it is able to spend and tax for.

We Conservatives willingly pay for those things with our taxes.

But not for the 16th Amendment. You do not believe, then, in the constitution? Or you are all simply ignorant??

You are welcome.

For what, me poor ignorant tool??? Everything you said in this post was wrong. Oh, and quick, go ask Step where I was wrong?? I was not, of course.

 

[jasonnfree]

It's totally greedy to want to keep your own property. It's also heroic and morally sound to want to take property that doesnt' belong to you for purposes you deem "necessary" for a "civilized" society.

I know, right? Strange and ironic. To promote theft by force and then call it "civilized". But Statists do impressive verbal acrobatics when seeking rent.

You more or less said taxation is theft, just like the libertarians. Promoting theft by force. No?

More or less? I came right out and said it. That's what it is, and that's how it works.

So is all taxation theft?

 

[Rshermr]

Does, or does not the OP claim that the companies paid no taxes in the title?

They assumed you could read. They did not know you. Not their fault.
The title of the article is:
"The Sorry State of Corporate Taxes". Nothing about whether anyone paid no taxes. You continue to lie, me boy. Tacky.

 

[JimmieD]

Though in truth a 10K is a projection, not a final corporate financial statement.

Actually, it is their year end audited financial statement. It's not a projection. It's their audited regulatory filing for the previous year.

Now, me boy, pay attention to the word income. And the word US. What is being said is that ge and 25 other companies paid (now try to pay attention here) NO US INCOME TAXES.
That they paid US taxes is not in question. Local property taxes, for instance. So, hopefully you now can check on the facts. Should you care in the slightest what the facts are.

Yes, they did pay US income taxes. It's in Item 8 in the report.

It is a study of the financial statements of a number of corporations. No opinion involved. I have indeed read up on it.

I have no doubt you've read articles on it, but apparently you forgot to read the financial reports themselves. It sounds like you should have immediately gone to the source when you saw the claims of the articles in order to verify and understand what was being said.

And find the piece to be as accurate as they could make it.

I guess they just get an "F" then. At least they tried their best though.

Now, what is your source,

The legal documents already referenced.

me poor ignorant con tool,

I guess you're just a poor partisan. Your worldview seems skewed to see everything in partisan terms. It's not going to be easy to stereotype me as conservative, liberal, or libertarian.

for denigrating Citizens for Tax Justice as a valid source of information??

Just verifying the facts.

Since you have "read up on it", you surely have sources.

Yes, the legal documents already referenced.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Does, or does not the OP claim that the companies paid no taxes in the title?

They assumed you could and would read the article. They did not know you. Not their fault.

They? It appears, from what I can tell, that the OP is one person who made a false thread title.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Yep, item 8. Income tax.

 

[Iceweasel]

Me poor ignorant tool. You are talking about Type S corporations. Type S corporations pay NO income taxes. They instead distribute profits to stockholders, who then pay taxes on their portion of the profits.
Here. Read.
S corporation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia? Don't use it. But I made it clear I what I was talking about, i. e., the foaming at the mouth anti-corporation retards. There. Read.