• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Google 2.4% Rate Shows How $60 Billion Lost to Tax Loopholes

Hoplite

Technomancer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
3,779
Reaction score
1,077
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This article is a poster child for deceptive journalism. The title is designed to create the association that google only pays a 2.4% tax rate and that it dodged 60 billion in tax revenues. In reality, googled avoided 3.1 billion; the 60 billion comes from everyone in the world combined, and the 2.4% tax rate is only on their foreign holdings. That said, gioogle actions are pathetic. Regardless of one feels about the level of taxation, that doesn't excuse weaseling out of them with absurd loopholes.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,942
Reaction score
33,983
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This article is a poster child for deceptive journalism. The title is designed to create the association that google only pays a 2.4% tax rate and that it dodged 60 billion in tax revenues. In reality, googled avoided 3.1 billion; the 60 billion comes from everyone in the world combined, and the 2.4% tax rate is only on their foreign holdings. That said, gioogle actions are pathetic. Regardless of one feels about the level of taxation, that doesn't excuse weaseling out of them with absurd loopholes.

This isn't even that bad of a case, either. A year or two ago there was a company that had billions in profits yet paid $0 in income taxes in the US. I think it was like GE or something!

edit: nope, ExxonMobil. $45 billion in profit, $0 in income taxes. Because their "headquarters" is a PO box on some island somewhere, basically.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/06/exxon-tax/

edit2: GE was also on that list, actually.
 
Last edited:

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It is a "loophole" only if you don't like it. Otherwise it is a "targeted public investment in the future." All politicians pull that crap when they have been in office too long and the corruption gets to them, this administration is just several orders of magnitude more brazen about it than most.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,927
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Google 2.4% Rate Shows How $60 Billion Lost to Tax Loopholes - Bloomberg


This is why I have a very hard time taking cries that corporations are over-taxed very seriously.

I have a coporation. I can't take advantage of these tax loopholes, yet--in your opinion--my taxes need to be raised, so as to punish the corporations that can?

The end result will accomplish only one thing: it will only help the large, multi-national corporations. The little guys will get hurt, because they won't be able to handle the higher taxes + overhead.

But, hey. Rock on!
 

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
38,355
Reaction score
11,332
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have a coporation. I can't take advantage of these tax loopholes, yet--in your opinion--my taxes need to be raised, so as to punish the corporations that can?

The end result will accomplish only one thing: it will only help the large, multi-national corporations. The little guys will get hurt, because they won't be able to handle the higher taxes + overhead.

But, hey. Rock on!


Didn't you know, that the moniker of Corporation is a designation of evil for anyone who does business?


j-mac
 

Diogenes

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
4,980
Reaction score
3,059
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The end result will accomplish only one thing: it will only help the large, multi-national corporations. The little guys will get hurt, because they won't be able to handle the higher taxes + overhead.
That's how politicians work, once they've been in office for a while: Complain about the "big corporations" (who are providing campaign contributions) and use the complaints as an excuse to institute policies that cripple the competition. Then the "big corporation" gets "too big to fail" and gets access to bailout money. Obama just happens to be the worst offender we've ever had in this regard.
 

Whovian

Banned
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
7,153
Reaction score
2,250
Location
dimensionally transcendental
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have a coporation. I can't take advantage of these tax loopholes, yet--in your opinion--my taxes need to be raised, so as to punish the corporations that can?

The end result will accomplish only one thing: it will only help the large, multi-national corporations. The little guys will get hurt, because they won't be able to handle the higher taxes + overhead.

But, hey. Rock on!

But... but... why don't you want to be neighborly and help out the folks? You know, give them some of what you earned, because they haven't? Working a little harder so someone else doesn't have to... it's your patriotic duty... :ninja:
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,942
Reaction score
33,983
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I have a coporation. I can't take advantage of these tax loopholes, yet--in your opinion--my taxes need to be raised, so as to punish the corporations that can?

The end result will accomplish only one thing: it will only help the large, multi-national corporations. The little guys will get hurt, because they won't be able to handle the higher taxes + overhead.

But, hey. Rock on!

Politicians give sweetheart deals to large corporations at the expense of the little guy? Well, I never!
 

DarkWizard12

Trans-Fascist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
2,288
Location
Tyler TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
This isn't even that bad of a case, either. A year or two ago there was a company that had billions in profits yet paid $0 in income taxes in the US. I think it was like GE or something!

edit: nope, ExxonMobil. $45 billion in profit, $0 in income taxes. Because their "headquarters" is a PO box on some island somewhere, basically.
ThinkProgress » ExxonMobil paid no federal income tax in 2009. (Updated)
Then what in the HELL is this?

szuds1.jpg


Yea, I wouldn't be using thinkprogress, who's sources they cite are the Huffpo.
edit2: GE was also on that list, actually.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,942
Reaction score
33,983
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Then what in the HELL is this?

szuds1.jpg


Yea, I wouldn't be using thinkprogress, who's sources they cite are the Huffpo.
edit2: GE was also on that list, actually.

I can't read any of that text.
 

DarkWizard12

Trans-Fascist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
2,288
Location
Tyler TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
I can't read any of that text.

>left click
>>view image
>>>right click when you see the cursor turn into a magnifying glass.

But if that's too much, it says(in millions USD):

Income Before Tax 12,706.00 12,068.00 10,206.00 9,204.00 7,517.00
Income After Tax 7,746.00 6,575.00 6,139.00 4,871.00 3,946.00

Basically, according to financial statements, they paid about 40% in taxes, each quarter.
 
Last edited:

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,357
Reaction score
8,099
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Google is fine. HUGE supports of the Democratic party, so they have nothing to worry about.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,927
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Aww, stop, Duece! You're one of the ones that complains the loudest about the, "evil corporations".

Not to mention, you don't even comprehend what I'm saying
 

Whovian

Banned
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
7,153
Reaction score
2,250
Location
dimensionally transcendental
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
>left click
>>view image
>>>right click when you see the cursor turn into a magnifying glass.

But if that's too much, it says(in millions USD):

Income Before Tax 12,706.00 12,068.00 10,206.00 9,204.00 7,517.00
Income After Tax 7,746.00 6,575.00 6,139.00 4,871.00 3,946.00

Basically, according to financial statements, they paid about 40% in taxes, each quarter.

A figment of your imagination?
 

DarkWizard12

Trans-Fascist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
2,288
Location
Tyler TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Aww, stop, Duece! You're one of the ones that complains the loudest about the, "evil corporations".

Not to mention, you don't even comprehend what I'm saying
hehe, he hasn't even replied to my post, proving exxon paid their taxes, in direct conflict to his blog source.
 

Johnny DooWop

Active member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
290
Reaction score
46
Location
The Right
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I'm conducting a study, I'm going around threads to see if every topic eventually melts down into a conservative/republican vs liberal/democrat debate instead of staying on the topic. This one is on the verge, if not already there.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
76,942
Reaction score
33,983
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
>left click
>>view image
>>>right click when you see the cursor turn into a magnifying glass.

But if that's too much, it says(in millions USD):

Income Before Tax 12,706.00 12,068.00 10,206.00 9,204.00 7,517.00
Income After Tax 7,746.00 6,575.00 6,139.00 4,871.00 3,946.00

Basically, according to financial statements, they paid about 40% in taxes, each quarter.

Not paying income taxes and not paying taxes are not the same thing. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't see this document as proof of much of anything because it doesn't specify what taxes are paid, and doesn't show me what year this happened in.
 

zip98053

Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
264
Reaction score
110
Location
98053
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I have a coporation. I can't take advantage of these tax loopholes, yet--in your opinion--my taxes need to be raised, so as to punish the corporations that can?

The end result will accomplish only one thing: it will only help the large, multi-national corporations. The little guys will get hurt, because they won't be able to handle the higher taxes + overhead.

But, hey. Rock on!


I think that the intent would be to close some of the loopholes that those multi-national corporations use for tax avoidance, not to just raise corporate taxes in general.

Unfortunately, the SCOTUS has made it possible for those tax-avoiding companies to spend unlimited amounts of money buying elections so that they can keep these loopholes open -- and create more if they can.

Clements said that "we have the best government money can buy" so this is nothing new. If it isn't the corporations and unions and other groups, its the robber barons (aka, Wall Street). Just get use to the fact that our representative democracy doesn't really represent the voters.
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,927
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I think that the intent would be to close some of the loopholes that those multi-national corporations use for tax avoidance, not to just raise corporate taxes in general.

Unfortunately, the SCOTUS has made it possible for those tax-avoiding companies to spend unlimited amounts of money buying elections so that they can keep these loopholes open -- and create more if they can.

Clements said that "we have the best government money can buy" so this is nothing new. If it isn't the corporations and unions and other groups, its the robber barons (aka, Wall Street). Just get use to the fact that our representative democracy doesn't really represent the voters.

In a perfect world, that would be all fine and dandy, but the U.S. tax code consists of 44,000 pages. One has to wonder what unintended conciquences would come along with closing this loophole.
 

DrunkenAsparagus

Devourer of Poor Children
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
4,496
Reaction score
1,878
Location
DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Regardless of one feels about the level of taxation, that doesn't excuse weaseling out of them with absurd loopholes.

I'm sure that you'll take any tax break that you can find for yourself. Google is in the business of making money; it would be stupid of them to not look for ways to pay less. I agree 110% that we absolutely must simplify the tax code, but you cannot really blame a business for doing cutting costs like this.

In a perfect world, that would be all fine and dandy, but the U.S. tax code consists of 44,000 pages. One has to wonder what unintended conciquences would come along with closing this loophole.

What about the unintended consequences of having them?
 
Last edited:

zip98053

Active member
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
264
Reaction score
110
Location
98053
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
In a perfect world, that would be all fine and dandy, but the U.S. tax code consists of 44,000 pages. One has to wonder what unintended conciquences would come along with closing this loophole.

It seems to me that these companies paying such a low US tax rate is the unintended consequence of allowing this loophole.
 
Top Bottom