2008-2010, 30 Big Corporations Spent More Lobbying Washington Than They Paid In Income Tax

thinkprogress.org

Today, thousands of 99 Percenters will march on K Street in Washington, D.C. as a part of an action called “Take Back The Capitol,” taking aim at the lobbying firms that corporate interests use to influence the federal government.

A report released this month by Public Campaign demonstrates just how important it is for Americans to battle corporate special interests and reclaim our democracy. The group’s research finds that thirty big corporations actually spent more money lobbying the federal government between 2008 and 2010 than they spent in taxes. For example, General Electric — one of the top 10 most profitable companies in the world — got a net tax rebate of $4.7 billion during this period. Meanwhile, it spent $84 million lobbying the federal government.

Yeah nothing at all wrong here, nothing to be upset about, certainly nothing to protest. Handouts are perfectly fine as long as you're already rich. No we can't feed the hungry, no we can't make schools better, no we can't pay our veterans their benefits...haven't you heard we're broke?

Those two numbers do not really have anything to do with each other. Should we live in a society where tax is the largest expense?

From where I stand it looks like Congress is looting taxpayer money.

Instead of these corporations paying tazes they take that same money and give it in contributions.
So instead of the Citizens benefiting from the taxes, Congress does.

Hmmmm.

The problem here is not the companies but the politicians. If you look you'll see the govt made more money off of the lobbyists rather than taxes.

The problem with taxes is that companies will find every loophole in the book to get out of paying them. The govt has been powerless for years to secure this tax money plus companies will play hardball and say well if we have to pay taxes we won't create jobs. Woe is me blah blah blah.

The money spent lobbying is but chump change compared to what the taxes would be if they actually have to pay them. The govt just rolls over, takes whatever money it can get and says yeah OK do whatever you want.

The problem like I said is with the govt. No balls when it comes to dealing with corporations. Why?? Because the corporations are more powerful than the govt. The govt runs a country but the companies run the world. They are the ones who create wars and make profit from them. The govt loses on this and comes crawling back to the companies for more handouts. Also the companies have people in every level of govt.

What needs to be done are first and foremost, end lobbying. Second, start taxing these bastards.

This won't happen. Its out of the hands of any one govt now that companies operate globally. Want to screw us?? Well just move our interests elsewhere. That's what will happen.

You just figured out who our true masters are. Govt is just a front for the rich companies to distract you from the real world power is.

The majority of these companies not only paid no taxes but got money back from the government. Then spent money on lobbying. It's like the government pays to lobby itself.

Corruption and collusion between government and these top corporations has run out of control.

Here is a great example of where the Occupy movement has taken a stand, by occupying K Street, the heart of all this corruption.

reply to post by PrimalRed


Okay. Do you understand that, let's use GE...the top one on the list. Over a three year period GE had a ten billion profit margin, that is final number after all wages paid etc. which looking at by itself is great, good for them. Then we, well rather our government, not only didn't collect taxes from them over those three years but we refunded them four billion. So in essence you and I (yanno taxpayers) paid GE their lobby money which was eighty-four million and the rest they probably paid their executive bonuses and bought the newest model year yachts.

Originally posted by PrimalRed
Those two numbers do not really have anything to do with each other. Should we live in a society where tax is the largest expense?

edit on 7-12-2011 by PrimalRed because: (no reason given)

you really should take an economics class.

those numbers have everything to do with eachother they show how big business is getting away with paying little taxes compared to us the 99%, and shows their control of our gov through donations to public officials.

and youre confused about the OWS message well there it is in the OP in those numbers you are ignoring.. ignorance is bliss no?

reply to post by Kali74


Personally I am against federal income tax so i say more power to them.

Originally posted by -W1LL

Originally posted by PrimalRed
Those two numbers do not really have anything to do with each other. Should we live in a society where tax is the largest expense?

edit on 7-12-2011 by PrimalRed because: (no reason given)

you really should take an economics class.

Why?

those numbers have everything to do with eachother they show how big business is getting away with paying little taxes compared to us the 99%, and shows their control of our gov through donations to public officials.

"the 99%" do not all pay income tax, many of "the 99%" do not make enough money to pay income tax.

and youre confused about the OWS message well there it is in the OP in those numbers you are ignoring.. ignorance is bliss no?

Im not confused about the OWS message, it is loud and clear.

reply to post by PrimalRed


You're against Federal Income Tax but you still have pay it if you work legally in the US, are you comfortable not only paying yours but paying to refund a company with a 10Billion dollar profit as well?

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by PrimalRed

 

You're against Federal Income Tax but you still have pay it if you work legally in the US, are you comfortable not only paying yours but paying to refund a company with a 10Billion dollar profit as well?

They keep a lot of their money overseas and out of the country, why should they pay an American tax on foreign business. 1/2 of their workforce is not even in America anymore.

Originally posted by PrimalRed

"the 99%" do not all pay income tax, many of "the 99%" do not make enough money to pay income tax.
Personally I am against federal income tax so i say more power to them.

LOL looks like you are the 99% more power to ya im glad you came around!

reply to post by PrimalRed


This is their US profits, not foreign.

So.... now you might understand just How the USA has the highest Corporate Tax rate in the world...


But (Tax Tables) has so many loopholes and exclusions to those tax rates (courtesy of the Lobbysts)
that the result is the Corporations pay much, much less than the advertised & listed Tax Table Rates

features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com...
Many U.S. multinational corporations keep some profits abroad, none more than GE: Its total was $94 billion at the end of last year. As long as corporations tell their accountants they intend to indefinitely invest those profits outside the U.S., they don't have to make a provision for federal and state taxes on them. If the profits stay abroad, they remain untaxed.

GE, in 2008 and 2009, told its accountants that about $3 billion of overseas profits were going to be indefinitely invested abroad. Previously, the company had not made that investment decision, so it was required to set aside a bookkeeping provision of about $1 billion for U.S. taxes. That provision impacted publicly reported earnings when it was taken.

GE never actually paid the $1 billion in taxes. And it doesn't say when the previous accounting provision of $1 billion was taken. But, lo and behold, in 2008 and 2009, when the company sorely needed higher profits, there they were, thanks to a tax benefit! It didn't have to sell more jet engines, or turbines, or kitchen appliances.

A leading tax accounting professor uses the GE shift as a case study in the flexibility of the accounting rules. Ed Outslay, Deloitte/Michael Licata professor of accounting at Michigan State University's business school, says GE's move shows the "discretion" inherent in the accounting rule.

GE, in answers provided through a spokeswoman, told us that it fully disclosed the investment changes as well as the reason behind them. "We don't think," the company went on, that the rule "allows too much discretion."

But its top tax executive, John Samuels, said at a conference last year that the ability to defer taxes on overseas profits gives companies an incentive to shift them abroad. It's "a heads-I-win, tails-I-break even situation," Samuels said.

reply to post by PrimalRed


If they got a tax REFUND that means they filed a tax return and you don't file a tax return on foreign profits just domestic.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by PrimalRed

 

If they got a tax REFUND that means they filed a tax return and you don't file a tax return on foreign profits just domestic.

edit on 7-12-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)

They did not get a tax refund...
And it turns out they did pay some taxes on their American profits

reply to post by PrimalRed


Yes they did, to the sum of 4.7B over the last three years. The little minus sign next to the dollar figure means refund. It means the dollar amount the US Treasury cut a check to them for.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by PrimalRed

 

Yes they did, to the sum of 4.7B over the last three years. The little minus sign next to the dollar figure means refund. It means the dollar amount the US Treasure cut a check to them for.

But it is not true

reply to post by PrimalRed


Oh? Show me how it's not true.