From Meteor Blades:

Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53
billion.

ExxonMobil did pay $15 billion in income taxes. That was 47% of its
pre-tax income. But not a dime of it went to the IRS, however.
Because, as Forbes points out:

Exxon tries to limit the tax pain with the help of 20 wholly owned
subsidiaries domiciled in the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands
that (legally) shelter the cash flow from operations in the likes of
Angola, Azerbaijan and Abu Dhabi. No wonder that of $15 billion in
income taxes last year, Exxon paid none of it to Uncle Sam, and has
tens of billions in earnings permanently reinvested overseas.

Likewise, GE has $84 billion in overseas income parked indefinitely
outside the U.S.

The fact that many ultra-lucrative U.S.corporations pay no taxes to
federal government is hardly a new event. In April, 2004, the General
Accountability Office found in a study sought by Sen. Byron Dorgan
that "[m]ore than half of US corporations paid no federal income taxes
during the boom years of the late 1990s." And an August 2008 GAO
report sought by Dorgan and Sen. Carl Levin found that "[t]wo out of
every three United States corporations paid no federal income taxes
from 1998 through 2005." While many corporations did not pay taxes
because they had net losses for those years, that wasn't the case for
some of the big guys. In 2005, for instance, 25% of large U.S.
corporations paid no taxes on revenue of $1.1 trillion.

Could one reason ExxonMobil paid $0 in taxes have to do with the
$27,430,000 it spent on lobbying Congress against job-killing,
confiscatory socialism? Nah.

"jps" wrote in message
...

From Meteor Blades:

Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53
billion.

ExxonMobil did pay $15 billion in income taxes. That was 47% of its
pre-tax income. But not a dime of it went to the IRS, however.
Because, as Forbes points out:

Exxon tries to limit the tax pain with the help of 20 wholly owned
subsidiaries domiciled in the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands
that (legally) shelter the cash flow from operations in the likes of
Angola, Azerbaijan and Abu Dhabi. No wonder that of $15 billion in
income taxes last year, Exxon paid none of it to Uncle Sam, and has
tens of billions in earnings permanently reinvested overseas.

Likewise, GE has $84 billion in overseas income parked indefinitely
outside the U.S.

The fact that many ultra-lucrative U.S.corporations pay no taxes to
federal government is hardly a new event. In April, 2004, the General
Accountability Office found in a study sought by Sen. Byron Dorgan
that "[m]ore than half of US corporations paid no federal income taxes
during the boom years of the late 1990s." And an August 2008 GAO
report sought by Dorgan and Sen. Carl Levin found that "[t]wo out of
every three United States corporations paid no federal income taxes
from 1998 through 2005." While many corporations did not pay taxes
because they had net losses for those years, that wasn't the case for
some of the big guys. In 2005, for instance, 25% of large U.S.
corporations paid no taxes on revenue of $1.1 trillion.

Could one reason ExxonMobil paid $0 in taxes have to do with the
$27,430,000 it spent on lobbying Congress against job-killing,
confiscatory socialism? Nah.


Corporate welfare bums!
Locally, the provincial government gave about $100 million no interest loans
and grants to two companies to help them run business locally.
One business was a Korean firm to take over an old railcar manufacturing
plant in the hopes of building windmills for electricity generation and the
other was for a pulp mill.
Yesterday they decided to raise our HST to 15% from 13% (harmonized tax on
goods & services)
Obvious who runs the country..... big business. We'll do anything including
bribery to encourage them to come & then to stay when the original gift
monies run out.

On 4/7/2010 7:55 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

From Meteor Blades:

Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53
billion.

ExxonMobil did pay $15 billion in income taxes. That was 47% of its
pre-tax income. But not a dime of it went to the IRS, however.
Because, as Forbes points out:

Exxon tries to limit the tax pain with the help of 20 wholly owned
subsidiaries domiciled in the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands
that (legally) shelter the cash flow from operations in the likes of
Angola, Azerbaijan and Abu Dhabi. No wonder that of $15 billion in
income taxes last year, Exxon paid none of it to Uncle Sam, and has
tens of billions in earnings permanently reinvested overseas.

Likewise, GE has $84 billion in overseas income parked indefinitely
outside the U.S.

The fact that many ultra-lucrative U.S.corporations pay no taxes to
federal government is hardly a new event. In April, 2004, the General
Accountability Office found in a study sought by Sen. Byron Dorgan
that "[m]ore than half of US corporations paid no federal income taxes
during the boom years of the late 1990s." And an August 2008 GAO
report sought by Dorgan and Sen. Carl Levin found that "[t]wo out of
every three United States corporations paid no federal income taxes
from 1998 through 2005." While many corporations did not pay taxes
because they had net losses for those years, that wasn't the case for
some of the big guys. In 2005, for instance, 25% of large U.S.
corporations paid no taxes on revenue of $1.1 trillion.

Could one reason ExxonMobil paid $0 in taxes have to do with the
$27,430,000 it spent on lobbying Congress against job-killing,
confiscatory socialism? Nah.


Corporate welfare bums!
Locally, the provincial government gave about $100 million no interest loans
and grants to two companies to help them run business locally.
One business was a Korean firm to take over an old railcar manufacturing
plant in the hopes of building windmills for electricity generation and the
other was for a pulp mill.
Yesterday they decided to raise our HST to 15% from 13% (harmonized tax on
goods& services)
Obvious who runs the country..... big business. We'll do anything including
bribery to encourage them to come& then to stay when the original gift
monies run out.



Maybe if we make it illegal for corporations to contribute to
political parties this might change. That being said I will likely end
up on an all inclusive cruise to Guantanamo.


wake up in Githowever I a

"LdB" wrote in message
m...
On 4/7/2010 7:55 AM, Don White wrote:
wrote in message
...

From Meteor Blades:

Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53
billion.

ExxonMobil did pay $15 billion in income taxes. That was 47% of its
pre-tax income. But not a dime of it went to the IRS, however.
Because, as Forbes points out:

Exxon tries to limit the tax pain with the help of 20 wholly owned
subsidiaries domiciled in the Bahamas, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands
that (legally) shelter the cash flow from operations in the likes of
Angola, Azerbaijan and Abu Dhabi. No wonder that of $15 billion in
income taxes last year, Exxon paid none of it to Uncle Sam, and has
tens of billions in earnings permanently reinvested overseas.

Likewise, GE has $84 billion in overseas income parked indefinitely
outside the U.S.

The fact that many ultra-lucrative U.S.corporations pay no taxes to
federal government is hardly a new event. In April, 2004, the General
Accountability Office found in a study sought by Sen. Byron Dorgan
that "[m]ore than half of US corporations paid no federal income taxes
during the boom years of the late 1990s." And an August 2008 GAO
report sought by Dorgan and Sen. Carl Levin found that "[t]wo out of
every three United States corporations paid no federal income taxes
from 1998 through 2005." While many corporations did not pay taxes
because they had net losses for those years, that wasn't the case for
some of the big guys. In 2005, for instance, 25% of large U.S.
corporations paid no taxes on revenue of $1.1 trillion.

Could one reason ExxonMobil paid $0 in taxes have to do with the
$27,430,000 it spent on lobbying Congress against job-killing,
confiscatory socialism? Nah.


Corporate welfare bums!
Locally, the provincial government gave about $100 million no interest
loans
and grants to two companies to help them run business locally.
One business was a Korean firm to take over an old railcar manufacturing
plant in the hopes of building windmills for electricity generation and
the
other was for a pulp mill.
Yesterday they decided to raise our HST to 15% from 13% (harmonized tax
on
goods& services)
Obvious who runs the country..... big business. We'll do anything
including
bribery to encourage them to come& then to stay when the original gift
monies run out.



Maybe if we make it illegal for corporations to contribute to political
parties this might change. That being said I will likely end up on an all
inclusive cruise to Guantanamo.


wake up in Githowever I a


That ship has sailed.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 01:31:41 -0700, jps wrote:



Could one reason ExxonMobil paid $0 in taxes have to do with the
$27,430,000 it spent on lobbying Congress against job-killing,
confiscatory socialism? Nah.]]

yeah but we're middle class. we're lucky exxon lets us live. we
should pay all taxes...the rich deserve a life of leisure

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 12:08:04 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 01:31:41 -0700, jps wrote:

Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53

Corporations don't pay taxes, their customers do..
If they paid any additional taxes, it would simply show up in the
price of gas, with the profit tacked on.
I understand some people do want to increase taxes on gasoline and
this is a way to do it but understand that is what you would be doing.

Flawed logic. Exxonmobil is simply a conduit for sales taxes paid by
you and me. Doesn't make a whit of difference to ExxonMobil, whose
profit was the largest in history last year, while paying no taxes.

You think that's fair? Not me.

I do the same for the city, state and government when selling retail
but that doesn't make my company a productive tax producer, just a
conduit.

Where I produce for the state is in state revenue taxes and federal
income taxes.

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 12:08:04 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 01:31:41 -0700, jps wrote:

Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53

Corporations don't pay taxes, their customers do..
If they paid any additional taxes, it would simply show up in the
price of gas, with the profit tacked on.
I understand some people do want to increase taxes on gasoline and
this is a way to do it but understand that is what you would be doing.

Flawed logic. Exxonmobil is simply a conduit for sales taxes paid by
you and me. Doesn't make a whit of difference to ExxonMobil, whose
profit was the largest in history last year, while paying no taxes.

You think that's fair? Not me.

I do the same for the city, state and government when selling retail
but that doesn't make my company a productive tax producer, just a
conduit.

Where I produce for the state is in state revenue taxes and federal
income taxes.

Profitable corporations do not pay taxes. They pay a business expense. And
expenses are calculated in to the price the consumer pays.

Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 12:08:04 -0400, wrote:


On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 01:31:41 -0700, wrote:


Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53

Corporations don't pay taxes, their customers do..
If they paid any additional taxes, it would simply show up in the
price of gas, with the profit tacked on.
I understand some people do want to increase taxes on gasoline and
this is a way to do it but understand that is what you would be doing.

Flawed logic. Exxonmobil is simply a conduit for sales taxes paid by
you and me. Doesn't make a whit of difference to ExxonMobil, whose
profit was the largest in history last year, while paying no taxes.

You think that's fair? Not me.

I do the same for the city, state and government when selling retail
but that doesn't make my company a productive tax producer, just a
conduit.

Where I produce for the state is in state revenue taxes and federal
income taxes.

Profitable corporations do not pay taxes. They pay a business expense. And
expenses are calculated in to the price the consumer pays.



Do you have an example of that? Pick a publicly traded company and look
at their balance sheet and financial statement. Profits = taxes. If
they were an expense they would reduce the profits.

"Larry" wrote in message
...
Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 12:08:04 -0400, wrote:


On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 01:31:41 -0700, wrote:


Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53

Corporations don't pay taxes, their customers do..
If they paid any additional taxes, it would simply show up in the
price of gas, with the profit tacked on.
I understand some people do want to increase taxes on gasoline and
this is a way to do it but understand that is what you would be doing.

Flawed logic. Exxonmobil is simply a conduit for sales taxes paid by
you and me. Doesn't make a whit of difference to ExxonMobil, whose
profit was the largest in history last year, while paying no taxes.

You think that's fair? Not me.

I do the same for the city, state and government when selling retail
but that doesn't make my company a productive tax producer, just a
conduit.

Where I produce for the state is in state revenue taxes and federal
income taxes.

Profitable corporations do not pay taxes. They pay a business expense.
And
expenses are calculated in to the price the consumer pays.



Do you have an example of that? Pick a publicly traded company and look
at their balance sheet and financial statement. Profits = taxes. If they
were an expense they would reduce the profits.

Profits are what you have after expenses. So the tax expense is built in to
the cost structure. XOM may not pay any US income tax, but I pay on my
dividends I receive from them. Also 46% of the workers in this country do
not pay income tax. And lots of those get back extra from the government.
Is one thing to not pay taxes, but to get back money is criminal. Criminal
for government. A family of 4 making $50k will not pay any income tax. But
they get all the benefits of society. They get an 11k deduction that
everyone gets, which leaves them an about $2k tax bill. They they get a $K
credit for each kid. the $2k tax bill is now zero. That is middle class
America making $50k.

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"Larry" wrote in message
...
Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 12:08:04 -0400, wrote:


On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 01:31:41 -0700, wrote:


Every time you drive up to the pump, you pay more in federal tax for
a
single gallon of gasoline (18.4 cents) than ExxonMobil paid in U.S.
income taxes in 2009. That's in spite of the fact that the world's
second largest company had a gross operating profit of nearly $53

Corporations don't pay taxes, their customers do..
If they paid any additional taxes, it would simply show up in the
price of gas, with the profit tacked on.
I understand some people do want to increase taxes on gasoline and
this is a way to do it but understand that is what you would be doing.

Flawed logic. Exxonmobil is simply a conduit for sales taxes paid by
you and me. Doesn't make a whit of difference to ExxonMobil, whose
profit was the largest in history last year, while paying no taxes.

You think that's fair? Not me.

I do the same for the city, state and government when selling retail
but that doesn't make my company a productive tax producer, just a
conduit.

Where I produce for the state is in state revenue taxes and federal
income taxes.

Profitable corporations do not pay taxes. They pay a business expense.
And
expenses are calculated in to the price the consumer pays.



Do you have an example of that? Pick a publicly traded company and look
at their balance sheet and financial statement. Profits = taxes. If
they were an expense they would reduce the profits.

Profits are what you have after expenses. So the tax expense is built in
to the cost structure. XOM may not pay any US income tax, but I pay on my
dividends I receive from them. Also 46% of the workers in this country do
not pay income tax. And lots of those get back extra from the government.
Is one thing to not pay taxes, but to get back money is criminal.
Criminal for government. A family of 4 making $50k will not pay any
income tax. But they get all the benefits of society. They get an 11k
deduction that everyone gets, which leaves them an about $2k tax bill.
They they get a $K credit for each kid. the $2k tax bill is now zero.
That is middle class America making $50k.



As usual, you've misrepresented what that means:

"About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either
their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions
and exemptions to eliminate their liability."

Your philosophy: Soak the middle/lower earners, let the rich get richer.

--
Nom=de=Plume