Massive CEO rewards for tax dodging

[Skybird]

http://www.ips-dc.org/reports/execut...r_tax_dodging/

corporate tax dodging has gone so out of control that 25 major U.S. corporations last year paid their chief executives more than they paid Uncle Sam in federal income taxes.
(...)
We researched the 100 U.S. corporations that shelled out the most last year in CEO compensation. At 25 of these corporate giants, we found, the bill for chief executive compensation actually ran higher than the company's entire federal corporate income tax bill.

[vienna]

Add to this: a large number of those CEOs and other top executives "underpay" or avoid paying taxes on their income completely due to deferrals, hedge accounts, offshore accounts, the tax breaks generously awarded them by the Bush administration, etc. ...

The ability of these corpoartions and their executives to lobby for tax breaks is amazing; this has gone from "no taxation without representation" to "preferred representation with no taxation"...

[August]

Europe lies. Do not believe it.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by August

Europe lies. Do not believe it.

Source is not European, but American.

And maybe you remember my link/post of maybe 2-3 months ago where a US senator listed on his website all numbers of US corporations that avoided tax payment alltogether, or minimised them to ridiculous marginality. that guy, I can assure you, was no European trojan horse, but a real US senator indeed.

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Source is not European, but American.

And maybe you remember my link/post of maybe 2-3 months ago where a US senator listed on his website all numbers of US corporations that avoided tax payment alltogether, or minimised them to ridiculous marginality. that guy, I can assure you, was no European trojan horse, but a real US senator indeed.

The thing is Sky these corporations are not dodging taxes like this very biased article implies. They are taking the deductions and exemptions allowed to them by law just like any of us would do, so to imply some wrongdoing on their part is, well, just wrong. I admit that I didn't read the link you're talking about but for a US Senator to badmouth people for just following the tax law that he and his fellow Congress critters wrote is pure hypocrisy.

As for how much CEO's are paid, again the article is biased and misleading. What a civilian company wants to pay it's employees, and that includes it's officers, is nobodies business except it's owners and shareholders. End of story. If we ever get to the point of the Federal government setting the pay scales for private citizens, like your article is basically advocating, that is the day it's time to follow Thomas Jeffersons "tree watering" advice.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by August

The thing is Sky these corporations are not dodging taxes like this very biased article implies. They are taking the deductions and exemptions allowed to them by law just like any of us would do, so to imply some wrongdoing on their part is, well, just wrong. I admit that I didn't read the link you're talking about but for a US Senator to badmouth people for just following the tax law that he and his fellow Congress critters wrote is pure hypocrisy..

It doesn't appear that you've read this link either, as it addresses your point.

Tax-dodging corporations argue they are breaking no laws. They are just, the argument goes, operating "under the rules that Congress has established." They are indeed. But massive corporate outlays for lobbying and campaign contributions shape those rules. The 25 firms highlighted in this study spent a combined total of more than $150 million on lobbying and campaign contributions last year.

All the companies highlighted in this report benefit enormously from their institutional presence in the United States. They utilize our taxpayer-funded infrastructure for transportation. They tap into government-sponsored research and subsidies for technological innovation. They expect the U.S. law enforcement and judicial systems to protect their intellectual and physical property. And they rely on the U.S. military to defend their assets abroad.

U.S. corporations also benefit from the public education of their workforces. In fact, 16 of the 25 CEOs included in this study received at least a portion of their post-secondary education in taxpayer-supported public universities. Yet these same corporations remain content to let others pay the bills.

That's what the argument is. The fact that corporations benefit from a taxpayer supported system without paying into it themselves is not fair. A corporation can be expected to use whatever profit-maximizing mechanisms they can. But the fact that they spend millions of dollars lobbying to keep their sweetheart deal going is indeed worthy of criticism.

The argument that CEOs can be paid whatever the shareholders want to pay them is fine and true, and it's also tired. What people are upset about is that these CEOs are taking advantage of worker productivity to enrich themselves and giving nothing back into the system in taxes that benefits everyone. I think it's a fair argument.

[Skybird]

Nice theory. But I have a different one. And that is that things are totally off balance, and that this is not by random fault, but by wanted intention by some who have the power to legalise system deformations that way that they benefit from from abusing it. And all others have to pay for them.

To me, a law has a certain intentions or purpose. Trying to work around it, to bypass it, and trying to find an exit door in the point above the "i", is the same like openly violating it.

We talk about politics and private business being in bed with each other . Which is the death of any democratic regime.

And we talk about criminal energy to avoid taxes, too.

Maybe you would do that too, like you imply in your answer when saying "we all would do". But still is a viollation of the spirit and intention of certain rules and laws, and still it is simply this: "wrong". Excusing it by refering to others, does not change this fundamental fact.

Such corporations often are just this: a closed club of bosses who think the company is just there to fill their pockets, and so they agree to act by a rule of "You fill my pockets and I'll fill yours." All persons outside their club, are just human capital waiting to be exploited. And the society, community, nation - is just a possibility to externalise all internal costs.

It's not clever to excuse such a system. It is organisid gang crime, and comes at the cost of the vast majority of ordinary people, and the desintegration of national and social structures. Not oinly is it immoral - it is antisocial, and corrosive to the basic cement of communities and societies.

And no, that can never be the decision for just a board of directors deciding over the payment of their own club members behind locked doors.

Edit: P.S.
I posted it before, and do it again, third time I think:
http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/n...4-a27f59d70de5

1) Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings. (Source: Exxon Mobil's 2009 shareholder report filed with the SEC here.)

2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion. (Source: Forbes.com here, ProPublica here and Treasury here.)

3) Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS. (Source: Citizens for Tax Justice here and The New York Times here. Note: despite rumors to the contrary, the Times has stood by its story.)

4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009. (Source: See 2009 Chevron annual report here. Note 15 on page FS-46 of this report shows a U.S. federal income tax liability of $128 million, but that it was able to defer $147 million for a U.S. federal income tax liability of $-19 million)

5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year. . (Source: Paul Buchheit, professor, DePaul University, here and Citizens for Tax Justice here.)

6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction. (Source: the company's 2009 annual report, pg. 112, here.)

7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department. (Source: Bloomberg News here, ProPublica here, Treasury Department here.)

8) Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury. (Source: Paul Buchheit, professor, DePaul University, here, ProPublica here, Treasury Department here.)

9) ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2006 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction. (Sources: Profits can be found here. The deduction can be found on the company's 2010 SEC 10-K report to shareholders on 2009 finances, pg. 127, here)

10) Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent.

I also remind of the now known fact that many banks and investment companies payed their bosses hilarious bonusses in the wake of the crash 2009 - with money that just had given to them from the tax payers tpo bail them out and help repairing the system. Billiions got sunk in pirvate pockets that way. Billions that the poublic had to come up for, and that were meant to repair the system for the benefit of all (whter that is reasonable or desirable, is something different) - not just some parasites at the top.

More obviously blood-sucking parasitism cannot be practised.