Yeah, this should help gas prices!

And some one thinks 41% is anything but extortion?
I thought we were all equal! So since i am po ass I should be glad that some pay 41%?
Man if I make 20,000 (I WISH) that would be 8,200 bucks...leaving me a whopping 11,800... Thanks guys! I say if every person payed a flat 10% NO DEDUCTIONS FOR BABY FACTORIES EITHER, and a fair sales tax and we quit charging businesses taxes and quit dolling out money to every tom dick and harry nation we would be farting thru silk drawers in no time!
Brent
 
What else would they pay taxes on??
Profit and taxable income are very different things. Even as a small business man, I can reduce my taxable income to 1/3 of my profits if I am willing to exercise only a few of the shady (but still technically legal) options available to me. Why do you think my LLC is based in las Vegas?

Companies with much greater wealth can reduce their taxable income even further using loopholes and off shore laws...and that is if they are not willing to be shady and actually break the law.
 
Offshore laws? Is that like moving plants and tech service centers overseas?
No, it is creating dummy companies that consist of nothing more than an address plaque on a wall on a foreign island nation so as to be able to funnel money and exploit international laws.

Next time you are somewhere like Roatan, Honduras ask about how many companies supposedly exist on the island and how many of them are anything more than a PO box at the local bank.
 
You know, this whole argument about taxes vs profits reminds me greatly of Stan Lee and the fact that the word "profits" is highly suspect without a great deal of specificity in the actual situation it is being used in:

Lee's attorneys filed court papers in Manhattan federal court, saying that Marvel signed a deal to give their client 10% of any profits from his characters used in films and television shows.

Spider-Man has been the year's biggest hit, grossing more than $400 million domestically — but the 80-year-old Lee says he hasn't seen a penny.

"Despite reaping enormous benefits from Mr. Lee's creations, defendants have failed and refused to honor their commitments to him," the lawsuit charges.

Marvel has reported millions of dollars in earnings from the film but has told Lee the company has seen no "profits" as defined by their contract.

Grossed $400 million and had zero profit. Huh. I wonder how much taxes they paid, and whether doing math and having to divide by zero argument helps or hinders your argument.

Bottom line: the statement that oil companies paid taxes that are 3 times their profits is meaningless and can be twisted around immensely.
 
They are not just keeping their earnings. They are keeping their earnings and yours. In the form of massive tax incentives and pay-outs from tax payer money.

I am all for paying someone for the work they do...but if someone comes to mow my yard I should not have to buy him the mower first. Tax payers are paying to upkeep and build refineries...and even that money is being redirected into CEO pockets.
You're saying they receive more from the government than they pay in. How can that be if they end up paying any amount of tax? And why would be be better off if their tax rate goes up even higher?
No, it is creating dummy companies that consist of nothing more than an address plaque on a wall on a foreign island nation so as to be able to funnel money and exploit international laws.
I believe that's illegal for a US company. If the bulk of their business is here, they need to be registered and pay US taxes. I don't think that's the case with the oil companies.
 
Grossed $400 million and had zero profit. Huh. I wonder how much taxes they paid, and whether doing math and having to divide by zero argument helps or hinders your argument.
That's a different issue entirely. I'm an artist and sympathetic to Stan but it sounds like he signed a poor contract. Artists are normally a breeze to take advantage of. I think the movie studios and marketers made the bucks off of Spidey, maybe Marvel signed a bad deal too. I would call that corporate greed but it isn't tax evasion.
 
You're saying they receive more from the government than they pay in. How can that be if they end up paying any amount of tax? And why would be be better off if their tax rate goes up even higher?

He's not saying that. He's saying that unlike [choose some random non-oil company] there is a windfall in the form of tax relief to hedge their risk.

Technically, a hedge pays off when your primary investment doesn't. If your primary investment pays off, your hedge shouldn't also pay off...

There is an obvious argument as to why the gov't (and thus all of us) should assume some of the risk in this situation, but since we end up "paying" them when they win OR lose (gross oversimplification, I know) it comes to the point of corporate welfare (whatever that is) and you can see why there would be some opposition?
 
royalties are not taxes

a previous post indicated the amount of taxes paid included royalties. Actualy royalties are not taxes they are the price the oil companies pays for the oil they remove from the ground. The oil in the ground belongs to state, federal government and private owners. Paying the royalty for the oil is similar to paying the farmer for the wheat he grows.

For those interested I recommend you check out this link http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0214-01.htm and take note of the 7 billion dollar oil royalty relief granted to oil companies in 2006.
 
That's a different issue entirely. I'm an artist and sympathetic to Stan but it sounds like he signed a poor contract. Artists are normally a breeze to take advantage of. I think the movie studios and marketers made the bucks off of Spidey, maybe Marvel signed a bad deal too. I would call that corporate greed but it isn't tax evasion.

I wasn't trying to imply there was any tax illegality, merely pointing out that "profit" can sometimes be a vague term.

As a small business owner, I want a large income, a low AGI, and a profit just north of ZERO (*I* being an expense should get that profit, not the company if I do things right)
 
toybox99615.. to quote from your link as it deserves some highlighting in this thread..

"I don't think there is a single member of Congress who thinks you should get royalty relief at $70 a barrel" for oil, said Representative Richard W. Pombo, Republican of California and chairman of the House Resources Committee.

"It was Congress's intent," Mr. Pombo said in an interview on Friday, "that if oil was at $10 a barrel, there should be royalty relief so companies could have some kind of incentive to invest capital. But at $70 a barrel, don't expect royalty relief."
 
oil companies directly paid or remitted more than $2.2 trillion in taxes, after adjusting for inflation, to federal and state governments—including excise taxes, royalty payments and state and federal corporate income taxes. That amounts to more than three times what they earned in profits during the same period, according to the latest numbers from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and U.S. Department of Energy.

Sorry, but this makes no sense.

Lets think about this.

Company A sells $100 worth of product, pays expenses of $90 and therefore has a net profit, net income of $10.

Either way you look at that quote it is saying that they PAID (meaning actual cash going to the government) more than three times what they earned. So in our example, they paid to the government taxes totaling either greater than 3 times $100 (the earnings of the company) or 3 times $10 (the net earnings of the company) a claim that is ridiculous. Unless the company is showing a net loss or a net operating loss for the year, that is impossible.

Oil companies make money hand over fist, to say they pay taxes 3 times their earnings (whether earnings of the company as a whole or net earnings) is wrong.

Brain fart...unless we are merely talking about financial purposes and nothing having to do with tax, sorry.
 
don't you realize

BoringAccountant don't you know that those of us why post based on law, tax code or facts are never going to convince the all-knowing who read it on the Internet some place. I've even had posters claim I make up some of the pages I reference becasue they could not understand what was on the page and it did not support their position.
 
It seems the holler has drowned out the topic.

First. The new law is specifically toward DOMESTIC oil companies. Companies that produce, refine, and sell in the US. This would include all the big guys EXCEPT one......Citgo......

Citgo is the Venezuelan (Hugo Chavez) oil company. They alone will still receive their tax credit. This gives them a marked advantage competitively. They can either keep pace with the coming increase in gas costs and enjoy even more profits, or capitalize on the opportunity to gain market share by maintaining margins and undercut our domestic companies.

That should be what we are concerned with. This is an example of more favoring foreign (China - Clintons, Venezuela - ?) corporations over American ones.

This forces companies to move operations over seas in order to keep market share. The now have to stop producing, refining, or selling in the US in order to stay competitive. This will inevitably be fed to the masses as more evil corporations moving American jobs overseas. I believe the same party that currently holds the majority in the Congress that passed this legislation is the party that feeds the 'American jobs overseas' line to their base. First China, now Venezuela.

But lets keep em' bickering about profits being unethical and corporations being evil. Like WAs sig reads, "Get em asking the wrong questions and you don't have to worry about the answers".

As for taxes vs. profits for businesses, it's clear how few actually own a business with employees. It costs $1.37 to pay $1.00 in wages when the matching SS and Medicare payments, workers comp and unemployment, etc. are tallied up. Plus the local, State and Federal taxes, a corporation pays far more then it keeps in profits. It's like your kid seeing your paycheck as an employee and saying 'What do you mean you can't afford a motorcycle, you have the money right there!!"

As an employee think about the deductions taken from you before you see the check as government regulation, your various mortgage, car payment etc. as overhead, your credit card payments as burden, and see what is left. THAT is your 'profit'. Now did you pay more taxes then you kept as 'profit'? 'But I'll get a refund!' OK, say you get a $3000 dollar refund. That's $250 a month. You KNOW they took more then $250 a month right...... And by giving you $3000 in a lump compared to what your usual 'profit' is you perceive it's all good!

A 10% margin is nominal for a business, a 33.3 is exceptional. no corporation is below 33 and a third in taxes save maybe a sub S with no employees. To pay twice or three times in taxes what you kept in profits is not at all odd, let alone unbelievable unless your so far removed from how a business actually works to fathom Daddy's paycheck amount doesn't mean you can now afford motorcycle.

Now, thinking about what I said before, the RIGHT question is 'Does this legislation help South America become the next China?' or maybe 'Why are Domestic oil companies targeted?' But guess what, people are actually cheering the hit on one of the few remaining large scale manufacturing industries left in the US. And will damn sure wail in unison when the relocate production and refining overseas to be done by S. American workers.
 
Last edited:
a minor correction

The Employer rate for Social Security is 6.2% and the Medicare rate is an additional 1.45 % for a combined 7.65% of wages paid. For every $ 1.00 an employer pays their employee they pay and additional 7.65 cents. A previous post refereeing to 37% was a fairly major error.

Bruxley I can not perceive where you came up with your information. But I find it mind boggling to think you believe what you wrote is accurate. Perhaps you might post a reference to the source of your enlightenment's.
 
The 37% is total burden not just SS and Medicare. My typo. An apparently mind boggling typo........:rolleyes:

............fixed.

As for references jeez. You want me to post a P&L or a ledger summary? Not on your life.

But the margins in Latin America ARE much better. An old member named JustMe gave me some ideas a few months ago and about the time Super Tuesday hit the last of the minutia was stitched up....NAFTA....if you can't beat it.......

There's gold in them there developing economies.

Libs keep making doing business here so damn difficult and expensive then don't be shocked when your like British or French workers. Gotta have the Government entitlements just to live. Heck, may of you ALREADY feel 'entitled' and politically are very influenced by that.

But back on point, why only Domestic companies?
 
However, Bruxley, you were right on here:

people are actually cheering the hit on one of the few remaining large scale manufacturing industries left in the US. And will damn sure wail in unison when the relocate production and refining overseas to be done by S. American workers.
 
Ya'll do realize that if people would stop buying & driving those gas-guzzling SUVs, Hummers and giant 4x4s that they're never going to need (unless your a framer/rancher or really have something to tow) and are only going to drive around town in, we wouldn't be complaining about gas prices.

Personally I'd like to see a 50% tax on all vehicles getting less than 30mpg unless your putting Farm or Commercial plates on them, to give people further incentive to get something effecient.
 
Beretta are you Chittin me? That would be a 50% FINE!
Heck I got a 4X4 gas hog ol huntin' truck... Never needed the 4X4 for the woods but on a sugar sand city street I needed to engage it so it was worth it...:D
A tax is to reimburse the gubmint for an expense... Not a means of puinshment! That sounds like some puke that fell out of a liberals mouth:barf:
Hey all you liberal money give-er-out-er types... you want a needy family to send that extra money to? Family of four on 20K per year... I will even set up a pay pal account for ya...
Brent
 
Back
Top