Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by CoolHand on Tuesday April 14 2015, @11:11PM   Printer-friendly
from the wish-we-were-in-the-one-percent dept.

Due to completely messed up U.S. tax policies, some even got a rebate check. Only small businesses pay taxes. Big companies often pay nothing at all.

Look at a new report from Citizens for Tax Justice ( http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2015/04/fifteen_of_many_reasons_why_we_need_corporate_tax_reform.php#.VSbihhPF8QY ), a Washington, D.C. group. It finds that some of nation's most famous brands have paid remarkably little to the government over the last five years. In fact, many actually enjoyed a negative tax rate: They received a nice rebate check from the U.S. Treasury.

The 15 giants highlighted by CTJ were chosen to represent a wide range of industries among Fortune 500 companies. They include CBS, Mattel, Prudential, and the California utility PG&E. Together, they paid no federal income tax in 2014, despite profits totaling $23 billion. CTJ's point is that these companies are not anomalies, they are examples.

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3044873/15-companies-that-paid-zero-income-tax-last-year-despite-23-billion-in-profits

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by tftp on Wednesday April 15 2015, @05:40PM

    by tftp (806) on Wednesday April 15 2015, @05:40PM (#171075) Homepage

    That's for your representative to determine.

    Nobody asked me if I want anyone else to make these decisions for me. The modern society does not need to send representatives, on horses, to a faraway city to make laws that are mandatory for everyone. This was necessary 200 years ago, but perhaps lawmaking should be moved from backrooms into the public arena? Nobody says that every voter has to be a lawyer, and referendums are perfectly legal. Just issue everyone a certificate on a USB stick, so that they can vote electronically.

    However, one's "fair" contribution is determined by their capabilities

    I thought that "fair" relates to equality before law. But it appears that some have to share more, percentage-wise, than others, just because some socialists think that a millionaire should live on $30K per year, and all the rest of his income should be confiscated by the government.

    No, childless couples should also fund schools because everyone benefits from an educated populace

    It amounts to extortion: "Pay for education of Little Johnny, or else he becomes a street robber and robs you." I do not like extortionists, and I believe that Little Johnny should not be my problem. A simple example: a neighbor with eight kids moves in, and then comes to you and tells you to pay him $1000/mo because otherwise his kids will break into your house and steal things. How would you react?

    Anything which benefits everyone, or at least an overwhelming majority like roads and education, should be paid for by everyone.

    I haven't said anything against financing the police and the fire department because everyone, rich and poor, may need their help with more or less equal probability. (Well, a bit higher for the poor, but that's details.) However even roads do not benefit everyone equally. If you do not own a car and do not drive you pay no DMV fees and you don't pay gas taxes. Your contribution to road construction becomes very small.

    those with plenty of wealth would have no problems continuing to live in luxury even if they lost all of their liquid assets.

    Yes, I'm sure there are many who would like to spend someone else's money. No doubt. It's much easier to steal someone's money than to earn it.

    There's still plenty of wilderness out there in the world, many untouched forests, plains, mountains, islands, and deserts that are essentially uninhabited. It probably won't even require leaving the country in which you live

    These places within your own country are under jurisdiction of your country, and you remain bound by its laws. Your only hope is that no government bureaucrat will ever find your cabin in the woods. Because if they do, they will order it destroyed, and you will be arrested for something or the other.

    Society doesn't really owe you anything.

    Huh? If I buy a Muni bond - which I do sometimes - the society most certainly owes me, and I know exactly what it is. If I pay a local tax and a new FD station is built, I "own" a little piece of it: (tax * num_citizens)/amortization_period. I buy it because I intend to use it. If I leave the country, why shouldn't I be refunded? I'm not going to call fire anymore.

    Way back in the day, anyone who refused to contribute was exiled from the village, and back then exile meant death.

    You are wearing very strong rose-colored glasses. Old villages had their share of super rich and super poor people. Peasants were famous for their "down to earth" stinginess and rationality. Poorer people used to die from hunger sometimes. Life is far more harsh than you imagine.

    if they fail to do so stop fucking re-electing them. Unfortunately this system has been purchased entirely

    First of all, I haven't elected anyone, ever. The averaged mass did. It's like a hundred neighbors walk up to your house and tell you how you must spend your money. Wouldn't you want to have a say in that decision?

    Secondly, the system indeed had been purchased and exploited long ago. Politicians are elected pretty much forever, and it takes a lot of misdeeds to get kicked out. Elections are openly manipulated by gerrymandering and fraud, with hardly any slap on the wrist to those who was seen carrying stacks of ballots. There is no chain of custody of voting machines and the voting data. But in the end it does not really matter because there are only two halves of one party that have a chance to win - and both candidates have confirmed their obedience to the System before they were nominated. This is exactly the reason why in a modern world referendums (direct democracy, not representative democracy) are practical. It would be also easier to vote from home, during a whole week perhaps, at your convenience, spending as much time as needed comparing and thinking.

    you're free to walk to another town, state, or country until you find one with a social contract that you agree with.

    You are free to walk to another town or state - and many people do vote with their feet. However this is only a minor relief, as absence of one tax is compensated by other taxes being higher. On average the government gets its pound of flesh, one way or the other. As I already said, you generally cannot move to another country.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2