• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Obama to speak @ 1pm EDT

RJKarl said:
What I'm saying is repatriation of money without any strings will not create jobs. There's no reason for it to happen.
Click to expand...

What is the downside to bringing dollars to our economy that otherwise wouldn't be here?
 
bobknightfan said:
In that case, why don't you just answer ONW's straight-forward question, instead of continuing to parry & dance around it?
Click to expand...

DeacMan said:
Probably because he didn't answer a straight forward question.

I am impressed with one thing that happened today. We have regulations to promote full economy in trucks. That is a good thing.

Is that "intervention"?
Click to expand...

ONW said:
Show me the question I didn't respond to in that posting.

Even if there was one, I'd have to give you a straight-answer first in order to receive yours? That's rich.
Click to expand...

DeacMan said:
What are you talking about? I think you are up in arms at something someone else was posting towards me, not you.
Click to expand...

pretty straight forward
 
bmoneydeac said:
What is the downside to bringing dollars to our economy that otherwise wouldn't be here?
Click to expand...

There's no upside. It's outrageous that the companies are allowed to screw the Us pulbic like they are. We should institute rules to punish companies fior doing this.

In the Bahamas,Switzerland and other places there are buildings with one person in them from a company (often that person represents multiple comapnies) masquerading as HQs. Each one of those companies needs to be made to pay US taxes on every penny they send to those locations.
 
RJKarl said:
There's no upside. It's outrageous that the companies are allowed to screw the Us pulbic like they are. We should institute rules to punish companies fior doing this.

In the Bahamas,Switzerland and other places there are buildings with one person in them from a company (often that person represents multiple comapnies) masquerading as HQs. Each one of those companies needs to be made to pay US taxes on every penny they send to those locations.
Click to expand...

All of which has absolutely nothing to do with allowing companies to repatriate money made through legitimate operations in subsidiaries overseas.
 
someone rich will get more rich. big fucking deal.
 
DeacMan said:
All of which has absolutely nothing to do with allowing companies to repatriate money made through legitimate operations in subsidiaries overseas.
Click to expand...


The money being parked there isn't coming from the US. It is foreign money being earned overseas, and is a direct result of our outdated corporate tax system.
 
i can't believe the simplest questions on this thread were never even addressed. call it whiny if you will.
 
DeacMan said:
All of which has absolutely nothing to do with allowing companies to repatriate money made through legitimate operations in subsidiaries overseas.
Click to expand...

Much of those monies were made in the US and paid to accounts in those countries to avoid US taxes.

Also without any strings bringing that money back does virtually no good for our economy.

Of course you don't think Obama is smart.
 
RJKarl said:
Much of those monies were made in the US and paid to accounts in those countries to avoid US taxes.

Also without any strings bringing that money back does virtually no good for our economy.

Of course you don't think Obama is smart.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. The vast majority of money being tied up overseas was generated by legitimate overseas operations. And bringing that money back to the United States would do good for our economy - because it would be taxed. A tax holiday would just see it taxed at lower rates than normal. Right now there is even noise about NOT allowing companies to do this because of the concern it would raise to banks in other countries - i.e. we may be facing another global credit crisis.
 
DeacMan said:
Uh, no. The vast majority of money being tied up overseas was generated by legitimate overseas operations. And bringing that money back to the United States would do good for our economy - because it would be taxed. A tax holiday would just see it taxed at lower rates than normal. Right now there is even noise about NOT allowing companies to do this because of the concern it would raise to banks in other countries - i.e. we may be facing another global credit crisis.
Click to expand...

Uh no you're wrong. The last tax holiday allowed them to bring money back to the US tax free not at a reduced. This is what is being discussed again.

and yes it's money US corporations made and shipped overseas saying that's where their HQs are. One example is one of the oil rig companies from the BP spill has a tons of employees in Houston and an executive suite in Switzerland where the payments to this company go.

Most of the profits stay in Switzerland. There are hundreds of companies that do the same thing.
 
The tax repatriation holiday in 2004 was at a rate of 5.25%.

And you are wrong about the nature of the profits. It is probably the same kind of laughably inept analysis that concludes that GE doesn't pay any US income taxes.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, the only thing I've taken from this thread is that RJ does not understand basic concepts of international taxation.
 
ChrisL68 said:
The tax repatriation holiday in 2004 was at a rate of 5.25%.

And you are wrong about the nature of the profits. It is probably the same kind of laughably inept analysis that concludes that GE doesn't pay any US income taxes.
Click to expand...

I'll admit I'm wrong about the 5.25%.

That "lughably inept analysis" is also shared by peopel like the NYT, CNN, Washington Post and many other sources.
 
I know. It's a pretty sad commentary on the financial journalists in this country that they would provide analysis that shows such a complete lack of understanding of that subject they are reporting.

GE probably won't file their 2010 tax return until 9/15, but they paid estimated taxes in 2010.

And companies the size of GE don't pay estimated taxes to the government for no reason.

Regardless, drawing conclusions about what a corporation pays to taxing authorities from their financial statements just demonstrates a lack of knowledge by the author.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top