Discussion:57,000 pages
From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> General Chat --> 57,000 pages
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 18 November 2011 |
| http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/ge-filed-57000-page-tax-return-paid-no-taxes-14-billion-profits_609137.html
I wonder if the preparer received a 4805 letter? | |
CathysTaxes (talk|edits) said: | 18 November 2011 |
| Disgusting. | |
Actionbsns (talk|edits) said: | 18 November 2011 |
| This might just be what the Occupy movement is talking about - if they could ever organize themselves to a cohesive thought. | |
| 2011-11-19 | |
| I knew Ken Kies name looked familiar. He's a DC tax lobbyist.
Tom | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 19 November 2011 |
| I believe he was once the chief GOP counsel on the Ways and Means Committee during the Reagan years.
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/alumni/newsletter/2006/january/kies.html He's been in DC since 1981!!!!!! | |
| 19 November 2011 | |
| GE took deductions for R&D and depreciation? How dare they! | |
| 20 November 2011 | |
| Natalie, if I missed the point, I still don't see it (although my browser isn't letting me access page 2 of the article now). My point was that the writer (or someone he was quoting, I don't remember which) was bemoaning the fact that GE took what are perfectly lawful deductions. It strikes me as sloppy reporting, which undermines the main point - that tax policy has not kept up with economic reality.
If you think I have still missed the point, please feel free to enlighten me. I am working my way through a Principles of Management textbook that is both tedious and simplistic. I could do with some mental stimulation this afternoon. | |
| 21 November 2011 | |
| Admittedly several days late, I just read the linked article. But I also read the GE response. which is linked right after the article. They say they did pay income taxes in 2010, and also that a major reason for their low effective rate includes not just the items mentioned above, but also significant losses in GE Capital. They claim to favor closing loopholes and lowering rates. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 22 November 2011 |
| The Weekly Standard is a very conservative newspaper; I believe the writer's view was another push for tax simplification and overhaul of the Code. The 'nutgraf' is the sentence that begins: "Ryan used the data point to underscore the irrationality of the corporate income tax code...." | |
| 22 November 2011 | |
| D&T, I learned a new word today! Thanks. Isn't simplification really just code for "we want our constituency to benefit from any tax changes"? Also, isn't a discussion of just US tax rates for multi-nationals incomplete? Simplification will not necessarily give us a level playing field. We need to look beyond our own borders, understand what other countries are taxing and either fill the gaps or cry foul on other countries for taxing profits that weren't earned there. | |
To join in on this discussion, you must first
log in.
