Three big energy firms paid the most taxes in absolute terms: Exxon $146 billion; Chevron $85 billion; and ConocoPhillips $58 billion.

Most large banks also at the higher end.

Apple, Google, GE, among the least.

Berkshire Hathaway (Buffett-owned and managed) and Union Pacific (largely Buffett-owned) also toward the lower end and less than average.



http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/25/sunday-review/corporate-taxes.html?_r=0

Note which were big obama supporters, the ones paying near zero or zero in taxes.

cool

drought Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cool
>
> src="http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/51a3
> db3169bedd395a000008-960/privatepresidents.jpg"/>


I like how that chart is a very indept analysis about how the .com bubble of the 90s with tailed off in the early 2000s affected the market or how the relaxed housing rules from the bubble and legislation that started under clinton was responsible for 2008.

Liberal Logic 52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> drought Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > cool
> >
> > >
> src="http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/51a3
>
> >
> db3169bedd395a000008-960/privatepresidents.jpg"/>
>
>
> I like how that chart is a very indept analysis
> about how the .com bubble of the 90s with tailed
> off in the early 2000s affected the market or how
> the relaxed housing rules from the bubble and
> legislation that started under clinton was
> responsible for 2008.

Suckerz.

lulz

You are a liar:
Apple
Income tax expense: $14.2 billion
Net income: $41.7 billion
Effective tax rate: 25%
As for Chevron:

The oil giant pay among the highest tax rates because of overseas royalties that float with the price of oil.
Income tax expense: $20 billion
Net income: $26 billion
Effective tax rate: 43%



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2013 08:05PM by Priapus.

Elizabeth Warren iPad case. lulz

Priapus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are a liar:
> Apple
> Income tax expense: $14.2 billion
> Net income: $41.7 billion
> Effective tax rate: 25%
> As for Chevron:
>
> The oil giant pay among the highest tax rates
> because of overseas royalties that float with the
> price of oil.
> Income tax expense: $20 billion
> Net income: $26 billion
> Effective tax rate: 43%


"The largest is Apple... with an effective tax rate of 14 percent."

as long as they support obama they could pay 0% like GE did one year and its ok

Don't the rail cars use diesel fuel, and they, not the oil companies, are really the ones who pay the taxes on oil? The same holds true for all other industries that use some product of oil refineries.

Large oil companies typically pay high rates, but some economists argue that the high rates do not cover the pollution costs imposed on society.

The figures are much lower than stated above.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2013/03/17/companies-paying-highest-income-taxes/1991313/

I'd also be suspicious that the income tax is merely a liability, most of which is deferred via offshore subsidiaries.

liberal logic 26 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Large oil companies typically pay high rates, but
> some economists argue that the high rates do not
> cover the pollution costs imposed on society.


No, "economists" don't argue that. Ideologues do.

liberal logic 26 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Large oil companies typically pay high rates, but
> some economists argue that the high rates do not
> cover the pollution costs imposed on society.


You mean the ones the also believe in the global warming bullshit? You can use my name all you want ferfux your stupidity and lies still shine through

ex-Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The figures are much lower than stated above.
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinanc
> e/2013/03/17/companies-paying-highest-income-taxes
> /1991313/
>
> I'd also be suspicious that the income tax is
> merely a liability, most of which is deferred via
> offshore subsidiaries.


Helps if you actually READ the article:

"Here is a look at what S&P 500 companies paid in corporate income taxes — federal, state, local and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to S&P Capital IQ."

No, it's not deferred, it's what they actually paid. All of these are public companies and report their financials including taxes paid.

In any case, the relative result is the same. Oil companies and banks tend to pay the most in taxes and more than do tech companies for a number of reasons (as well as employ more people).

One large reason being that tech companies deal in more virtual and easily relocatable products which are more amenable to the 'double Irish' and similar tax strategies. They also don't deal with commodity products which are priced independently, actively tracked, subject to royalties, etc., for which valuations, timing of sales, etc., aren't as easily managed (i.e., fudged). They also take huge expenses for 'R&D' counting large portions of their development and operating costs as R&D expenses which, while stretched to be legal, is not as available to more traditional companies because such activities don't comprise nearly as large a part of their business.

I bet sales taxes are being factored as being paid by oil companies when actually they are being paid by consumers. WTF is defending a conglomerate oil corporation that literally funds the regimes and people in the world that you hate going to do for you?

Sometimes I think Republicans oppose progress just because they feel they need to. They're failures, they fuck this country up and this still have the nerve to try to lecture us when they should be begging for forgiveness. If this were Japan they would fall on their own sword in shame. In the U.S. people have no shame.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I bet sales taxes are being factored as being paid
> by oil companies when actually they are being paid
> by consumers. WTF is defending a conglomerate oil
> corporation that literally funds the regimes and
> people in the world that you hate going to do for
> you?


No, they're not. These are corporate taxes paid. For taxes paid at the pump, assuming first that it's a company-run station to begin with, they simply act as a collection agent for the state/feds/whomever on a pass-through basis. Basically the same as in the case of a retailer collecting sales tax. It would count any wholesale taxes on their side.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> If this were
> Japan they would fall on their own sword in shame.
> In the U.S. people have no shame.


If this were Japan they would have killed you long ago for shaming their culture with your stupidity.

Youre right though people apparently have no shame. I mean just look at you, literally everything you say is proven wrong yet you keep spewing bullshit everywhere

Even Bob Dole says you are a problem. He says he and Ronald Reagan couldn't make it in this party. Obstructionism will only cause you to lose favor with the electorate. You liberal logic is what is wrong with the Republican party and the country. Between us I think you are the one with a real need for soul searching. I am mere resistance to your kind.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even Bob Dole says you are a problem. He says he
> and Ronald Reagan couldn't make it in this party.
> Obstructionism will only cause you to lose favor
> with the electorate. You liberal logic is what is
> wrong with the Republican party and the country.
> Between us I think you are the one with a real
> need for soul searching. I am mere resistance to
> your kind.


Sadly you liberals are full of fear. Fear that you cant conquer and are too cowardly to ever face. The GOP in congress however face the Libtard onslaught every day with their convictions intact. I myself have conquered many fears. I once had a fear of fire so I lit a fire and held my hand over it till I couldnt stand it anymore. I once had a fear of Rats so i chases one down with a hammer, smashed it and ate it. Lastly I had a fear of lightning so I climbed a tree during an electrical storm. I got all the way to the top of the tree as I could, then broke out a kite and began to fly it. Yes I was suffering from electric shock by the end but I CONQUERED my fear. Can you libtards say the same? No because you lack CONVICTION and BRAVERY!

Do you have a fear of heights? Is so do us all a favor and jump off a bridge.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you have a fear of heights? Is so do us all a
> favor and jump off a bridge.


You've been posting since just after midnight. Do you ever sleep? Perhaps your lack of sleep would explain the complete lameness of your posts (such as this one).

 
Attachments:

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even Bob Dole says you are a problem. He says he
> and Ronald Reagan couldn't make it in this party.
> Obstructionism will only cause you to lose favor
> with the electorate. You liberal logic is what is
> wrong with the Republican party and the country.
> Between us I think you are the one with a real
> need for soul searching. I am mere resistance to
> your kind.

You can stop responding to yourself under my name ferfux when ever you feel like it your stupidity isnt hidden from a name change.

Give it up already everyone knows what an idiot you are. Get a hobby, or a job, or finish that high school diploma, pretty much anything other than spout bullshit all over the internet would be more productive.

S&P Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ex-Lester Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The figures are much lower than stated above.
> >
> >
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinanc
>
> >
> e/2013/03/17/companies-paying-highest-income-taxes
>
> > /1991313/
> >
> > I'd also be suspicious that the income tax is
> > merely a liability, most of which is deferred
> via
> > offshore subsidiaries.
>
>
> Helps if you actually READ the article:
>
> "Here is a look at what S&P 500 companies paid in
> corporate income taxes — federal, state, local
> and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to
> S&P Capital IQ."
>
> No, it's not deferred, it's what they actually
> paid. All of these are public companies and
> report their financials including taxes paid.
>
> In any case, the relative result is the same. Oil
> companies and banks tend to pay the most in taxes
> and more than do tech companies for a number of
> reasons (as well as employ more people).
>
> One large reason being that tech companies deal in
> more virtual and easily relocatable products which
> are more amenable to the 'double Irish' and
> similar tax strategies. They also don't deal with
> commodity products which are priced independently,
> actively tracked, subject to royalties, etc., for
> which valuations, timing of sales, etc., aren't as
> easily managed (i.e., fudged). They also take
> huge expenses for 'R&D' counting large portions of
> their development and operating costs as R&D
> expenses which, while stretched to be legal, is
> not as available to more traditional companies
> because such activities don't comprise nearly as
> large a part of their business.

$31 billion is much lower than the figure stated in the original post.

Most of the tax is paid outside the country if it is really paid at all.

In 2011, they only paid $1.5 billion in income taxes in the U.S. out of the $28 billion tax liability.

ex-Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> S&P Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ex-Lester Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The figures are much lower than stated above.
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinanc
>
> >
> > >
> >
> e/2013/03/17/companies-paying-highest-income-taxes
>
> >
> > > /1991313/
> > >
> > > I'd also be suspicious that the income tax is
> > > merely a liability, most of which is deferred
> > via
> > > offshore subsidiaries.
> >
> >
> > Helps if you actually READ the article:
> >
> > "Here is a look at what S&P 500 companies paid
> in
> > corporate income taxes — federal, state,
> local
> > and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to
> > S&P Capital IQ."
> >
> > No, it's not deferred, it's what they actually
> > paid. All of these are public companies and
> > report their financials including taxes paid.
> >
> > In any case, the relative result is the same.
> Oil
> > companies and banks tend to pay the most in
> taxes
> > and more than do tech companies for a number of
> > reasons (as well as employ more people).
> >
> > One large reason being that tech companies deal
> in
> > more virtual and easily relocatable products
> which
> > are more amenable to the 'double Irish' and
> > similar tax strategies. They also don't deal
> with
> > commodity products which are priced
> independently,
> > actively tracked, subject to royalties, etc.,
> for
> > which valuations, timing of sales, etc., aren't
> as
> > easily managed (i.e., fudged). They also take
> > huge expenses for 'R&D' counting large portions
> of
> > their development and operating costs as R&D
> > expenses which, while stretched to be legal, is
> > not as available to more traditional companies
> > because such activities don't comprise nearly
> as
> > large a part of their business.
>
> $31 billion is much lower than the figure stated
> in the original post.
>
> Most of the tax is paid outside the country if it
> is really paid at all.
>
> In 2011, they only paid $1.5 billion in income
> taxes in the U.S. out of the $28 billion tax
> liability.


I'm going to type this s l o w l y for you (again) so that you can try to follow along.

"Here is a look at what S&P 500 companies paid in corporate income taxes — federal, state, local and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to S&P Capital IQ."

If you're going to comment on it then READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE IDIOT.

lulz

Damn some of you are dense mofos Wrote:
-
> I'm going to type this s l o w l y for you (again)
> so that you can try to follow along.
>
> "Here is a look at what S&P 500 companies paid in
> corporate income taxes — federal, state, local
> and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to
> S&P Capital IQ."
>
> If you're going to comment on it then READ THE
> FUCKING ARTICLE IDIOT.
>
> lulz


Go post more old pics of FFX you douche faggot. No offense there Gordo, but you're one fucking piece of shit asshole. LoLzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


 
Attachments:

Damn some of you are dense mofos Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ex-Lester Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > S&P Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > ex-Lester Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > The figures are much lower than stated
> above.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinanc
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> e/2013/03/17/companies-paying-highest-income-taxes
>
> >
> > >
> > > > /1991313/
> > > >
> > > > I'd also be suspicious that the income tax
> is
> > > > merely a liability, most of which is
> deferred
> > > via
> > > > offshore subsidiaries.
> > >
> > >
> > > Helps if you actually READ the article:
> > >
> > > "Here is a look at what S&P 500 companies
> paid
> > in
> > > corporate income taxes — federal, state,
> > local
> > > and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according
> to
> > > S&P Capital IQ."
> > >
> > > No, it's not deferred, it's what they
> actually
> > > paid. All of these are public companies and
> > > report their financials including taxes paid.
> > >
> > > In any case, the relative result is the same.
>
> > Oil
> > > companies and banks tend to pay the most in
> > taxes
> > > and more than do tech companies for a number
> of
> > > reasons (as well as employ more people).
> > >
> > > One large reason being that tech companies
> deal
> > in
> > > more virtual and easily relocatable products
> > which
> > > are more amenable to the 'double Irish' and
> > > similar tax strategies. They also don't deal
> > with
> > > commodity products which are priced
> > independently,
> > > actively tracked, subject to royalties, etc.,
> > for
> > > which valuations, timing of sales, etc.,
> aren't
> > as
> > > easily managed (i.e., fudged). They also
> take
> > > huge expenses for 'R&D' counting large
> portions
> > of
> > > their development and operating costs as R&D
> > > expenses which, while stretched to be legal,
> is
> > > not as available to more traditional
> companies
> > > because such activities don't comprise nearly
> > as
> > > large a part of their business.
> >
> > $31 billion is much lower than the figure
> stated
> > in the original post.
> >
> > Most of the tax is paid outside the country if
> it
> > is really paid at all.
> >
> > In 2011, they only paid $1.5 billion in income
> > taxes in the U.S. out of the $28 billion tax
> > liability.
>
>
> I'm going to type this s l o w l y for you (again)
> so that you can try to follow along.
>
> "Here is a look at what S&P 500 companies paid in
> corporate income taxes — federal, state, local
> and foreign — from 2007 to 2012, according to
> S&P Capital IQ."
>
> If you're going to comment on it then READ THE
> FUCKING ARTICLE IDIOT.
>
> lulz


Jesus, you are dumb. The three companies you cite at the top of the thread are also in the USA Today article I posted. How hard is it for you to figure out that your numbers are inflated and inflated by a lot when you account for only US income taxes. I even posted the figures for the top taxpayer of the 3, Exxon.

Get yer hypocrisy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Elizabeth Warren iPad case. lulz
>
>
> src="http://i1.cpcache.com/product/763727771/liz_w
> arren_progressive_ipad_2_cover.jpg?color=White&hei
> ght=460&width=460&qv=90">


She's the one that said she's Native American to win the election, eh?

ex-Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Jesus, you are dumb. The three companies you cite
> at the top of the thread are also in the USA Today
> article I posted. How hard is it for you to
> figure out that your numbers are inflated and
> inflated by a lot when you account for only US
> income taxes. I even posted the figures for the
> top taxpayer of the 3, Exxon.


I'm dumb?

You post single year numbers for the US only and then say that the numbers don't match up. Of course they're lower. Duh. lol

They used 5-year numbers in order to get a more representative view since any single year, especially during that period, could significantly skew the numbers.

Regardless, as I said, the relative results are the same as your own link shows. Oil companies and the big banks consistently represent the bulk of the largest tax-paying companies versus how they tend to be portrayed by the 'Left' and relative to other more favored companies.

5-year numbers won't be any more representative in comparing between industries. The US gave out huge tax breaks in the form of extending the 3-yr NOLA carrybacks. Having stayed profitable, oil companies are less able to take advantage of the 5-yr NOLA carryback. Corporate tax receipts have been depressed for about 4 years.

I would say that the big banks are more the target of the progressives. They've had huge amounts of money thrown at them by the government in addition to borrowing money interest-free at the expense of a large swath of the public.

Buffett bailouts

Those tax figures are merely liabilities. What they actually pay is a different number altogether.

As a 2011 Citizens for Tax Justice report points out:

Over the past two years, ExxonMobil reported $9,910 million in pretax U.S. profits. But it enjoyed so many tax subsidies that its federal income tax bill was only $39 million -- a tax rate of only 0.4 percent.

Even when Exxon Mobil had a record profit of $40 billion in 2008 due to record oil prices it had only a 31 percent effective tax rate. That’s 13 percent lower than the maximum 35 percent despite being Exxon Mobil's fifth year as the top corporate earner in Fortune 500’s annual listing. The company paid no taxes at all to the U.S. federal government in 2009 on its domestic profits of nearly $2.6 billion. It appears that they avoided the tax man that year by legally funneling their profits through wholly owned subsidiaries in countries like the Cayman Islands, and reinvesting their earnings overseas.

More striking still is the discrepancy between Exxon Mobil's rates and those of most American breadwinners. The company’s effective rate of 17.6 percent is nearly 16 percent below the average individual federal tax rate, which according to the Congressional Budget Office was 20.4 percent as of 2007

http://www.alternet.org/story/150908/exxon_pays_a_lower_effective_tax_rate_than_the_average_american

Thats merely the difference between Gross and net pay. The tax rate and then the after slicing and dicing by accountants tax rate. Nobody but the graphs are fooled by such shennanigans.

ex-Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Even when Exxon Mobil had a record profit of $40
> billion in 2008 due to record oil prices it had
> only a 31 percent effective tax rate. That’s 13
> percent lower than the maximum 35 percent despite
> being Exxon Mobil's fifth year as the top
> corporate earner in Fortune 500’s annual
> listing.

Yea you just proved youre full of shit.

31 is 13 percent lower than 35?

Even if you claim 31 was a typo and you meant 21 the math still doesnt add up.

Oil companies pay huge amounts of taxs but the partisan ideologue hacks at the center for american progress you link try their best to hide that.

"While they were recording record profits last year, they were also writing checks to Uncle Sam to the tune of $100.7 billion -- two and a half times what they made in net profit."

http://taxfoundation.org/blog/exxonmobils-record-profits-and-record-taxes

Liberal Logic 52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Yea you just proved youre full of shit.
>
> 31 is 13 percent lower than 35?
>


Typical chump way of trying to make the difference look greater than it is.

He meant to type 21 but you fucking Republicans are too childish not to jump on a typo. Fuckin pukes are such a waste of time. Worthless, absolutely worthless.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He meant to type 21 but you fucking Republicans
> are too childish not to jump on a typo. Fuckin
> pukes are such a waste of time. Worthless,
> absolutely worthless.


Correct your posts are worthless.

I already addressed the 21 typo in my post.

FYI ferfux you should have learned in 3rd grade 21 + 13 doesnt = 35

liberal logic 2.0 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thats merely the difference between Gross and net
> pay. The tax rate and then the after slicing and
> dicing by accountants tax rate. Nobody but the
> graphs are fooled by such shennanigans.


As usual the big timers game the system and leave the little guys out in the cold. Thanks Lib Log!

The Solution is simple. Taxing corporations on their revenue rather than on their profits. If Apple gets 60 percent of its revenue from sales in the US Then APPLE should pay US taxes on that revenue. This greed was good, for you and me.

liberal logic 107 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Solution is simple. Taxing corporations on
> their revenue rather than on their profits. If
> Apple gets 60 percent of its revenue from sales in
> the US Then APPLE should pay US taxes on that
> revenue. This greed was good, for you and me.


Thats the stupidest idea ever comrade ferfux.

So if a company has revenue of 100 million but expenses of 80 million yet you tax the 100 million at 35% what do you get?

We all know you cant do math so Ill give you the answer. Youd have a company that loses 15 million a year and would never operate.

Want to see the fastest way to have every company move overseas and a lot of companies just say screw the US market all together, tax revenue instead of profit. Companies arent in business to lose money comrade

That's nothing more than a sales tax. That would drive up food and energy prices rather sharply because of low margins. A big part of the problem is non-enforcement of abuses in transfer pricing and offshore IP transfers. The corps pay off the politcians who pressure the tax authorities to lay off the big firms like Apple, Google, GE, and others.

Liberal Logic 65 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> liberal logic 107 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Solution is simple. Taxing corporations on
> > their revenue rather than on their profits. If
> > Apple gets 60 percent of its revenue from sales
> in
> > the US Then APPLE should pay US taxes on that
> > revenue. This greed was good, for you and me.
>
>
> Thats the stupidest idea ever comrade ferfux.
>
> So if a company has revenue of 100 million but
> expenses of 80 million yet you tax the 100 million
> at 35% what do you get?
>
> We all know you cant do math so Ill give you the
> answer. Youd have a company that loses 15 million
> a year and would never operate.
>
> Want to see the fastest way to have every company
> move overseas and a lot of companies just say
> screw the US market all together, tax revenue
> instead of profit. Companies arent in business to
> lose money comrade

Give that man an Apple!

Not in the slightest since China would be happy to tax revenue as well, or the European Union would tax revenue. Its a sound investment for government to squash the private sector the way the Private sector has been trying to lobby and destroy the government for years through bad policy and taking over government from within. its a dog eat dog world old sport and why let all the big dogs take down the biggest and oldest dog? I say let them not have their cake and your cake and my cake and eat it too. Lets just TAX them they way they are trying to Starve government to death. No more using the Government as a Bail out get out of free ATM.

liberal logic 36 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not in the slightest since China would be happy to
> tax revenue as well, or the European Union would
> tax revenue. Its a sound investment for
> government to squash the private sector the way
> the Private sector has been trying to lobby and
> destroy the government for years through bad
> policy and taking over government from within.
> its a dog eat dog world old sport and why let all
> the big dogs take down the biggest and oldest dog?
> I say let them not have their cake and your cake
> and my cake and eat it too. Lets just TAX them
> they way they are trying to Starve government to
> death. No more using the Government as a Bail out
> get out of free ATM.

Nice alternate world you live in where every government sets out to destroy business so all thats left is government. That may be your dream world but in reality you just created a world with no jobs and everyone other than federal workers being unemployed.

You cant honestly be this stupid can you ferfux?