Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Companies who move offshore to save federal taxes still get federal contracts
New Jersey Online ^ | 5/27/03 | The Associated Press

Posted on 05/27/2003 1:12:47 PM PDT by Willie Green

Edited on 07/06/2004 6:38:51 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]


(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: contracts; globalism; offshore; thebusheconomy

1 posted on 05/27/2003 1:12:47 PM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Accenture is the big gorilla here. The sad thing is...there are other big consulting firms (and corporations) who are incorporated in the USA and who do better work. Period.
2 posted on 05/27/2003 1:20:13 PM PDT by dark_lord (The Statue of Liberty now holds a baseball bat and she's yelling 'You want a piece of me?')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Just food for thought:

Companies that pay less taxes can be more competitive and can under bid other companies to provide services. What the government loses in taxes is made up in cheaper prices.

Is moving offshore the patriotic thing to do, NO! Is it a wise business decision, Yes.

I firmly believe in not taxing business, bacause a business that is taxed, simply passes the tax on to the consumer (read me).
3 posted on 05/27/2003 1:24:17 PM PDT by Lokibob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lokibob; Willie Green
I've got no reason to stand up for corporations like this, but the fact that so many of them are doing this is an indication that something is wrong with the U.S. tax system. The same Bush administration that rallied support for the dividend tax exemption by pointing out the inherent unfairness of double taxation didn't say a damned thing about the inherent unfairness of taxing corporate income earned outside the U.S. that has already been taxed in another jurisdiction.
4 posted on 05/27/2003 1:27:38 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
? The New World Orders of,........'ENRON'........?
5 posted on 05/27/2003 1:39:50 PM PDT by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
ping!
6 posted on 05/27/2003 1:41:49 PM PDT by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lokibob
bacause a business that is taxed, simply passes the tax on to the consumer (read me).

Food for thought:

In a competitive market, prices are determined strictly by supply and demand in the marketplace. Taxes, therefore, cannot be merely "passed along" to the consumer unless companies enjoy noncompetitive monopolistic or oligopolistic control over the market. Corporate income taxes are merely government confiscation of a portion of the profits (if any). They are not a "cost" that can be passed along to the consumer.

7 posted on 05/27/2003 1:54:09 PM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green; BrooklynGOP
You now following the Pat "Close Our Borders" Buchananites around GOP?
8 posted on 05/27/2003 2:13:49 PM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
General Motors, when pricing the new models, has to include taxes as the cost of doing business. Otherwise, at the end of the year, the bottom line COULD show that they sold each automobile at a loss. Fortunately for them and every other manufacturer, they all pay taxes, so the price can be set with that in mind.

I think we both are saying the same thing, proving my point that the offshore companies have an advantage in the market place.

9 posted on 05/27/2003 2:15:25 PM PDT by Lokibob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Good. I have enormous respect for companies clever enough to move off-shore for tax purposes. The IRS makes the rules unnecessarily complex and unfathomable. If they make the rules, any play within the rules is legal.

Any play that keeps money out of the hands of the government is commendable.

Companies owe their first duty to their stockholders and their second duty to their customers. Lowering their costs and increasing their profits serves both groups.

10 posted on 05/27/2003 2:25:11 PM PDT by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
Any play that keeps money out of the hands of the government is commendable.

Along with rights go responsibilities.
Failure to live up to those responsibilities has consequences.
Tax evader called leech, gets 30 months in prison

11 posted on 05/27/2003 2:35:20 PM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
the inherent unfairness of taxing corporate income earned outside the U.S. that has already been taxed in another jurisdiction.

That's what they do with individual American expat workers as well.

The U.S. is the only country in the world that does this.

12 posted on 05/27/2003 3:40:43 PM PDT by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Corporate responsibility is to the stockholders, not the government unless you wish to argue that corporations should be beholden to the government.
13 posted on 05/27/2003 3:46:24 PM PDT by DugwayDuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
And why shouldn't they get federal contracts. I mean, they paid their Congressman all that money.
14 posted on 05/27/2003 3:49:28 PM PDT by BJungNan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke
unless you wish to argue that corporations should be beholden to the government.

They are. The only reason Government grants investors limited personal liability in the formation of business enterprise is to promote economic development that is beneficial to society. When corporate activity no longer serves that purpose, there is no longer any justification for Government to extend that privilege.


15 posted on 05/27/2003 4:00:51 PM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
You now following the Pat "Close Our Borders" Buchananites around GOP?

Nah, we prefer the "we breed them - you feed them" policies of Fox.

16 posted on 05/27/2003 4:10:04 PM PDT by BrooklynGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lokibob
General Motors, when pricing the new models, has to include taxes as the cost of doing business.


The cost of doing business is a tax writeoff.
17 posted on 05/27/2003 4:14:45 PM PDT by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lokibob
General Motors, when pricing the new models, has to include taxes as the cost of doing business. Otherwise, at the end of the year, the bottom line COULD show that they sold each automobile at a loss.

And I suppose you've never seen an automotive manufacturer post a loss.

Corporate Income Taxes are NOT a cost that is "passed along" to the consumer.
They are merely government confiscation of a portion of the profit made (if any) after costs are deducted from revenues.

18 posted on 05/27/2003 4:25:06 PM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Corporate Income Taxes are NOT a cost that is "passed along" to the consumer.

They are if the "consumer" is the government.

19 posted on 05/27/2003 4:28:26 PM PDT by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: philetus; Lokibob
The cost of doing business is a tax writeoff.

Maybe Lokibob is an Enron/Arthur Anderson accountant.

He wants to take a tax deduction for his taxes from his taxes.

20 posted on 05/27/2003 4:28:38 PM PDT by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
"The only reason Government grants investors limited personal liability in the formation of business enterprise is to promote economic development that is beneficial to society. When corporate activity no longer serves that purpose, there is no longer any justification for Government to extend that privilege."

Some times, you sound just like a democrat. Usually, democrats make these claims right after proposing new regulations and taxation. This argument says that corporations are societies slaves, existing only to further the goals of government. Corporations exist to further the goals of individuals.
21 posted on 05/28/2003 2:39:49 AM PDT by DugwayDuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
They're aren't tax evaders, they're tax avoiders. If it's inside the rules, it's legal. And, in my view, commendable.
22 posted on 05/28/2003 5:46:58 PM PDT by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Salman
All costs are passed along to the customer. The customer is where all of the money comes from.
23 posted on 05/28/2003 5:48:48 PM PDT by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
All costs are passed along to the customer. The customer is where all of the money comes from.

Not exactly. Costs cannot ALWAYS be passed to the consumer. Sometimes the consumer decides not to buy. Everyone (except Willie, he understands marginal propensity to consume) seems to think that the seller SETS the price based on his costs and a fair profit. Don't they wish! Prices are actually set by the MARKET. If there is sufficient competition, substitutes, lack of demand (the ol' marginal propensity, again) the seller may not even make back his costs. That's why they sometimes post losses.

Come on guys, this is basic economics, not rocket science. Even an engineer can fathom this level of economics.

24 posted on 05/28/2003 8:05:53 PM PDT by weaponeer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: weaponeer
It may be too basic because, once initial investment is allowed for (and any additional money put into the business), the customer is the only source of revenue. Whether or not this covers the costs is irrelevant. All revenue comes from the customer and all costs are passed along in the form of the "cost of production". COP is a basis for price but you are correct in that only the market sets the final price. The seller may choose to withdraw his product from the market if he cannot get a sufficient price but once a satisfactory deal is struck,it is the customer who covers all costs, including taxes,
25 posted on 05/29/2003 2:06:29 PM PDT by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson