Tax Dodgers

[GannonFan]

How has it gotten worse? Your first line is silly, of course we collected a lower percentage of taxes in '09 than in the 50 years prior - funny how severe economic downturns have a way of limiting the income earned in the year of the downturn. But how have things gotten worse - seems like more of the same to me.

At one point in the last decade financial services represented 40% of GDP. Banks had record profits and some paid nada in taxes. Yet middle class teachers in Oshkosh are the problem. Yep, it's always been like this.

So you're saying you have no way to improve campaign finance?

[kalm]

At one point in the last decade financial services represented 40% of GDP. Banks had record profits and some paid nada in taxes. Yet middle class teachers in Oshkosh are the problem. Yep, it's always been like this.

So you're saying you have no way to improve campaign finance?

Short of overturning Citizens United or amending the constitution to limit corporate person hood, no. I'm not holding my breath.

[GannonFan]

So you're saying you have no way to improve campaign finance?

Short of overturning Citizens United or amending the constitution to limit corporate person hood, no. I'm not holding my breath.

So campaign finance was fine priot to Citizens United, is that what you're saying?

[blueballs]

If BofA is breaking IRS guidelines (which they likely are) then they deserve whatever penalties the IRS throws at them. Why isn't $4.4B of income with no taxes paid showing up as a red flag to the IRS? Are they busy chasing down the gross offenders that failed to report $100 in interest expense?

The IRS is tasked with interpretation and enforcement of tax law - no question BofA (like many companies) operates in the grey area of tax code and challenges the IRS to prove that their interpretation of tax codes is incorrect. It's a freakin' shell game, hiding earnings and assets to avoid taxation and as soon as Congress enacts a more restrictive code companies with the resources to do so will find ways around it.

I'm not saying it's illegal or that I wouldn't do the same in their shoes. But this whole concept of who's fleecing the system and hurting the average tax payers the most is a fucking farce. BTW, congressional conks want to make significant cuts to IRS enforcement. You know, to save the tax payers money.

The Fairtax would render the IRS moot and probably lead to its abolishment.

http://www.fairtax.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[kalm]

Short of overturning Citizens United or amending the constitution to limit corporate person hood, no. I'm not holding my breath.

So campaign finance was fine priot to Citizens United, is that what you're saying?

Of course not. But it would be a start. Glad you think the current system is fine.

[GannonFan]

So campaign finance was fine priot to Citizens United, is that what you're saying?

Of course not. But it would be a start. Glad you think the current system is fine.

That's odd, I don't remember saying our current system is fine. Strange.

[Appaholic]

You guys do realize that BoA is not breaking anynlaws or doing anything remotely close to shady business dealings to generate all these deductions and credits right?

Merely operating within the bounds of US law. In fact they aren't even really using any loopholes in the tax code.

Yes, DF, we do....hence the outrage....if it's not against the law to make $4.4bil in profit and pay no income taxes, but it's against the law for me not to pay income taxes on combined gross income of less than $100k in my household....well.... ...Don't get me wrong, I don't blame this on BofA...hell, I tip my hat to them, but this is ridiculous in the grand scheme...just as ridiculous as other wasteful Federal programs like subsidies for ethanol, Dept of Homeland Security, et al....

[Chizzang]

You guys do realize that BoA is not breaking anynlaws or doing anything remotely close to shady business dealings to generate all these deductions and credits right?

Merely operating within the bounds of US law. In fact they aren't even really using any loopholes in the tax code.

Yes, DF, we do....hence the outrage....if it's not against the law to make $4.4bil in profit and pay no income taxes, but it's against the law for me not to pay income taxes on combined gross income of less than $100k in my household....well.... ...Don't get me wrong, I don't blame this on BofA...hell, I tip my hat to them, but this is ridiculous in the grand scheme...just as ridiculous as other wasteful Federal programs like subsidies for ethanol, Dept of Homeland Security, et al....

BINGO..!!!!

And lets bail them out again in a few years - shortly after all the senior execs get multimillion dollar bonuses


We get just what we deserve

[Grizalltheway]

Yes, DF, we do....hence the outrage....if it's not against the law to make $4.4bil in profit and pay no income taxes, but it's against the law for me not to pay income taxes on combined gross income of less than $100k in my household....well.... ...Don't get me wrong, I don't blame this on BofA...hell, I tip my hat to them, but this is ridiculous in the grand scheme...just as ridiculous as other wasteful Federal programs like subsidies for ethanol, Dept of Homeland Security, et al....

BINGO..!!!!

And lets bail them out again in a few years - shortly after all the senior execs get multimillion dollar bonuses


We get just what we deserve

[kalm]

Of course not. But it would be a start. Glad you think the current system is fine.

That's odd, I don't remember saying our current system is fine. Strange.

You didn't. And you also didn't say you can't see the connection between campaign finance, monopolies, and preferential tax treatment.

[kalm]

Yes, DF, we do....hence the outrage....if it's not against the law to make $4.4bil in profit and pay no income taxes, but it's against the law for me not to pay income taxes on combined gross income of less than $100k in my household....well.... ...Don't get me wrong, I don't blame this on BofA...hell, I tip my hat to them, but this is ridiculous in the grand scheme...just as ridiculous as other wasteful Federal programs like subsidies for ethanol, Dept of Homeland Security, et al....

BINGO..!!!!

And lets bail them out again in a few years - shortly after all the senior execs get multimillion dollar bonuses


We get just what we deserve

What. You mean you guys can't get money from the fed at zero interest either?

[GannonFan]

That's odd, I don't remember saying our current system is fine. Strange.

You didn't. And you also didn't say you can't see the connection between campaign finance, monopolies, and preferential tax treatment.

Nope, I'm pretty sure I just made the point that we've had problems with campaign finance since the get go in this country - you seem to think it's just a problem of the past decade, even just the last year or two.

[kalm]

You didn't. And you also didn't say you can't see the connection between campaign finance, monopolies, and preferential tax treatment.

Nope, I'm pretty sure I just made the point that we've had problems with campaign finance since the get go in this country - you seem to think it's just a problem of the past decade, even just the last year or two.

I know that's what you think.

[JohnStOnge]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/0 ... banks.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Bank of America probably won't pay federal taxes because it lost money in the U.S. for the year."

You know, if you take a loss, you don't have to pay income taxes. That applies to everybody.

I'd be a lot more concerned about something like 60% of the population not paying income taxes and often even getting payouts through the earned income tax credit. I wouldn't be concerned about corporations paying their fair share. They do.

Seriously. I don't see how anybody can, with a straight face, talk about "the rich" and "corporations" not paying their "fair share" of income taxes when a majority of the population essentially pays no income taxes at all. Ever.

[Chizzang]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/0 ... banks.html

"Bank of America probably won't pay federal taxes because it lost money in the U.S. for the year."

You know, if you take a loss, you don't have to pay income taxes. That applies to everybody.

I'd be a lot more concerned about something like 60% of the population not paying income taxes and often even getting payouts through the earned income tax credit. I wouldn't be concerned about corporations paying their fair share. They do.

Seriously. I don't see how anybody can, with a straight face, talk about "the rich" and "corporations" not paying their "fair share" of income taxes when a majority of the population essentially pays no income taxes at all. Ever.

I believe they took a loss because they structured there purchase of Merrill lynch, Country Wide and Wells Fargo in such a way as to show losses over a 5 year period... so each year they have a built in loss and we're only three years into the fancy structured purchases - so no matter how many billions they make next year, they'll lose money on paper and in 2012 as well...

[JohnStOnge]

I believe they took a loss because they structured there purchase of Merrill lynch, Country Wide and Wells Fargo in such a way as to show losses over a 5 year period... so each year they have a built in loss and we're only three years into the fancy structured purchases - so no matter how many billions they make next year, they'll lose money on paper and in 2012 as well...

I don't think the "no matter how manhy billions they make next year, they'll lose money on paper..." statement is accurate. But the point is that we have people demagoguing about something like this when we have a majority of the US population functioning as parasites.

[Chizzang]

Gee lets see,
They buy Merrill lynch, Country Wide and Wells Fargo..
They proceed to stagger the structure of the buys so they didn't pay taxes in 2008 and 2009 and 2010... (you can check the record on that) and in 2011 and 2012 they won't pay taxes either... just watch

they're right on course

[kalm]

I believe they took a loss because they structured there purchase of Merrill lynch, Country Wide and Wells Fargo in such a way as to show losses over a 5 year period... so each year they have a built in loss and we're only three years into the fancy structured purchases - so no matter how many billions they make next year, they'll lose money on paper and in 2012 as well...

I don't think the "no matter how manhy billions they make next year, they'll lose money on paper..." statement is accurate. But the point is that we have people demagoguing about something like this when we have a majority of the US population functioning as parasites.

I think it's cute when "capitalists" like John defend the oligarchs.

The top 6 banks now control 60% of GNP. I wonder if they're ok with where were at? I wonder if they're still giving loans or credit cards to any of the parasites? I wonder if the parasites bank there?

[houndawg]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/0 ... banks.html

"Bank of America probably won't pay federal taxes because it lost money in the U.S. for the year."

You know, if you take a loss, you don't have to pay income taxes. That applies to everybody.

I'd be a lot more concerned about something like 60% of the population not paying income taxes and often even getting payouts through the earned income tax credit. I wouldn't be concerned about corporations paying their fair share. They do.

Seriously. I don't see how anybody can, with a straight face, talk about "the rich" and "corporations" not paying their "fair share" of income taxes when a majority of the population essentially pays no income taxes at all. Ever.

How big was B of A's loss, as a percentage of executive bonuses, John?

[BDKJMU]

To break it down into its simplest form, if a company loses a certain amount of $, say 10 billion, they shouldn't have to pay any taxes till they show over 10 billion in profits. After all, 10 billion in losses followed by 10 billion in profits = 0.

So is this sort of along the lines of what we're talking baout with BofA here?