Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

GE's tax rate

JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:03:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Ok, I want to ask a question.

What do you think GE's effective tax rate was last year, for all GE companies excluding GE Capital?
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:07:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Cronyism at its finest
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:10:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:05:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
0%. GE is also a huge washington insider.

Nope. Want to guess again? I'll give you a hint, you're more than 5 percentage points off.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:12:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
GE avoids paying taxes
http://www.nytimes.com...
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:14:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:12:24 PM, lewis20 wrote:
GE avoids paying taxes
http://www.nytimes.com...

No it doesn't. That was simply one of the poorest examples of journalism I've seen in a long, long time.

I really want to get a few more people inputting their idea before I post the reality.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:19:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
2.6 billion
They went crazy with that article, Should know better than to believe what I read in the news and see on tv hah
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:28:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:19:48 PM, lewis20 wrote:
2.6 billion
They went crazy with that article, Should know better than to believe what I read in the news and see on tv hah

Yeah, the entire thing was extrapolated from an investor sheet that claimed a 'tax benefit', meaning the company did something that would affect their taxes(which could be anything from a lost in GE. Capital, to higher international taxes, to restructuring debt, etc.)

The worst thing is they never really corrected that story.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:34:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:28:03 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:19:48 PM, lewis20 wrote:
2.6 billion
They went crazy with that article, Should know better than to believe what I read in the news and see on tv hah

Yeah, the entire thing was extrapolated from an investor sheet that claimed a 'tax benefit', meaning the company did something that would affect their taxes(which could be anything from a lost in GE. Capital, to higher international taxes, to restructuring debt, etc.)

The worst thing is they never really corrected that story.

and I heard that story so many times in the news I assumed it had to be true.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 10:40:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:34:29 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:28:03 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:19:48 PM, lewis20 wrote:
2.6 billion
They went crazy with that article, Should know better than to believe what I read in the news and see on tv hah

Yeah, the entire thing was extrapolated from an investor sheet that claimed a 'tax benefit', meaning the company did something that would affect their taxes(which could be anything from a lost in GE. Capital, to higher international taxes, to restructuring debt, etc.)

The worst thing is they never really corrected that story.

and I heard that story so many times in the news I assumed it had to be true.

This is why I never believe the news, just because I heard it on the news. I never take anybody's word for it, no matter what side they are on.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 11:22:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
They pay no federal taxes.
http://abcnews.go.com...
http://www.thedailybeast.com...
They avoided taxes on one 14 billion dollar profit too.
http://www.weeklystandard.com...

They avoided taxes on 5.1 billion dollars of wealth
http://news.yahoo.com...

Avoid taxes
http://www.nytimes.com...

More no taxes
http://nation.foxnews.com...

Where is the bad reporting?!?!
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 11:26:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 11:22:16 PM, 16kadams wrote:
They pay no federal taxes.
http://abcnews.go.com...
http://www.thedailybeast.com...
They avoided taxes on one 14 billion dollar profit too.
http://www.weeklystandard.com...

They avoided taxes on 5.1 billion dollars of wealth
http://news.yahoo.com...

Avoid taxes
http://www.nytimes.com...

More no taxes
http://nation.foxnews.com...

Where is the bad reporting?!?!

All your links point to the same wrong NYT article
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2012 11:32:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 11:22:16 PM, 16kadams wrote:
They pay no federal taxes.
http://abcnews.go.com...
http://www.thedailybeast.com...
They avoided taxes on one 14 billion dollar profit too.
http://www.weeklystandard.com...

They avoided taxes on 5.1 billion dollars of wealth
http://news.yahoo.com...

Avoid taxes
http://www.nytimes.com...

More no taxes
http://nation.foxnews.com...

Where is the bad reporting?!?!

All of that is based, not on any tax documents from GE, but a misunderstood figure in a fact-sheet, and perpetrated by the NYTimes.

Out of curiosity, did you look at my link?
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 1:15:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I applaud lewis20. He is interested in the truth, and accepted it when it was presented.

This is almost as bad as the thread I made about Romney/Bain. Not a single bain-basher posted in that thread.

It's sad to see so many people ignore the truth because it doesn't fit their political views, especially on a site like this that could be such a vessel for helping everyone to improve their views.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Mimshot
Posts: 275
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 4:09:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 10:18:59 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
http://www.sec.gov...

Page 81.

GE's average effective tax rate for the last 3 years is 20.9%

Page 33 says their effective tax rate for 2010 was negative 4.3%.
Page 81 says nothing about taxes. Are you thinking of page 82? Look at Note 14 at the end. It's convenient to leave out GECS since they paid negative $2.4B in taxes.
Mimshot: I support the 1956 Republican platform
DDMx: So, you're a socialist?
Mimshot: Yes
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 4:19:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 4:09:50 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:18:59 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
http://www.sec.gov...

Page 81.

GE's average effective tax rate for the last 3 years is 20.9%

Page 33 says their effective tax rate for 2010 was negative 4.3%.
Page 81 says nothing about taxes. Are you thinking of page 82? Look at Note 14 at the end. It's convenient to leave out GECS since they paid negative $2.4B in taxes.

I said excluding GECS, because the taxes for Capital Services are much more complicated. Yes, GECS had negative taxes in 2010, but they had 152% tax rate in 2009. Their 3-year running average was 21.9%.

It's stupid to look at a company like that by linking everything together to see their tax rate. Look at capital taxes separately from regular taxes, and things make a lot more sense. BOTH of their tax rates have been around 20% for the last 3 years.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Mimshot
Posts: 275
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 5:14:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 4:19:10 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:09:50 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:18:59 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
http://www.sec.gov...

Page 81.

GE's average effective tax rate for the last 3 years is 20.9%

Page 33 says their effective tax rate for 2010 was negative 4.3%.
Page 81 says nothing about taxes. Are you thinking of page 82? Look at Note 14 at the end. It's convenient to leave out GECS since they paid negative $2.4B in taxes.

I said excluding GECS, because the taxes for Capital Services are much more complicated. Yes, GECS had negative taxes in 2010, but they had 152% tax rate in 2009. Their 3-year running average was 21.9%.

It's stupid to look at a company like that by linking everything together to see their tax rate. Look at capital taxes separately from regular taxes, and things make a lot more sense. BOTH of their tax rates have been around 20% for the last 3 years.

Ok fine, if you look at only half the company they paid taxes last year. Therefore the NYT lied when they said the whole company didn't.

In other news, if you ignore everything but my 6 dollars of interest income last year, I paid zero in taxes.
Mimshot: I support the 1956 Republican platform
DDMx: So, you're a socialist?
Mimshot: Yes
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 5:20:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 5:14:54 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:19:10 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:09:50 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:18:59 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
http://www.sec.gov...

Page 81.

GE's average effective tax rate for the last 3 years is 20.9%

Page 33 says their effective tax rate for 2010 was negative 4.3%.
Page 81 says nothing about taxes. Are you thinking of page 82? Look at Note 14 at the end. It's convenient to leave out GECS since they paid negative $2.4B in taxes.

I said excluding GECS, because the taxes for Capital Services are much more complicated. Yes, GECS had negative taxes in 2010, but they had 152% tax rate in 2009. Their 3-year running average was 21.9%.

It's stupid to look at a company like that by linking everything together to see their tax rate. Look at capital taxes separately from regular taxes, and things make a lot more sense. BOTH of their tax rates have been around 20% for the last 3 years.

Ok fine, if you look at only half the company they paid taxes last year. Therefore the NYT lied when they said the whole company didn't.

In other news, if you ignore everything but my 6 dollars of interest income last year, I paid zero in taxes.

If you look at the INCOME companies, which is all except GECS, they paid an average of 20% for each of the last three years.

If you look at the CAPITAL company, GECS, they paid an average of 23% for each of the last three years.

Do you understand? They pay taxes!

Yes, maybe some years GECS doesn't pay taxes, but that has to do with when gains and losses are realized. It happens with any investments. If you look at the total average, you find that they are paying taxes.

I didn't see any liberals complaining when GECS paid 152% taxes in 2009.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 5:20:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 5:14:54 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:19:10 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:09:50 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:18:59 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
http://www.sec.gov...

Page 81.

GE's average effective tax rate for the last 3 years is 20.9%

Page 33 says their effective tax rate for 2010 was negative 4.3%.
Page 81 says nothing about taxes. Are you thinking of page 82? Look at Note 14 at the end. It's convenient to leave out GECS since they paid negative $2.4B in taxes.

I said excluding GECS, because the taxes for Capital Services are much more complicated. Yes, GECS had negative taxes in 2010, but they had 152% tax rate in 2009. Their 3-year running average was 21.9%.

It's stupid to look at a company like that by linking everything together to see their tax rate. Look at capital taxes separately from regular taxes, and things make a lot more sense. BOTH of their tax rates have been around 20% for the last 3 years.

Ok fine, if you look at only half the company they paid taxes last year. Therefore the NYT lied when they said the whole company didn't.

In other news, if you ignore everything but my 6 dollars of interest income last year, I paid zero in taxes.

Your argument is just like looking at a wealthy person's capital gains tax rate and comparing that to an individual's income tax rate. They are two different taxes.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Mimshot
Posts: 275
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 5:58:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 5:20:47 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/7/2012 5:14:54 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:19:10 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:09:50 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:18:59 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
http://www.sec.gov...

Page 81.

GE's average effective tax rate for the last 3 years is 20.9%

Page 33 says their effective tax rate for 2010 was negative 4.3%.
Page 81 says nothing about taxes. Are you thinking of page 82? Look at Note 14 at the end. It's convenient to leave out GECS since they paid negative $2.4B in taxes.

I said excluding GECS, because the taxes for Capital Services are much more complicated. Yes, GECS had negative taxes in 2010, but they had 152% tax rate in 2009. Their 3-year running average was 21.9%.

It's stupid to look at a company like that by linking everything together to see their tax rate. Look at capital taxes separately from regular taxes, and things make a lot more sense. BOTH of their tax rates have been around 20% for the last 3 years.

Ok fine, if you look at only half the company they paid taxes last year. Therefore the NYT lied when they said the whole company didn't.

In other news, if you ignore everything but my 6 dollars of interest income last year, I paid zero in taxes.

Your argument is just like looking at a wealthy person's capital gains tax rate and comparing that to an individual's income tax rate. They are two different taxes.

Huh? My point was that looking at part of the income is not the full picture. It's one company with one set of stock holders and one board of directors.
Mimshot: I support the 1956 Republican platform
DDMx: So, you're a socialist?
Mimshot: Yes
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 6:02:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 5:58:21 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/7/2012 5:20:47 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/7/2012 5:14:54 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:19:10 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/7/2012 4:09:50 PM, Mimshot wrote:
At 3/6/2012 10:18:59 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
http://www.sec.gov...

Page 81.

GE's average effective tax rate for the last 3 years is 20.9%

Page 33 says their effective tax rate for 2010 was negative 4.3%.
Page 81 says nothing about taxes. Are you thinking of page 82? Look at Note 14 at the end. It's convenient to leave out GECS since they paid negative $2.4B in taxes.

I said excluding GECS, because the taxes for Capital Services are much more complicated. Yes, GECS had negative taxes in 2010, but they had 152% tax rate in 2009. Their 3-year running average was 21.9%.

It's stupid to look at a company like that by linking everything together to see their tax rate. Look at capital taxes separately from regular taxes, and things make a lot more sense. BOTH of their tax rates have been around 20% for the last 3 years.

Ok fine, if you look at only half the company they paid taxes last year. Therefore the NYT lied when they said the whole company didn't.

In other news, if you ignore everything but my 6 dollars of interest income last year, I paid zero in taxes.

Your argument is just like looking at a wealthy person's capital gains tax rate and comparing that to an individual's income tax rate. They are two different taxes.

Huh? My point was that looking at part of the income is not the full picture. It's one company with one set of stock holders and one board of directors.

When you confuse income with capital gains, you miss the full picture.

Yes, their total could have been negative this year, but what about last year? The only way to look at it is look at their income tax and look at their capital gains tax.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 6:50:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/6/2012 11:32:45 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/6/2012 11:22:16 PM, 16kadams wrote:
They pay no federal taxes.
http://abcnews.go.com...
http://www.thedailybeast.com...
They avoided taxes on one 14 billion dollar profit too.
http://www.weeklystandard.com...

They avoided taxes on 5.1 billion dollars of wealth
http://news.yahoo.com...

Avoid taxes
http://www.nytimes.com...

More no taxes
http://nation.foxnews.com...

Where is the bad reporting?!?!

All of that is based, not on any tax documents from GE, but a misunderstood figure in a fact-sheet, and perpetrated by the NYTimes.

Out of curiosity, did you look at my link?

Their tax rate is only 2.3%...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 6:53:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 6:50:13 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/6/2012 11:32:45 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 3/6/2012 11:22:16 PM, 16kadams wrote:
They pay no federal taxes.
http://abcnews.go.com...
http://www.thedailybeast.com...
They avoided taxes on one 14 billion dollar profit too.
http://www.weeklystandard.com...

They avoided taxes on 5.1 billion dollars of wealth
http://news.yahoo.com...

Avoid taxes
http://www.nytimes.com...

More no taxes
http://nation.foxnews.com...

Where is the bad reporting?!?!

All of that is based, not on any tax documents from GE, but a misunderstood figure in a fact-sheet, and perpetrated by the NYTimes.

Out of curiosity, did you look at my link?

Their tax rate is only 2.3%...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Bro. Look at the OP.

Click on the link.

All of the news articles are based on the crap reporting of the NY Times.

GE, minus GECS, paid an average rate of 20% over the last three years.

GECS paid an average rate of 23% over the last three years.

This isn't A NEWS STORY. This is SEC FINANCIAL FILINGS.

SEC filings trump old news stories.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Starcraftzzz
Posts: 487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 7:16:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
And that is why the corporate tax rate is to low because it results in very large companies paying a negative tax rate in some years, while small companies can't access or use many of the loopholes, that is why democrats propose that we eliminate loopholes and make it so that corporate taxes are progressive resulting in large companies paying more in taxes, which results in more competition via small companies
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/7/2012 7:20:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/7/2012 7:16:43 PM, Starcraftzzz wrote:
And that is why the corporate tax rate is to low because it results in very large companies paying a negative tax rate in some years, while small companies can't access or use many of the loopholes, that is why democrats propose that we eliminate loopholes and make it so that corporate taxes are progressive resulting in large companies paying more in taxes, which results in more competition via small companies

What negative tax rate are you talking about?

When a capital services company realizes billions of dollars of losses in a year, yes they can have a negative rate. But, GECS averages 23% per year. You dont know what you're talking about.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13