Microsoft, HP Accused of ''Skirting'' U.S. Taxes

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]@kyee7k - you're confusing Federal with State, and most of the 'Welfare States' (States who take more Federal taxes IN than the pay OUT) are Republican; see below.Here's the equation🙁Lower Income / Fed Payroll only) + (Middle Income / Fed Payroll + Fed Taxes) + (High Income / Fed Taxes) = Taxes (Income) - Expenses (Pay out)The 'problem' is millions of folks have shifted (left) to lower tax brackets, well when the Income goes down but the Expenses go up you run into a Deficit. The problem is Republican's want to shift the burden to the Middle and Lower Classes. However, rich folks haven't yet figured-out without a Middle Class no one can afford their 'stuff' so they seek out a Global Market, but the Global Market works the same as ours (US) and there's a Global Recession (by Definition it's actually a Depression) but calling it 'that' would really freeze purchasing...I could go on and on -- trust me I get it. My father is in the top <0.01%, but I'm much poorer.Deficit Spending:Welfare States:Oddly, Republican's are a LOT more Socialist, it's funnier than hell to me.[/citation]


Color me shocked that states that don't have a large amount of federal parks, wetlands, military bases, coasts, retirees from northern blue states, etc etc etc don't receive as much in money as those that do. Unless you are wanting to back up your numbers that the red state numbers are solely for social programs you are simply throwing out a big fat red herring.
 
Y'know I don't care, if MS pays less tax that means more money to Bill Gates, which means more money to worthwhile causes via the Foundation
...
Whereas more money to Apple means more money to Tim Cook so he can buy a solid gold dildo with a head shaped like Steve Jobs face
 
[citation][nom]aft_lizard01[/nom]Color me shocked that states that don't have a large amount of federal parks, wetlands, military bases, coasts, retirees from northern blue states, etc etc etc don't receive as much in money as those that do. Unless you are wanting to back up your numbers that the red state numbers are solely for social programs you are simply throwing out a big fat red herring.[/citation]
I forgot to add that your graph would look totally different if you did it by who ran congress..because as we know Presidents only offer budgets and sign them..they don't actually make them.
 

I'd say take 'your time' and prove me wrong, most of those 'Red' Republican states don't have anymore hard expenses than any other state in the union (US).

I suggest you search 'Welfare States' and 'Deficit Surplus per President' then maybe we'll have something to talk about.
 
[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]So then how do roads, bridges, military, schools, etc, get paid?[/citation]
The military kicks your door in a take it off you, oh hang on, the Government does that anyway
 
So, they're upset about businesses not paying the amount in taxes the Gov't wants them to because of offshore accounts....yet we have a man running for president that has offshore accounts and owns US based businesses that have off-shore bank accounts to shelter themselves from taxes...amazing how things work....we allow a ma dodging taxes to run for president....but they want to attack businesses....
 
[citation][nom]jwcalla[/nom]So the takeaway here is that as tax rates go up, wealth flees?And we needed a Senate investigation to know this?[/citation]
No, my takeaway is folks with power don't want to lose it (power) regardless of the long-term consequences to the economy including the Global economy. Supply Side Economics only makes sense for wealthy people to hoard money (control). The scare tactics are to threaten gullible folks with their 'jobs,' but in reality where there's profit and in particular Demand companies still flourish. Example, my father use to employ over 10,000 workers, medium size by definition, and whether his tax rate was 20% or 30% he wouldn't hire a single person above the Demand. It's a fallacy that the 10% post-tax money would go into expansion - remember that's after taxes, instead pre-tax money goes into expansion.

Supply Side Economics also stifles (holds back) new and perhaps better opportunity aka Repression. In the past we (US) were known as the country of Wealth & Opportunity. When that was true the tax rates were indeed much higher, and there was a strong and abundant middle-class. Wealthy folks only want to control (limit) opportunity aka competition.

Bottom-line, if the middle class anywhere has no money then who's profiting?! ANS: no one!

Jobs are driven only by Demand and the wealth of folks who are 'buying' their 'stuff' (middle-class or the 98%), but the wealth of the middle-class has been taken away by many sources. The largest job-taker is China who has driven its' appeal by lowering its' currency manipulation by at least 40% under its' market value. Imagine you were buying 'stuff' and one place it's 40%-off and the other is MSRP (full price) - where are you going to go?! Frankly, China should be thrown out of the WTO until their currency is 'Market Value' and they quit polluting the same air we breath and water we drink.

The 'problem' is China owns too much World debt and can 'call in' their money - strings. If anyone is going to borrow you Trillions, you're crazy if you think it's for an investment or no strings attached. The US itself is guilty of the 'strings' attached with Billions it borrows or gives.

The only control is people and quite often fear based, but people are too dumb to realize they are (masses 98%) in control. Globally if every country added a 40%~50%+ tariff to imported 'stuff' from China and other similar Countries then their jobs, in mass, would return back to them very quickly.

Future - The underlying real trouble to 'employment' is high-tech automation, and as technology gets improved at an exponential rate then at the same rate people are losing more and more of their jobs to a machine. The future isn't pretty and there's no simple answer as complexity complicates the solutions. Some day heck even complex surgery can be replaced by a high-tech programmed machine; no job is safe.
 
[citation][nom]Kami3k[/nom]Funny how if a average joe were to do this they would be arrested for tax evasion, but if the big corporations do it? It's business as usual.[/citation]

because they could honestly move out of country completely, and feel next to nothing.
 
[citation][nom]kcorp2003[/nom]i see some single family survive on net income of less than 22,000 a year (and support at least 1 kid). and they pay their taxes.[/citation]

kcorp after you factor in the standard married and single child deduction then the earned income credit that they probably claimed means that they probably got back more money than they put in. Factor in that many in that income level qualify for some time of assistance program and... well you see where I'm going.
 

Listen today unless your household income is near a $100K you're barely making it.

Those folks, whom you referred to, may get some money back but it's nearly impossible to get it all back from withholding's, and never your SS or MC deductions. Under $50K family income you're essentially the working poor (my definition); under that level is unthinkable to me and I sincerely don't know how a family can manage on less. I give folks all the credit and respect them that are hard working with low incomes.
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]The military kicks your door in a take it off you, oh hang on, the Government does that anyway[/citation]
To FUND SOCIAL NECESSITIES! DURR DURR!
 
[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Listen today unless your household income is near a $100K you're barely making it. Those folks, whom you referred to, may get some money back but it's nearly impossible to get it all back from withholding's, and never your SS or MC deductions. Under $50K family income you're essentially the working poor (my definition); under that level is unthinkable to me and I sincerely don't know how a family can manage on less. I give folks all the credit and respect them that are hard working with low incomes.[/citation]
People with less than $50K a year is poor & below is unthinkable? My wife gets paid about $14,xxx a year... & I can't find a job. What do you call us?
 
[citation][nom]ethanolson[/nom]The more they evade, the longer I have a job. I'm actually on a contract between both companies, so I don't care how they get the money.[/citation]
That's rather selfish, don't you think?
 
Huh...now I don't feel so bad for pissing off the Xbox Live moderators (aka "German SS") when I told them I repaired their junk.
 
I think it is peculiar that Bill Gates portrays to the media that he is this wise father figure that gives to the poor in Africa and will one day give half of his wealth to his "foundation" still leaving untold billions. He unquestionably supports the democratic institution along side his good friend Warren Buffet who openly said his taxes should be increased. But, and a very large "but", his company which he stills own a very huge stake in, is allegedly sneaking around not paying all the taxes they are due. Whether it is one side or the other that is the better I cannot say for certain, but I can say that you can bet your sweet ass that the individual readers of this site and every other individual of middle class and less are going to pay 100% of their due taxes when the IRS rings the register or the government will freeze all of your accounts and take it from you or put you in the clink. I will say that in due time this will not be a headline and HP and Microsoft will continue paying a smaller percentage substantially than your small businesses and that will never be fair.
 

What makes you erroneously believe (and beg the question) that only a government and taxes can provide such things?
 
[citation][nom]madjimms[/nom]To FUND SOCIAL NECESSITIES! DURR DURR![/citation]
By no means was I saying anything like the family making 22k is anything but poor. 22k for 3 people. Yeah that's pretty ruff. I was simply pointing out a fact that a lot of folks overlook. I actually think that earned income credit is one of the better social programs as it rewards those who actually work even if it could use some tweaking. My thoughts on the proper income to be able to have a family. Don't have kids if you can't afford them. However people are selfish and most will put their wants over what's best for a child. Or this over populated world for that matter.

 
[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Listen today unless your household income is near a $100K you're barely making it. Those folks, whom you referred to, may get some money back but it's nearly impossible to get it all back from withholding's, and never your SS or MC deductions. Under $50K family income you're essentially the working poor (my definition); under that level is unthinkable to me and I sincerely don't know how a family can manage on less. I give folks all the credit and respect them that are hard working with low incomes.[/citation]


By no means was I saying anything like the family making 22k is anything but poor. 22k for 3 people. Yeah that's pretty ruff. I was simply pointing out a fact that a lot of folks overlook. I actually think that earned income credit is one of the better social programs as it rewards those who actually work even if it could use some tweaking. My thoughts on the proper income to be able to have a family. Don't have kids if you can't afford them. However people are selfish and most will put their wants over what's best for a child. Or this over populated world for that matter.
 
[citation][nom]Pennanen[/nom]Maybe if people actually paid the taxes instead of avoiding them, the taxes wouldnt be that high.[/citation]You're gullible if you think they'd lower taxes just because revenue increased. They spend every dime you give them, and then some. Even if tax revenue doubled, they'd blow it all rather than dropping the tax rate. Government doesn't make money, they spend money, and they're extemely, mind-blowingly inefficient at it.

Our corporate tax rate is disgustingly high, and as a result all companies that are capable of reducing tax burden do so, any way they can.[citation][nom]kcorp2003[/nom]i see some single family survive on net income of less than 22,000 a year (and support at least 1 kid). and they pay their taxes.[/citation]Not enough info. Depending on situation, they probably aren't paying much if any income taxes. Plus you're not even talking about things like tax returns, government assistance, etc.

I know people that have nicer vehicles than me, and are on food stamps (well, EBT now). They go on cruises and vacations I can't afford. Why? They don't pay for food, our taxes do - and the dollar amount FAR exceeds what they actually pay into the system in taxes.
 
I find it odd that Microsoft and HP are getting the flack for this, and getting grilled by the senate of all people. You know. The people who purposefully put those loop holes into bills THEY passed and have the power to change the law?

Regardless of what you think the tax rate should be there will always be loop holes and there will NEVER be a fair and level playing field until politicians are continually monitored and taken to task for their actions. Otherwise corruption and pet favors and projects and payoffs for getting elected will never stop, and we all just have to do the best we can with the crazy messed up stuff they pass
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom