1. Abbott Laboratories
Overall Tax Rate: -89.8 percent
State Tax Rate: Negative income
Federal Tax Rate: Negative income
International Tax Rate: 17.5 percent
2. Morgan Stanley
Overall Tax Rate: -45.6 percent
State Tax Rate: Negative income
Federal Tax Rate: Negative income
International Tax Rate: 34.8 percent
3. Bank of America
Overall Tax Rate: -36.3 percent
State Tax Rate: 28.8 percent
Federal Tax Rate: -159.3 percent
International Tax Rate: 109.7 percent
4. AIG
Overall Tax Rate: -27.9 percent
State Tax Rate: Negative income
Federal Tax Rate: Negative income
International Tax Rate: 5.4 percent
5. Bristol-Myers Squibb
Overall Tax Rate: -6.9 percent
State Tax Rate: Negative income
Federal Tax Rate: Negative income
International Tax Rate: 14.4 percent
6. Verizon Communications
Overall Tax Rate: -6.7 percent
State Tax Rate: -3.1 percent
Federal Tax Rate: -3.6 percent
International Tax Rate: -6 percent
7. Citigroup
Overall Tax Rate: 0.1 percent
State Tax Rate: Negative income
Federal Tax Rate: Negative income
International Tax Rate: 32.4 percent
8. Visa
Overall Tax Rate: 2.9 percent
State Tax Rate: -24.3 percent
Federal Tax Rate: 9.7 percent
International Tax Rate: 18.3 percent
9. AbbVie
Overall Tax Rate: 7.9 percent
State Tax Rate: N/A
Federal Tax Rate: N/A
International Tax Rate: 5.2 percent
10. Metlife
Overall Tax Rate: 8.9 percent
State Tax Rate: Negative income
Federal Tax Rate: Negative income
International Tax Rate: 13.5 percent
9 of these ten corporate welfare companies in fact, pay a higher rate offshore.
Abbott Laboratories, income tax expense (benefit), continuing operations
ReplyDeleteUSD $ in millions
12 months ended Dec 31, 2013 Dec 31, 2012 Dec 31, 2011 Dec 31, 2010 Dec 31, 2009
Domestic 16 198 (586) 1,462 194
Foreign 555 1,230 1,187 835 521
Current 571 1,428 601 2,297 715
Domestic (308) (483) 162 (1,068) 905
Foreign (125) (645) (293) (142) (172)
Deferred (433) (1,128) (131) (1,210) 733
Taxes on earnings from continuing operations 138 300
http://www.stock-analysis-on.net/NYSE/Company/Abbott-Laboratories/Analysis/Income-Taxes
2013 US taxes paid, 138 million.
A big reason that Verizon's effective tax rate is so low, coming in at a negative 4.8%, is largely due to accounting. The company's sped-up depreciation, severance and pension costs are large credits that contribute to pushing the company's taxes down, says Jonathan Schildkraut of Evercore. But there's also a distortion caused by the company's 55% interest in Verizon Wireless. Vodafone, which owns 45% of Verizon Wireless, pays taxes on its share, but the entire profit is reported on income. Adjusting for this, Verizon's effective tax rate is closer to 30%, the company says. Verizon is buying Vodafone's stake, which will eliminate the issue in the future. Similarly, real estate investment trusts have low effective tax rates because they pass profit to shareholders, who then pay the taxes.
ReplyDeleteAbbVie, which is based in North Chicago, Ill., will cut its overall effective tax rate from 22.6% last year to 13% in 2016 by reincorporating in Jersey, according to a regulatory filing Friday.
ReplyDeleteSo for Abbvie it's a state tax problem not a federal one. Verizon, you have 100 reasons why but those 100 reasons = negative tax liability and does so year after year. Obviously Abbott Labs has figured it out. They hit the corporate welfare list twice with the main company and the Abbvie spinoff.
ReplyDeleteHey Lou,
ReplyDeleteI don't have time to go and see if you added any more to our previous discussion on taxes as it is a work day for me, but for discussion sake, why is it up to the American people to pay for the roads that goods are transported on, the upkeep of the courts to defend that protect intellectual property rights, the Navy that protects shipping lanes and so on, for a company that wants only to come here, sell, and take their profit elsewhere? Corporations want access to our officials through lobbyists, they want "personhood" and basically they want a say in how the country is run, but they want this without having to actually make any commitment to the country they make their money in.
My best example is Walmart. If you want to sell in their giant market, you will play by their rules and they will make money off of you. For some reason, according the corporate world, it's a crime against humanity for the country to act similarly. I've read your argument that every single penny of tax will be added to the selling price, and I don't agree. This is true at some level, but not at every single level of tax and price point.
Hey Max,
DeleteDo you for one instant think Walmart pays a dime in taxes?
Look at how the price of goods and services are priced.
Included:
1. Manufacturing costs.
2. Raw material costs.
3. Transportation costs.
4. Labor, benefits costs.
5. Marketing costs.
6. Taxes, local, state, Federal.
Do you think for 1 minute that Walmart or any other business doesn't pass the cost to the customer?
I did as well as all other costs to do business. It was built into the labor rate I charged the customers. After reviewing Walmart's 10K I cannot find an after tax line item for paying more taxes.
Just saying.
p.s. The same applies to unions. They want personhood and have it. The have access to lobbyists to influence decisions and elections as now does business. And no, the union does nothing to support this country either.
We call the SCOTUS decision, leveling the playing field.
You missed my point a little on Walmart, my point was that they run a marketplace, the run the store, transport the goods, stock the shelves and so on. They also, in contrast to any local retailer, will ruthlessly demand compliance from anyone who wants to sell merchandise in their marketplace. They can do this becuase they are so big. A discussion that I can never get anyone to participate in is that everything has a cost. As a person who doesn't own a business, it annoys me that over 3 decades now, we have destroyed the working class. As we've said before, we got cheap shit, and now we have no jobs.
DeleteCompanies like Walmart, McDonalds, and many others, pay such shitty wages and provide no benefits and tax payers like me have been picking up part of that tab for a long time. As a business owner, you see taxation as unfair period. There's not room for any more discussion. Taxes=wrong. End of discussion.
The bit about unions doesn't add up. Lobbyist or not, it's done them no good for 30 years as we are historically at the lowest period of membership ever. With unions, before they got too big, powerful and corrupt, we had a much better distribution of profit. Now, we have no unions, we have a massive income gap, increased productivty and no gains for workers. We also have economic growth of less than 3% which S&P attributes to the income gap.
everything has a cost. But, this discussion is about the tiniest piece of the equation possible. Hopefully they will end all taxes because as you say, large corporations aren't paying them already, just imagine how much better the country will be if corps pay no taxes. Surely we will all enjoy even lower prices.
Max, it's what people want even today with shitty jobs. people want cheap. How may people would spend 5 grand on a LED 50" TV made in America? No one.
DeleteI could care less of they doubled corporate income tax. It all filters down to the consumer.
It also forces corporations to seek other avenues to cut those taxes, move from Illinois to Nevada and if that doesn't do it, out of the country. Isn't the global marketplace wonderful?
As a side note, in the past the unions collected dues and paid out benefits when workers went on strike. Today, they spend the money visiting Washington and buying votes. No different from business.
"Today, they spend the money visiting Washington and buying votes. No different from business."
DeleteOne difference being that business gets something for it's money. Unions continue to decline.
I would disagree, they got the president they wanted.
DeleteDo people finally realize that Unions are as self serving as business?
This study indicates that companies moving overseas actually create U.S. jobs.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-04/companies-expanding-overseas-create-u-s-jobs-study-says.html
No Mick it doesn't say that. It says international companies operating overseas create US jobs. That is because by operating internationally they create more demand creating more jobs here. Yes I realize many of Americas big companies are international players, but operating internationally and moving jobs offshore are two different animals.
DeleteI thought that expanding overseas and operation overseas were the same thing. Don't most companies expand overseas by merging with an existing foreign company? I guess I'm confused.
DeleteBut that would be different then moving jobs offshore. if a company merges with an offshore company provided it didn't move it's American operations abroad it just took on overseas jobs/employees it didn't have before
Delete