Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh but they did get to deduct under the bill. There was nothing illegal about it. This health care bill removed it so they have to now account for the additonal taxes.
When the Bush tax cuts expire you'll have to do the same thing next year. Deductions removed so you will have to react to paying more taxes so you'll either get less in your paycheck or you'll have to save more on the side. Same difference.
It was made legal but never should have been. They got a tax free subsidy and then were able to deduct that subsidy as an expense. They got free $$$ from the government than deducted it the same way they would deduct their own expenses. It was absolutely outrageous and ver should have happened in the first place.
I don't make anywhere near $250000 so my taxes won't be increasing next year.
It was made legal but never should have been. They got a tax free subsidy and then were able to deduct that subsidy as an expense. They got free $$$ from the government than deducted it the same way they would deduct their own expenses. It was absolutely outrageous and ver should have happened in the first place.
I don't make anywhere near $250000 so my taxes won't be increasing next year.
Well there is nothing on paper keeping those tax cuts. All we have so far is "a promise".
Until you see a bill passed, do not assume.
Regarding the bolded sentence above. I read that they were depreciating assets to cover the subsidy and this change required them to change the depreciation rate on those assets, hence the big writeoffs.
I gotta tell you the past subsidy was dumber than dumb. The goverment subsidy was tax free, yet the corporations was able to deduct it on their tax anyway???? And it was only for selected few. So, yes, that kind of socialism has no place in United States.
This is why there were already detailed estimates of the effect from well before the bill was passed.
Which Obama and Congress obviously ignored.. Why are they asking AFTER the bill passed, not before?
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
What was not anticipated was the magnitude of the charges that some -- such as AT&T -- elected to take.
Why was it unanticpated, they didnt listen during their lunch meetings? They arent "electing" to take the charges, they are under an obligation to maximize their profits and report proper figures per SEC regulations and fiduciary responsibilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Now, maybe they have a perfectly good rationale behind their numbers. If so, fine. But they are going to have to come down here and explain the situation,
They dont HAVE to come down and explain the situation, they were requested to come but they dont have to..
I don't make anywhere near $250000 so my taxes won't be increasing next year.
You dont think the companies you deal with will pass on their taxes to their consumers, i.e. you? I mean seriously, where do you think the money will come from?
You dont think the companies you deal with will pass on their taxes to their consumers, i.e. you? I mean seriously, where do you think the money will come from?
You dont think the companies you deal with will pass on their taxes to their consumers, i.e. you? I mean seriously, where do you think the money will come from?
They never should have gotten this in the first place I didn't see anything lowered when they got this massive amount of corporate welfare.
You dont think the companies you deal with will pass on their taxes to their consumers, i.e. you? I mean seriously, where do you think the money will come from?
Yes we have, stop lying.. We repaid those debts with new debts and tax revenue, but dont pretend they havent been paid off..
So, the financial whiz-bang endorses paying off the Visa bill by charging it to the old Mastercard and vice versa. We have never repaid any of those debts. We have merely rolled them over into a new note upon the maturity of the original note. Want to explain how that would show up in a balance sheet?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
How the HELL is that going to happen if the government keeps taking more and consumers cant spend?
What sort of silly argument is that? Do you expect that federal revenues will somehow NOT increase as the economy recovers and then expands? Do you expect that emergency support payments will NOT decrease at the same time? Do you imagine that increasing receipts and decreasing outlays will NOT bring about deficit reduction that in tandem with GDP growth will work to LOWER the debt-to-GDP ratio?
good, insurance companies are the devil anyway. I hope they all go bankrupt and then we can pick up the pieces and put together a UHC system... until then I'll just enjoy my popcorn and watch the train wreck that is American public policy
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
