Consumer products giant Procter & Gamble was named as one of the 7 corporations that form the ultraconservative oligopoly that controls Cincinnati. Corporate groupthink led by these 7 firms made the region America's capital of capitalism in the late 20th century.
Now P&G is suing the IRS for $435,000,000 because it has to pay taxes like everyone else.
I'm always wary of government agencies like the IRS, but the millions that P&G claims the IRS made it overpay is only a fraction of P&G's profits. The more important point though is that the IRS assessing this tax was almost certainly not erroneous (from the information that I can gather).
The disagreement involves credits for artwork P&G donated to museums, work on patents and research, and other items. A corporation expects to get tax breaks just for owning patents? It sounds like that's what P&G is claiming.
I have little doubt that this suit is really an effort to gut corporate taxes entirely. If Procter & Gamble can make the IRS pay back millions, it'll be a foot in the door for our corporate masters.
Maybe the reason the government has allowed two-thirds of American corporations to evade taxes for the past 10 years is because it knows corporations will just sue over the taxes anyway.
Can I sue Kentucky over the sales tax I have to pay every time I have to buy something?
(Source: http://www.kypost.com/content/wcposhared/story.aspx?content_id=88d7ec3b-bd33-4731-9b41-20e093ba4c36)
Monday, September 22, 2008
P&G sues because it has to pay taxes
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Tim,
ReplyDeleteYou don't pay income taxes, but lets pretend for a minute that you do. Imagine you went to H&R Block to review your tax filings and they figured out that you had paid more than you actually owed. Let's say you overpaid $1,000 a year for 10 years because you were given only one Child Tax Credit for your (hypothetical) now 10-year-old twins. What would you do? Let the IRS keep that $10,000 or would you try to get it back?
Leave it to Scheffy-poo to defend a corporation..no matter how indefensible.
ReplyDeleteComparing corporate tax credits to child tax credits is comparing apples and oranges.
Apparently the IRS had reviewed the P & G case for years and made its decision. The IRS has rules on what is creditable and what is not..hiring attorneys to file frivolous patent suits (which is a P & G specialty) apparently is not.
BTW i know P & G will have something to say about all this here, because they long ago hired a firm to search for criticism on the WWW and try to "discredit" it.
Hi Ann. Your charming presence here on the Online Lunch warms the hearts of all of Tim's readers. We are blessed to have your insight. So please tell us, what information do you have that tells you P&G's case is frivolous? Or are you, like Tim, of the mindset that you can never tax enough the likes of Procter & Gamble? Do you pay taxes or are you only a receiver, not a contributor?
ReplyDeleteAnd if P&G pays people to challenge criticism, what's your motivation for defending anything Tim writes, no matter how far off the deep end it may be?
Why do you defend all corporations Scheff??
ReplyDeleteI was going to write something here about P&G and the IRS probably both being corrupt and just being happy that they are fighting over money.....
ReplyDelete@ SHEFFBD:
I like many of the things that you write and I think some are valid an sharp. I don't agree some/most of the time but I do like to hear other views and it is good for all of us to have a dose of another perspective. Why is it that you sometimes "personally" attack Tim though? I have seen you do it a few times now and although you seem very intelligent, it appears that you are not respectful or tactful at times. This detracts from your views and credibility.
I think you can get excellent points across and remain tactful at the same time. If you want respect from intelligent persons, regardless of your views, I would ask anyone to rethink approaching discourse and comment in a way that is personally degrading. Of course, if one were to reply to a low-blow comment, I think that could be an acceptable response.