Disclaimer: I own GE stock and want the share price to go up … a lot.
The NY Time excoriated GE last week because the company paid federal income taxes in 2010.
According to the Times:
“As the company expanded abroad, the portion of its profits booked in low-tax countries such as Ireland and Singapore grew far faster … Since 2002, the company has eliminated a fifth of its work force in the United States while increasing overseas employment.
In that time, G.E.’s accumulated offshore profits have risen to $92 billion from $15 billion.”
Let’s frame the issue: GE paid no federal income taxes for 2 main reasons:
1) The company lost a boatload of money on GE Credit during the financial meltdown, and have carried over the losses. The ultimate tax dodge: lose money.
2) GE makes a ton of money outside the U.S., pays taxes to local countries and doesn’t “repatriate” the profits back to the US. That way, the company funds its international developments and keeps the $$$ away from the IRS.
Put succinctly by Seeking Alpha:
Why should GE, or any other company, have to pay U.S. tax on money earned outside the U.S.?
It makes perfect sense, from the perspective of the company and its shareholders, to keep the money outside America until the American politicians wake up and lower American tax rates to the point at which they are competitive with those in Singapore or Ireland.
GE choosing not to pay tax now by choosing to keep the money offshore isn’t really that different from a homeowner deciding not to sell his house now because he doesn’t want to pay the capital gains tax this year.
Up to a point, the decision on when to realize income is up to the taxpayer, not up to the New York Times reporter.
And whatever you might think about how influential GE or its tax department is, it’s not GE that sets the tax rate in Singapore or Ireland.
Seeking Alpha, Why G.E.’s Tax Reducing Strategies Are Legit, March 27, 2011
Note: O’Reilly hates GE … mostly because of his feud with Olberman and because he thinks that MSNBC operates as a White House press office.
See Bill and Lou Dobbs rant on GE …
The Homa Files 
March 30, 2011 at 11:50 am |
On a somewhat related topic, there are arguments to reduce or eliminate the tax on repatriated profits. Money repatriated to the US could help fund expansion in the US creating more jobs, etc. instead of continuing growth overseas.
March 30, 2011 at 1:03 pm |
Not an entirely accurate characterization KEH.
The core issues are:
1) Not whether GE repatriates the foreign earnings for taxation, but rather whether GE manipulates reporting to shift taxable earnings out of the United States to lower-rate foreign countries. It appears to do so
2) Whether GE creates (via lobbying) and uses (via a large and aggressive tax shop) uneven tax policy quirks to create an overall non-standard rate of taxation. It appears to do so
Contextually:
A) If GE claims to be all about delivering shareholder profit, fine. Compete on every field and run up the score. If GE claims to be a good corporate citizen, its walk diverges from its talk here
B) GE is increasingly a political/government-sponsored enterprise. It has adopted a closer relationship with government in response to the recessionary times. GE shareholders (and board members) should actively discuss whether this is a good thing
C) The American corporate tax rates are crushingly high – should we be surprised that companies would opt to avoid them? According to Safra Catz and John Chambers, the current tax rate is one of the reasons why US businesses have not invested the $1 trillion sitting on their balance sheets