Re: ;-)

1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #342,199 by beepster 5/2/11 10:35:17 PM Reply	Re: ;-) But the poor corporation is taxed multiple times, with excise taxes, payroll taxes..why should they have to pay a higher net tax rate than Obama? After all, he's rich! Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,200 by Another Scott 5/2/11 10:40:32 PM Reply	...
Post #342,201 by beepster 5/2/11 10:48:51 PM Reply	Re: ... You seemed to like that argument before... ;-) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.

exxonmobile 10.7 billion broken out - (boxley) - (38) - May 2, 2011, 11:11:22 AM EDT

Um, so they count FICA, etc., as taxes paid??? -NT - (Another Scott) - (37) - May 2, 2011, 11:14:52 AM EDT

They can because they do - (beepster) - (31) - May 2, 2011, 11:59:25 AM EDT

Interesting - (S1mon_Jester) - (2) - May 2, 2011, 12:07:27 PM EDT

50/50 - (Steve Lowe) - (1) - May 2, 2011, 12:14:12 PM EDT

Re: 50/50 - (S1mon_Jester) - May 2, 2011, 01:06:03 PM EDT

Is FICA a tax on their profits? No, it isn't. - (Another Scott) - (27) - May 2, 2011, 02:32:18 PM EDT

So are you - (beepster) - (13) - May 2, 2011, 02:48:37 PM EDT

The topic is Exxon's earnings and taxes on same. HTH. -NT - (Another Scott) - (12) - May 2, 2011, 03:07:26 PM EDT

Really? Cause I read in Box's post.... - (beepster) - (11) - May 2, 2011, 03:53:00 PM EDT

It has nothing to do with how much tax they pay on earnings. - (Another Scott) - (10) - May 2, 2011, 04:18:58 PM EDT

Why not? - (beepster) - (9) - May 2, 2011, 04:54:02 PM EDT

You need to review the definition of "earnings", I think. -NT - (Another Scott) - (8) - May 2, 2011, 05:21:04 PM EDT

I don't think so... - (beepster) - (7) - May 2, 2011, 05:24:54 PM EDT

Heh... - (Another Scott) - (6) - May 2, 2011, 05:45:04 PM EDT

Ah, I see.. - (beepster) - (5) - May 2, 2011, 05:53:59 PM EDT

Riddle me this, Batman. - (Another Scott) - (4) - May 2, 2011, 06:10:54 PM EDT

And my other point.... - (beepster) - (3) - May 2, 2011, 07:14:46 PM EDT

The thread's not big enough to handle all of them... ;-) -NT - (Another Scott) - May 2, 2011, 08:03:46 PM EDT

I'll vilify them just as much as the Oil Companies. - (folkert) - (1) - May 2, 2011, 09:34:57 PM EDT

Beep's a big Bernie Sanders supporter, donchaknow. - (Another Scott) - May 2, 2011, 11:22:18 PM EDT

yes it is - (boxley) - (12) - May 2, 2011, 08:45:56 PM EDT

No it isn't. - (Another Scott) - (11) - May 2, 2011, 09:46:56 PM EDT

FICA - (beepster) - (4) - May 2, 2011, 10:23:41 PM EDT

;-) - (Another Scott) - (3) - May 2, 2011, 10:28:31 PM EDT

Re: ;-) - (beepster) - (2) - May 2, 2011, 10:35:17 PM EDT

... -NT - (Another Scott) - (1) - May 2, 2011, 10:40:32 PM EDT

Re: ... - (beepster) - May 2, 2011, 10:48:51 PM EDT

feds dont take out fica for their employeees they are exempt - (boxley) - (5) - May 3, 2011, 07:28:50 AM EDT

You're wrong about that, too. - (Another Scott) - (4) - May 3, 2011, 07:36:32 AM EDT

Only because he stated an absolute.. - (beepster) - (3) - May 3, 2011, 08:52:09 AM EDT

No, he was wrong because he was wrong. HTH. -NT - (Another Scott) - (2) - May 3, 2011, 10:02:21 AM EDT

Forgive us for being old... - (beepster) - (1) - May 3, 2011, 10:31:15 AM EDT

:-) I'm getting up there too. -NT - (Another Scott) - May 3, 2011, 11:19:10 AM EDT

is it a tax? Yeah because you cant opt out as a company -NT - (boxley) - (4) - May 2, 2011, 12:31:26 PM EDT

Not sure that's true - (S1mon_Jester) - (3) - May 2, 2011, 01:14:54 PM EDT

rare corner case for a very few employers - (boxley) - (2) - May 2, 2011, 01:21:08 PM EDT

Ahem...didn't argue that it wasn't rare. - (S1mon_Jester) - (1) - May 2, 2011, 01:23:01 PM EDT

Dunno if they do now, but ... - (mmoffitt) - May 2, 2011, 02:05:01 PM EDT

Just the facts, ma'am.
191 ms