Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dave rose who wrote (5202)	2/22/2001 6:30:57 PM
From: Mr. Whist	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 59480

(In 1994) a House of Representatives investigative team discovered that federal environmental cleanup and defense contractors had been milking federal taxpayers for millions of dollars in entertainment, recreation, and party expenses. Martin Marietta Corporation charged the Pentagon $263,000 for a Smokey Robinson concert, $20,000 for the purchase of golf balls, and $7,500 for a 1993 office Christmas party. Ecology and Environment, Inc., of Lancaster, New York, spent $243,000 of funds designated for environmental cleanup on "employee morale" and $37,000 on tennis lessons, bike races, golf tournaments, and other entertainment. Such activities give new meaning to the term "corporate welfare." (Preceding from the Cato report, which I linked to in previous post.) Right. The less taxes these corporations pay, the better off America is.

To: dave rose who wrote (5202)	2/23/2001 12:09:16 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 59480

Although there were ancient forms of corporations, the modern form, primarily aimed at furthering economic enterprise, was an invention of the 19th century, and was immediately treated with suspicion by existing economic interests. The corporation is a person under the law, which is the rationale for its liability to the income tax. Although a person, it is not competent, and therefore its affairs are under the direction of a board. All of this is an expedient legal fiction to cure some of the defects of partnerships, where, for example, any partner may be liable for debts incurred on behalf of the business. Its primary use is in insulating the directors against liability except for malfeasance, and expediting the selling of equity shares. The liability to the income tax was a silly side effect, in the pursuit of multiple sources of tax revenue. Sole proprietorships, like the corner auto shop, or partnerships, like law firms, have no such burden to pay an additional tax on the revenues of the firm. Taxes on profits are taken when an actual person receives them as profits. In the case of corporations, dividends are always subject to taxation, and therefore a corporate tax on profits is a form of double taxation. If one argues that not all profits are split as dividends, some are put back into the business, then one asks what is wrong with expanding the business, or improving depreciated assets, without incurring the costs of loans? Why tax profits that are put to a productive use?