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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (40489)	9/18/2005 5:15:01 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 90947

"Eli Lilly said that several factors had depressed its U.S. profit, and Pfizer said that it was following the intent of the law." Knew there had to be an explanation. I was wondering if it might not have been the old "several factors"--which I too have run into from time to time even while following the "intent of the law"... The intent of the law (in my mind) has always been to protect my selfish interests. This involves several factors as one might imagine... Anybody interested in a two billion dollar dinner and DANCE!?

To: Solon who wrote (40489)	9/18/2005 5:16:55 PM
From: Constant Reader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Puerto Rican Pharmaceuticals DO NOT pay Federal Taxes and they DO NOT pay import duties back to the mainland. They DO pay a small stipend to the Puerto Rican Territory. Import duties? Of course not, Puerto Rico is not a foreign land, it is part of the United States of America, a commonwealth. I think you already know that, so I wonder why you mention import duties? While I appreciate the fact that you have repeatedly made and demonstrated, that pharmaceutical companies enjoy significant tax advantages by locating in Puerto, you have overlooked the reason for that: Unemployment is widespread in Puerto Rico, it has virtually no natural resources but it does have one of the largest populations in the Caribbean. If you go back to the legislation that enabled all those tax preferences, I think you will discover that the primary motivation was job creation, something made easier by concentrating on an industry that does not rely on nearby natural resources, that can bring in the raw materials it uses relatively inexpensively and ship the product out easily. If the drug companies had to pay taxes equivalent to locating in New York, Washington, or New Mexico, they would not be in Puerto Rico but they would be in New York, Washington, or New Mexico. And thousands of Puerto Ricans that are currently employed by them, or employed providing services to those companies and their employees, would be out of work and on the dole. I don't know if it is true any more, but a few years ago (which probably means a decade or more ago because I lose track of time), one out of every four food stamp recipients in the United States of America lived in Puerto Rico.