The Drive-a-Toyota Act
in [Toyota]
|
From: mrv on 10 Jul 2007 12:51 On Jul 10, 4:36 am, Bill Putney <b...(a)kinez.net> wrote: > m...(a)kluge.net wrote: > > This is now OT, but according to a 2004 US GAO report, between 1996 > > and 2000, 61% of American corporations and 70% of foreign-owned > > corporations paid no US federal income taxes. For the 2000 tax year, > > 93.9% of US-controled companies paid less than 5% of its income in > > taxes. > >http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2004/04/08/most-companies-paid-... > >http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2004/04/11/most_us_firm... > > original/full GAO report: > >http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04358.pdf > > Are there not other taxes (besides income taxes) and fees that > corporations do pay that allow a little sleight of hand in the picture > that's painted when quoting such figures (i.e., just income tax)? Also, > ignoring that, the very people that would be in favor of hitting up > businesses with more taxes, costs, and penalties would be the very ones > who complained after the fact that businesses are moving off shore and > would blame, instead of themsleves, the people who were in favor of > giving businesses incenctives for staying here and keeping business > costs low. I'm not saying whether or not the income tax data is a good thing or a bad thing, or that anything should or should not be changed. (that is way OT for this list.) I was just pointing out that should the supposed list of corporate income tax filings be found, and if Toyota is really on that list, that Toyota would be with the majority of other corporations in not having paid corporate income taxes. (So Toyota shouldn't be singled out of the pack... "when in Rome...") But so far I have not seen any proof of such a list, nor that Toyota is on it. I can say that Toyota does pay taxes to someone, though - it's on their annual investor report (see the Financial section). http://www.toyota.co.jp/en/ir/library/annual/pdf/2006/
From: Mike Hunter on 10 Jul 2007 15:43 Corporations that show a loss for the year obviously do not pay corporate "income" taxes. ;) mike "Bill Putney" <bptn(a)kinez.net> wrote in message news:5fgun8F3ceqeuU1(a)mid.individual.net... > mrv(a)kluge.net wrote: > >> This is now OT, but according to a 2004 US GAO report, between 1996 >> and 2000, 61% of American corporations and 70% of foreign-owned >> corporations paid no US federal income taxes. For the 2000 tax year, >> 93.9% of US-controled companies paid less than 5% of its income in >> taxes.
From: Mike Hunter on 10 Jul 2007 15:45 Search the IRS site for the information you seek, WBMA. mike <mrv(a)kluge.net> wrote in message news:1184039815.760829.312570(a)w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > On Jul 5, 2:08 pm, "Mike Hunter" <mikehu...(a)mailcity.com> wrote: >> Those if favor of "tax" assistance do not think of the fact they are the >> ones paying the tax money that is used to "assist," and that is going to >> a >> foreign corporation that pays NO US federal corporate income taxes ;) >> > > This is now OT, but according to a 2004 US GAO report, between 1996 > and 2000, 61% of American corporations and 70% of foreign-owned > corporations paid no US federal income taxes. For the 2000 tax year, > 93.9% of US-controled companies paid less than 5% of its income in > taxes. > http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2004/04/08/most-companies-paid-no-taxes.aspx > http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2004/04/11/most_us_firms_paid_no_income_taxes_in_90s/ > original/full GAO report: > http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04358.pdf > > So, although I haven't found a site that publicizes US tax records, > since the majority of companies owned or operated in the US did not > pay US federal income taxes in 1996-2000, that the odds are in your > favor for truth if you say that corporation X didn't pay federal > taxes... > > (I could not find data on individual firms' taxes paid, nor on state/ > local income or property taxes, nor employment taxes...) >
From: Mike Hunter on 10 Jul 2007 16:30 You have said that several times but I'm not ignoring anything of the sort. Japanese and American Corporation pay applicable state and local taxes but American corporations also pay US federal corporate taxes on profits but Japanese corporations do not because of tax credit for taxes paid in Japan. Sure their are tax advantage to Japanese corporations, at least in the US. Corporations in Japan, that return profits earned in other counties get an after tax rebate on each vehicle, as "capital" return. They also get paid an after tax rebate for every vehicle they export or build in other countries. They do not call it "Japan Incorporated" for nothing Japanese corporations do not enjoy the same tax advantages in European countries, that they enjoy in the US however. The profits made in Europe are taxed in Europe because Japanese taxes are not allowed as a credit as they are in the US. European countries need the money to pay for all that socialism "free stuff," and the thirty hour work weeks That is why Japanese vehicle sales are not nearly as high, as a percentage of the market in Europe as they are vis a v European and US manufactures operating in Europe, even though Toyota Honda etal make many models worldwide that are suitable for the European market, than do the American corporations make vehicles in Europe, for the European market. All company profits are treated the same in Europe, whether they are earned by a European company of a foreign company. This has been pointed out to you several time but like with most subjects on which you choose to comment of which you have little or no knowledge, you prefer to believe what you want to believe. That's you privilege but you opinion does not make others postings incorrect Mike "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ykKki.40089$sq4.1381(a)trnddc05... > C. E. White wrote: > <...> >> Mike ignores the fact that Toyota does business in the US through a >> number of wholly and partially owned subsidiaries. All of these are >> incorporated in the US and subject to state and local income taxes. No >> doubt Toyota plays accounting games to avoid US taxes to the extent >> possible, but like any other company operating in the US, they are >> subject to US taxes. > > There may be tax treaties between the US and Japan that apply to Toyota as > well as the Michigan 3. However, Japan's corporate tax rate is higher than > the US's. So there is no net benefit to Toyota to avoid US taxes. > > Jeff >
From: Jeff on 10 Jul 2007 16:39
Mike Hunter wrote: > You have said that several times but I'm not ignoring anything of the sort. > Japanese and American Corporation pay applicable state and local taxes but > American corporations also pay US federal corporate taxes on profits but > Japanese corporations do not because of tax credit for taxes paid in Japan. Correct. But Toyota owns several American corporations that pay US income taxes. > Sure their are tax advantage to Japanese corporations, at least in the US. > Corporations in Japan, that return profits earned in other counties get an > after tax rebate on each vehicle, as "capital" return. They also get paid > an after tax rebate for every vehicle they export or build in other > countries. They do not call it "Japan Incorporated" for nothing Japanese companies also face a higher tax rate than corporations in any other country. > Japanese corporations do not enjoy the same tax advantages in European > countries, that they enjoy in the US however. The profits made in Europe > are taxed in Europe because Japanese taxes are not allowed as a credit as > they are in the US. European countries need the money to pay for all that > socialism "free stuff," and the thirty hour work weeks Yet the American subsidies don't get a Japanese tax credit because they are American companies that happen to be owned by a Japanese company. > That is why Japanese vehicle sales are not nearly as high, as a percentage > of the market in Europe as they are vis a v European and US manufactures > operating in Europe, even though Toyota Honda etal make many models > worldwide that are suitable for the European market, than do the American > corporations make vehicles in Europe, for the European market. All company > profits are treated the same in Europe, whether they are earned by a > European company of a foreign company. No, because the Europeans are smart enough to know that they lose jobs when they products from non-European companies or companies that don't make cars in Europe, like Ford, GM, Peugeot and BMW do. (Toyota and Honda import a relatively high percentage of their vehicles into Europe, too). > This has been pointed out to you several time but like with most subjects on > which you choose to comment of which you have little or no knowledge, you > prefer to believe what you want to believe. That's you privilege but you > opinion does not make others postings incorrect Look in the mirror. Perhaps this will help you remember: What does the first digit of the VIN represent? JEff > Mike > > > "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:ykKki.40089$sq4.1381(a)trnddc05... >> C. E. White wrote: >> <...> >>> Mike ignores the fact that Toyota does business in the US through a >>> number of wholly and partially owned subsidiaries. All of these are >>> incorporated in the US and subject to state and local income taxes. No >>> doubt Toyota plays accounting games to avoid US taxes to the extent >>> possible, but like any other company operating in the US, they are >>> subject to US taxes. >> There may be tax treaties between the US and Japan that apply to Toyota as >> well as the Michigan 3. However, Japan's corporate tax rate is higher than >> the US's. So there is no net benefit to Toyota to avoid US taxes. >> >> Jeff >> > > |