OldGimletEye Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 7 hours ago, unpaid comintern said: fair point, should be trying to break up, regulate, tax the fuck out of or outright nationalize ALL of the companies From what I recall, Amazon wasn't able to get away with its shenanigans in Germany, like it did in the US and the UK, because the labor unions in Germany hold more clout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 True. I have a few acquaintances working for Amazon. It is one of the larger employers here. There are regular strikes at the Amazon distribution center, at least every few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 Unless I missed a post, I feel like guys still haven’t touched on the real problem with Amazon….. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 50 years from now, historians might just explain 2018 with this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKitttenGuard Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 46 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Unless I missed a post, I feel like guys still haven’t touched on the real problem with Amazon….. Corporate taxes are not company specific. The business of retail is difficult for some of the issues are a result that opening something like a mall were more for tax evasion, at least in some areas of the country, than demand that needed to be created. The internet is an infrastructure that allow for more easier shopping with shipping. Amazon does have its issue outside taxes but the whole area has really been messed up for decades overall. That should make sense also if you think there is a over-consumer problem in the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 30, 2018 Author Share Posted March 30, 2018 It took a lot of years for Amazon to become profitable. Analysts sneered at the stock for quite a long time and suggested it would never be profitable. It will pay taxes for a lot of years. I loathe Anne Coulter. Seeing her apology framed around Holy Week made me just want to puke and made my hatred even more visceral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mlle. Zabzie Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 9 hours ago, TheKitttenGuard said: 2. I am mainly digesting that we are dealing with Amazon potential and not actually liability. The actual paper work and calculation will take nearly the whole year and Federal Taxes will be due much earlier and they will want to avoid Penalty and Interest. 3. On the NOL, what is the greater purpose of allowing what can be one bad year to defray paying taxes over several years? It gives the appearance a year can used for the loses (though that has its perils). 1. In my Supreme Glorious Leader for 4 hours whom rule is permanant is that an individual who will own a news company will have that as their only ownership. They cannot own, be on boards or own stocks not related to their own company. I do not think this will be necessarily as they are today and other changes are needed to balance benefit/cost of the new system. Overall I think news company should have as little overlap with other business as is possible. Yes Trump should be attacked for going after a company based on the News coverage of a unrelated company. Will not be harmful to also talk about a tax system that is increasingly regressive. I do not think discussing that is supporting Trump targeting. Methodology ramblings Reveal hidden contents Thanks providing some insight into proable motivation in the presentation of reporting as it concern the Koch Bros been targeting Amazon. I attempt to find articles I think will look to present more favorable a topic like the paying of Corporate Tax. I presented the article for I am thinking in general something like Fox business will want to present the reasoning why as favorable as possible. I will have to put greater care in that reasoning. 2. Not sure I follow you here. In most tax systems taxable persons (including corporations) pay estimated tax on a regular (in the US quarterly) basis. Separately public companies have a reporting obligation with the SEC where they have to file GAAP financial statements (audited annually on the 10K, quarterly unaudited 10Qs). GAAP tax accounts (including deferred tax assets/liabilities) do not equal cash tax. There is footnote reconciliation that helps you bridge that, so you should always read the tax footnote if you want a better idea of what's going on. It is true that though corporate tax returns are due 4/15, most corporations actually file on an extended basis, so won't put in their final consolidated return until 10/15. They will pretty much have paid everything that is due and more though as of 4/15. As a note, most of those same big corporations are under continuous audit, either through the CAP program (lamentably no longer open to new applicants) or just because they are audited on a relatively current basis. 3. Most tax systems allow some carryfoward (and sometimes carry back) of net operating losses from one year to another, in one form or another. Under law in effect prior to 2018, losses in the US could be carried back 2 years and carried forward 20. If carried forward, the losses could effectively offset 90% of taxable income (because of the operation of the corporate AMT). Currently, post TJCA, pre-2018 losses can be carried forward 20 years from incurrence and effectively offset 100% of taxable income in post 2017 years, but new NOLs can be carried forward indefinitely and offset only 80% of taxable income. (All of this is pretty high level btw). The theory is to allow corporate taxpayers to smooth their tax liability over time. Put differently, theoretically, it helps to alleviate the artificiality of measuring tax liability on an annual basis. Most of these systems also have rules in place to prevent trafficking in losses. The US has a rule that says if a corporation has an "ownership change" (really generally defined as a 50% change in ownership among 5% or more holders, with the public treated as a single 5% or more holder over a rolling three year period - but honestly it's a mind numbingly complex calculation), it can only use an amount of its NOL equal to its equity value multiplied by the LT tax exempt rate (subject to some exceptions). Other jurisdictions have a straight loss of NOLs on any sale of a company. There are lots of ways to cut this. You could certainly as a matter of policy simply stick to the annual accounting period. You could allow carrybacks, but not carryforwards, but only for corporations in bankruptcy. You could instead try to have the company's income match up better with its deductions (e.g., the 100% expensing rule we have now is economic nonsense). But having an NOL is not proof that a company is doing something nefarious - just that it lost money for tax purposes. Note that if it is not anticipated that a company will generate enough income to use an NOL, GAAP requires that the company put a valuation allowance against the deferred tax asset created by the NOL. Companies love it when they can release a valuation allowance and/or make a DTA current. Does great things for their GAAP income. 1. Look - I really disagree with this. I am extremely wary of any limitation on the press and ownership thereof by any regulatory body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 20 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: It took a lot of years for Amazon to become profitable. Analysts sneered at the stock for quite a long time and suggested it would never be profitable. It will pay taxes for a lot of years. I loathe Anne Coulter. Seeing her apology framed around Holy Week made me just want to puke and made my hatred even more visceral. I’m not sure Ann Coulter has ever apologized for anything she’s ever said, but you’re thinking about Laura Ingraham, who is a talentless two bit hack, and yes, the apology was disgusting, as were the comments she was apologizing for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/trump-golfing.html You Might as Well Take the Rest of the Day Off Because the President Already Did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 42 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: It took a lot of years for Amazon to become profitable. Analysts sneered at the stock for quite a long time and suggested it would never be profitable. It will pay taxes for a lot of years. I loathe Anne Coulter. Seeing her apology framed around Holy Week made me just want to puke and made my hatred even more visceral. The only reason Amazon is profitable is because of AWS. Their server farms keep them afloat. They lose money on almost every sale at amazon.com, as do pretty much every big online retailer. I work for one and our goal is to break even in online sales, and that would be a huge success in the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 30, 2018 Author Share Posted March 30, 2018 27 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: I’m not sure Ann Coulter has ever apologized for anything she’s ever said, but you’re thinking about Laura Ingraham, who is a talentless two bit hack, and yes, the apology was disgusting, as were the comments she was apologizing for. Ugh, I meant Laura Ingraham, I did, I did, honestly! My fingers have a mind of their own! One of the first times I saw Ingraham speak, during Trump's campaign, she bragged about her Polish grandparents, and that's when I started to loathe her. I thought to myself, way to go, lady, make me ashamed of my heritage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 30, 2018 Author Share Posted March 30, 2018 Andrew McCabe, gearing up for his lawsuit over his firing, decided to open a GoFundMe page to raise $125,000 for legal fees. When the money was raised the same day, the request was raised to $250,000, so $400,00 got pledged as the word got around! Looking forward to the lawsuit! https://www.gofundme.com/andrewmccabelegaldefensefund eta: $446,418 in 23 hours! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Queen Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 1 minute ago, Fragile Bird said: Andrew McCabe, gearing up for his lawsuit over his firing, decided to open a GoFundMe page to raise $125,000 for legal fees. When the money was raised the same day, the request was raised to $250,000, so $400,00 got pledged as the word got around! Looking forward to the lawsuit! https://www.gofundme.com/andrewmccabelegaldefensefund They're up to $449,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 25 minutes ago, aceluby said: The only reason Amazon is profitable is because of AWS. Their server farms keep them afloat. They lose money on almost every sale at amazon.com, as do pretty much every big online retailer. I work for one and our goal is to break even in online sales, and that would be a huge success in the market. Don’t a lot of these online companies work like sports franchise, in which they aren’t making great profits, and are sometimes losing money (Netflix, for example is like $20B in the hole), but their equity growth vastly outpaces any losses? Also, still not seeing anyone hit the nail on the head when it comes to Amazon, but TKG scratched the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 18 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: Ugh, I meant Laura Ingraham, I did, I did, honestly! My fingers have a mind of their own! It’s an easy mistake to make. Just say “Generic Conservative Blond Number 27” and you’re probably correct. Also, the joke is there, and it’s so easy to make, but I must resist. Quote One of the first times I saw Ingraham speak, during Trump's campaign, she bragged about her Polish grandparents, and that's when I started to loathe her. I thought to myself, way to go, lady, make me ashamed of my heritage. Part of the beauty of being a complete mutt is I can claim my ancestry when it does good things and ignore other parts when it’s misbehaving. In essence, I’ve won 11 World Cups! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Don’t a lot of these online companies work like sports franchise, in which they aren’t making great profits, and are sometimes losing money (Netflix, for example is like $20B in the hole), but their equity growth vastly outpaces any losses? Also, still not seeing anyone hit the nail on the head when it comes to Amazon, but TKG scratched the surface. I'm not 100% sure how all of that works and I'm sure there are others far more knowledgeable than me on the subject. But one of the reasons that for years people thought Amazon would crumble is because they have never been profitable with online sales, which was their biggest business. It was only when they began selling cloud computing via AWS that they actually turned a profit. They are still looking for ways to make online sales profitable, but without AWS Amazon would have crumbled years ago. You can't run at a loss forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 The very real consequences of the Trump administration’s chaos in foreign policy. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna859966?__twitter_impression=true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted March 30, 2018 Share Posted March 30, 2018 3 hours ago, aceluby said: I'm not 100% sure how all of that works and I'm sure there are others far more knowledgeable than me on the subject. But one of the reasons that for years people thought Amazon would crumble is because they have never been profitable with online sales, which was their biggest business. It was only when they began selling cloud computing via AWS that they actually turned a profit. They are still looking for ways to make online sales profitable, but without AWS Amazon would have crumbled years ago. You can't run at a loss forever. I think you if you have the capital reserves and the rate of growth is greater than your losses, but like you this is not my field. 2 hours ago, Mexal said: The very real consequences of the Trump administration’s chaos in foreign policy. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna859966?__twitter_impression=true Great. Also, here come some more firings..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted March 31, 2018 Share Posted March 31, 2018 On 3/29/2018 at 5:26 PM, Martell Spy said: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/conservative-economists-turning-back-to-debt-hysteria.html Conservative Economists Turning Back to Debt Hysteria Oh, I can’t help myself here. As conservative sorts of people know, I’ve at times thrown a fuckin’ fit about about these guys, particularly Cochrane and Taylor. For conservative sorts of people that are not aware: Cochrane is a professor of finance at U of Chicago. Now being specializing in finance doesn’t obviously preclude Cochrane from making comments about macroeconomic policy. But it would be nice, if he had at least reviewed some of the basic material I know he learned about at some point and forgot about. Back in 2009 he and Eugene Fama wrote some completely fuckin’ goofy opinion piece asserting that “a dollar spent by the government is one that can’t be spent by the private sector”. That is completely utter horseshit and its based some kind hoary old MV = Py thingy, that even hardcore monetarist don’t believe in. The amount of money in the economy will depend on the flow of spending and the interest rate. So no it’s not true that that a “dollar spent by the government can’t be spent by the private sector.” Cochrane and Fama should have known better. But, I guess some guys gotta play team conservative Republican. And then Cochrane went around inflationista fear mongering. And when that didn’t pan out, he started up with a bunch of Neo Fisherian horseshit. And when Woodford respond the Neo Fisherian result doesn’t hold once you relax the rational expectations assumption, the Neo Fisherian result doesn’t hold, what does Cochrane do? He writes some fucking nonsense like, “and when your opponent isn’t using Rational Expectations, the battle is half won!” Bullshit. I think most people understand that Rational Expectations is something you jam in a model because it’s easy to work with and because it’s better than not modeling expectations at all. But nobody, should think it’s a realistic or the best way to model expectations. And then there is John Taylor. Taylor’s whole spiel basically is that it’s important for government to strictly follow rules. He doesn’t like what he has seen as the discretion exercised by the FED and he’s been pushing the Bankruptcy only thing with Dodd-Frank. Now, I think rules based policy is important. But, the rules aren’t more important than the policy target. If you say your going to anchor inflation exceptions at 2%, then it’s important that you anchor them. We are lucky that Yellen and the FED pretty muched ignored Taylor’s advice. And if your following a rule that doesn’t get you there, then really what in the hell is the point? And he makes the same mistake with Dodd Frank. Nobody, I think want’s to do Tarp again. And certainly, bankruptcy court should be the preferred option for failing financial institutions. But, the bankruptcy only option is not credible or time consistent during a financial crises and financial institutions know it. So in those cases you have to have something like the OLA where bankruptcy is just not feasiable. Under Taylors bankruptcy only thing, the whole system risk breaking down, putting you in a situation of doing Tarp again. And no sitting president is going to let the bottom just drop out of the economy. Anyway, I love how in discussing the US future debt problems, there is no discussion, about fixing the US overpriced healthcare system, which would fix a lot of problems. And seriously fixing social security shouldn’t cause that many helmet fires. Nope, its just shred the US’s safety net. Now all these guys, hold various prestigious academic positions, and I’d assume they wouldn’t want to be mixed in with idiotic supply side clowns like Laffer and Larry Kudlow. But it seems to me, despite their academic credentials, that’s exactly what they are doing. There is little evidence that tax cuts are as powerful as they imagine, including a paper written by their right of center colleague Martin Feldstein about the Reagan tax cuts. If Taylor, Cochrane had any credibility, they’d recommend that the corporate tax bill be at least revenue neutral, which puts you somewhere between 25% - 30% as the top marginal rate. I guess some people just gotta play team Republican all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted March 31, 2018 Author Share Posted March 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, Triskele said: Just gave $100. Never given up money more glutonously (sp) in my life. I will eat things and people to give money to this cause. Did you notice what the level is now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.