Go Home

Due to a recent server outage, our video archives are currently unavailable. We are working as fast as we can to remedy this. Thanks for your understanding.

Get Adobe Flash player

DOWNLOADS: (598)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (2408)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
Embed

The Young Turks' Cenk Uygur filling in for Ed Schultz talked to former Labor Secretary under President Clinton Robert Reich about the recent request by U.S. companies for a tax holiday on the over $1 trillion in assets they have sitting offshore.

Dodging Repatriation Tax Lets U.S. Companies Bring Home Multinational Cash:

At the White House on Dec. 15, business executives asked President Obama for a tax holiday that would help them tap more than $1 trillion of offshore earnings, much of it sitting in island tax havens.

The money -- including hundreds of billions in profits that U.S. companies attribute to overseas subsidiaries to avoid taxes -- is supposed to be taxed at up to 35 percent when it’s brought home, or “repatriated.” Executives including John T. Chambers of Cisco Systems Inc. say a tax break would return a flood of cash and boost the economy.

What nobody’s saying publicly is that U.S. multinationals are already finding legal ways to avoid that tax. Over the years, they’ve brought cash home, tax-free, employing strategies with nicknames worthy of 1970s conspiracy thrillers -- including “the Killer B” and “the Deadly D.”

Read on...

Uygur asked Reich what solutions there are when we have one party that is a wholly owned subsidiary of big business as the Republicans are and too many Democrats willing to feed off of the same trough. Reich pointed to the obvious, which is campaign finance reform.

Transcript below the fold.

Cenk Uygur and Robert Reich on Corporate Tax Avoidance and the Need for Campaign Finance Reform

UYGUR: But we start tonight with the request by corporate America for a tax break for over $1 trillion they have sitting off shore. In a meeting with president, they asked for a tax holiday so that they can bring the money back into the country without paying their full share of taxes.

I love the terms they use. Wouldn’t you like to take a holiday from your taxes?

When big business does it, it’s not tax evasion, its tax avoidance. I’m sure we’d all like to avoid our taxes, but we don’t have the lobbying power of multinational corporations behind us. And we don’t have a whole political party devoted to making us richer. In case you’ve been living in a cave in the last 30 years, that would be the Republican Party.

Companies are playing a shell game, aided and abetted by the GOP, where they take money in and out country, depending on our tax laws, to make it appear as if they really didn’t make any money here. One common trick is to say that they made all their money in Bermuda, where they have to pay almost no taxes, but that all of their costs were here. Very convenient, of course.

So, in the end, we have a situation where ExxonMobil made $70 -- I’m sorry, $37.3 billion in profits in 2009 and paid zero dollars in U.S. taxes. Bank of America made $4.4 billion in profits, and not only did they pay nothing in taxes, the U.S. government owes them $1.9 billion.

I don’t know how they do that.

And GE, the parent company of MSNBC, in full disclosure, made pretax profits of $10.3 billion and somehow has a tax credit of $1.1 billion.

So I paid more taxes last year than the company that owns all of this? Now, does that mean the companies are unpatriotic and immoral? No.

You see, the most important thing to understand is that companies don’t have nationalities and they don’t have morals. They’re not immoral actors, they’re amoral machines. They’re profit-making robots.

They’re not allowed to have a soul or have feelings. If an executive paid the company’s full taxes out of his patriotic duty, he’d be removed from his post. That’s not how it works.

And remember, Google’s whole mantra is, "Don’t be evil." And they avoided $3.1 billion in taxes in the last three years by doing these same kinds of tax tricks.

Why? Because they’re legally bound to make as much money as possible for their shareholders.

When we had a ban on companies doing business with Iran, Halliburton set up an office in Tehran, Iran. They did it anyway. Their CEO at the time was this man. You might remember him. He’s Dick Cheney.

Later, Halliburton would move its official headquarters to Dubai to avoid U.S. taxes, while continuing to rake in huge contracts from the American government as a so-called American company.

So what’s the answer?

First, we have to recognize the problem. Politicians who talk about being "pro-business" are usually using it as an excuse to give corporations tax breaks. By the way, some of which gets funneled back to him in the form of campaign donations.

So let’s get this straight. No one’s anti-business. We want our big and small companies to do well so they hire more people. But at the same time, we don’t want people using the excuse of being pro-business to funnel our tax dollars to multinational corporations.

Most of those guys that are doing the hiring, these so-called American companies, are doing it abroad anyway. Look, the Economic Policy Institute says that American companies created less than a million jobs here in the U.S., but created 1.4 million jobs overseas last year. So you can see where their priorities are.

If we give a tax break to a company, it must be to specifically create jobs here, period. If they don’t, they can go get their tax break from Bermuda or Singapore.

No more American taxpayer money to finance multinational corporations. There has to be a separation of business and state.

This is not the United States of corporate America. Our representatives in this democracy are supposed to look out for us, their voters, not their corporate benefactors.

Secondly, we have to get much tougher on enforcing our tax laws.

In 2004, the Bush administration allowed, again, so-called American companies to repatriate $312 billion back into the U.S. at the comically low rate of 5.25 percent. The real corporate tax rate is supposed to be 35 percent.

Now do you see why the corporate world loved Bush? That means all of the executives at those companies got much fatter bonuses that year.

We did the Republican strategy of just trusting big business to create jobs with all of those tax breaks that we gave them, and guess what happened? Since that huge 2004 tax break, we have lost nearly seven million jobs.

Would you trust your personal money with an amoral machine? No way, right? Then why do we all trust our collective money with these guys? It’s time we built a wall between business and state so that our government looks out for our interests and not multinational corporations` interests.

Now, get your cell phones out. I want to know what you think.

Tonight’s text survey is: Do you think tax breaks for corporations lead to more U.S. jobs? Text "A" for yes, text "B" for no to 622639. I’ll bring you the results later in the show.

Now joining me is former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich. He’s a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, and he’s also the author of "Aftershock."

All right, Secretary Reich, I want to play you a clip by President Obama, because there was a bill introduced earlier in the year to actually stop the subsidies for off-shoring jobs, and it didn’t pass. The Republicans killed it.

And here’s what the president had to say about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Republicans in Washington claimed to draw their ideas from a Web site called America Speaking Out. It turns out that one the ideas that’s drawn the most interest on their Web site is ending tax breaks for companies that ship overseas.

The funny thing is, when we recently closed one of the most egregious loopholes for companies creating jobs overseas, Republicans in Congress were almost unanimously opposed. The Republican Leader, John Boehner, attacked us for it and stood up for outsourcing instead of American workers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UYGUR: Secretary, is that right? I mean, that seems so unbelievably egregious.

ROBERT REICH, FMR. LABOR SECRETARY: Well, Cenk, when you said a moment ago that this is the United States of corporate America, or at least that’s what it seems, that’s egregious enough.

I mean, big corporations are arguing in terms of getting more tax breaks or getting a tax holiday that they need it in order to have an incentive to create jobs in the United States. But most big corporations now have plenty of money.

Corporate profits are higher than they’ve been in years. In fact, big corporations are now sitting on almost a trillion dollars worth of cash. They’re not creating jobs in the United States, they’re creating jobs abroad.

UYGUR: So the fact that they kill a bill that would have stopped, you know, the loophole that allows them to get a subsidy for off-shoring, I mean, I feel like that’s such a no-brainer for the Democrats, I almost want to pull a Jon Stewart and just do this whole show and the next show and the next show after that about that.

How did the Democrats blow that? Why don’t they take advantage of that and tell the American people what’s happening?

REICH: Well, there are a lot of no-brainers for the Democrats when it comes to corporate malfeasance or nonfeasance.

Cenk, one of the problems -- and I don’t want to tar all Democrats with this, but at least some Democrats with regard to campaign donations are drinking at the same trough as Republicans. They’re going to big corporations.

Now, earlier this year, the Supreme Court, you’ll remember, said in one of the worst Supreme Court decisions in history, in Citizens United against the Federal Election Commission, that corporations are people and they’re entitled to provide as much money to campaigns and to politicians as they want. Otherwise, their First Amendment rights would be breached.

Well, you can’t have it both ways. You said it earlier, and I agree with you, that corporations are not people. They’re just machines. They are just designed to maximize profits.

If we actually treat them as people and say they have First Amendment rights to undermine and corrupt our politicians and our political process, then we’re really in trouble, because they don’t really represent America and Americans.

UYGUR: Well, they keep calling them American companies, or even corporate America. But do these so-called American companies have any obligation to America?

REICH: Well, unfortunately, they don’t. I mean, these global corporations have a primary obligation under the law, and also in terms of economics to their shareholders, to maximize shareholder returns.

That’s what under American capitalism corporations are supposed to do. They’re not obligated to maximize jobs. And it turns out these days, the most rapidly growing markets are in China, India, Brazil, several other rapidly growing markets, and so American corporations are over there not only selling but also creating jobs. Not here.

UYGUR: You know, the thing is, I don’t want people to get me wrong. I actually don’t think that’s crazy or bad. I get why businesses want to start factories in China and why they’re using India for labor, et cetera. I understand that. But what drives me crazy is the idea that we should be subsidizing that.

REICH: Exactly. Cenk, I couldn’t agree with you more.

In other words, corporations should be, according to the way we organize capitalism, maximizing shareholder returns, maximizing profits. So they should be going all over the world. But there is no reason for us, taxpayers, to be subsidizing those corporations, and then those corporations taking those subsidies, or those tax breaks, and using them for creating jobs all over the world. It makes no sense at all.

UYGUR: Unfortunately, I’m going to have to ask you the question that we always run into here. What can we do about it? Because the seems like the politicians, honestly, a lot in both parties -- certainly the Republicans are a wholly-owned subsidiary of multinational corporations, but the Democrats are partly owned, as you explained.

How do we get beyond it when they have already bought the politicians?

REICH: Well, what we have to, I think all of us, get serious about campaign finance reform. I mean, eyes glaze over. It’s not an exciting topic. We’d much rather talk about holding on to health care and everything else. But unless we actually stem the flow of corporate money into American politics, everything we want to do, everything we believe in is jeopardized.

UYGUR: Secretary Reich, thank you so much for joining us.

REICH: Thanks, Cenk. Happy New Year.

UYGUR: Happy New Year to you, too.

Share This Post

Link To This Post


28 Comments
Edwin's picture
;^)

...The recent request by U.S. companies for a tax holiday on the over $1 trillion in assets they have sitting offshore.

Sure. Why not? It's Christmas: 'tis the season (act fast before it's too late). Only a Grinch would deny them a few perks for all their hard work. It's bound to trickle down. (Perfect Washingtonese logic.)


far left loon >.<

absolute dependence on 1000 unchallenged and coordinated right wing radio stations is finally challenged by the left.

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Diabolus est Deus Inversus

Ape-Man's picture

Don't forget the corporate news media.
The corporate news media has been perverted to perpetuate rule by the rich.
They will resist reform at first.
We can thank god for MSNBC and an excellent line up to lead the way! Thanks MSNBC!


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Corporate Finance?


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

Geronimo.'s picture

Cenk is one of the best guys on the corporate news. I'm glad C&L is supporting him and giving him attention.


"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." ~ Eleanor Roosevelt

at 5% and say that he is stimulating the economy.

Peter G's picture

with a Double Irish to go.


Hasa Diga Eebowai

Ape-Man's picture

It has become abundantly clear that we are being ruled by the rich, and that's not working out very well for anyone.


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

Kreskin's picture

It's working out quite nicely for the rich and for the politicians who cater to them .


"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all."

Ape-Man's picture

For now... unfortunately, if the rich remain in control of America, they will wake up one day soon in a vast waste land that no one will want to live in any more, including them. It's just around the corner.


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

Kreskin's picture

you're right again Mr. Ape Man but the ultra rich do not care what shape this country is in just as long as the money keeps rolling in and their wealth continues to grow , they are international , they own have homes all over the world , hang out and play in the exclusive resorts , playgrounds for the wealthy , live on their mega yachts , live in their gated communities ... which doesn't in itself make them evil or bad but they do not have a whole lot to sweat as long as they have the money , the world is theirs .


"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all."

Ape-Man's picture

Ya, you're right. We cannot count on the rich for the solution. Appealing to their patriotism is futile when they have none.


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

Kreskin's picture

Of course campaign finance reform is needed , man , that is an understatement , but anyone here think it'll happen ? Not a chance .


"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all."

Ape-Man's picture

Not while the rich rule America.


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Diabolus est Deus Inversus

media critic's picture

This is the kind of brutal honesty Americans need to hear more from, so we can change things for the better.

Dradeeus's picture

Definitely one of the best Cenk Uygar MSNBC rants, but I get really tired of that "amoral" rhetoric. (Which is also common on his TYT show.)

I can't have a business that scams people, and when people tell me it's wrong, I go "What? I'm part of an amoral business. It's out to scam as much money as possible. Don't blame me, it's the business I'm part of, that has no sense of right and wrong, not me."

We didn't go "Well, the Nazis were evil, but it was an amoral government that was killing Jews. Governments don't have feelings. So let's let the SS officers go."

I know the whole schpiel about it being "law" that corporations must "look out for their shareholder's interests"
i.e. be as profitable as possible, regardless of damage.

But corporations don't have private jets. They don't take home billion dollar bonuses, and they don't bribe government. People do that. People who aren't morons, or connected through some brain-washing wire TO this "amoral corporation." They know EXACTLY what they're doing, and they knew it before they got their jobs, in many cases.

At some point, you gotta blame the people themselves.

Ape-Man's picture

I think what Cenk is getting at is that we cannot count on the corporations to do the right thing simply because the SCOTUS made them 'persons'. We can't count on morality to motivate corporations because they are not really 'persons' at all, even if the SCOTUS has said that they are. The SCOTUS got it wrong. We need legislation to fix it.


"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-

Will legislation fix it if the Supreme Court finds the legislation unconstitutional?

We need a Constitutional Amendment inscribing the law of the land right into the Constitution.

ikalbertus's picture

They are programmed to do one thing, make money, just like the Terminator was programmed to do one thing. Morals don't enter into it unless there is a legal penalty, or a moral act can be parlayed through advertising into good press for the company. They are not people, they are more like robots.

Kreskin's picture

Being moral and ethical in business these days means you are a lousy businessman , costs shareholders money and if the share holders lose money / if their investments are not making them $ , you lose your job and your million dollar bonuses , ethics and morality have no place in business and are irrelevant except in fantasy land ... as far as the shareholders are concerned . In the same way a politician may want to tell the lobbyists to take their money and shove it but they can't , campaign $ wins elections , what's the average cost to run a campaign for the Senate or Congress these days ? Greed and $ , the ones with that money , they rule , who's going to be able to change that ? No one . As human beings our sense of right and wrong , ethics , morality and our values have eroded and decayed to the point that the conscience no longer restrains us and it's only getting worse . Cheers !


"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all."

Steve E's picture

is going to correct this problem after all the tax giveaways and corporate cuddling he has performed up till now, I want to know what your smoking.

Dradeeus's picture

Just because the right wing is brought up as the primary problem, no one is bring up Obama except to scrutinize him. No one is smoking anything.

jelohman's picture

This new form is tax free, will increase hiring, and protect shareholders...

http://moneyedpoliticians.net/2010/12/06/wisc...

clara13's picture

Tax holiday? Lot's of corporations are in trouble just like the banks are and they need that cash reserve to shore them up. TBTF is crumbling all around us in many different ways-and without Bernanke's credit window they would have failed by now. Capitalists don't recognise this bizarre form of business that uses socialized welfare to bail them out. The capitalists can't even compete anymore.

When the capitalists are whining you know something is wrong-the big plunderers are keeping the little plunderers from plundering.(unfair!) There are too many sharks in the tank.

www.ickenittlepost.com

ronspri's picture

As noted in many of the comments. Plutocracy rules and big money has us by the balls. How do we change that? I think we need a new system. This one is broken beyond repair. We need one that puts less focus on money. Now I know many people would be lost, that being the entire point of their existence.
Among the things we need is less purchasing and a focus on durable, upgradable products that are made with sustainable materials. Products that have multiple uses, like your cell phone. We need to shape a vision of a better future and get out of the right wing pig pen.

ikalbertus's picture

Krugman had an editorial a few days ago. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/31/opinion/31k... that drew an interesting comment pointing out that wealthy people don't create wealth, they harvest wealth by manipulation of the financial system. Most of their income is from stock options, taxed at 15%, effectually a lower tax bracket than the middle class.

As pointed out in the Bloomberg article, business is already sitting on a mountain of cash, 1.9 trillion in liquid assets, so the argument that bringing more cash into the country will stimulate the economy is a fraud, as are most of their arguments. Whatever they get, it's never enough. It seems like the average person is so resigned to this that he just bends over and says get it over with.

Comments are closed on this entry