Halliburton leaving the US

[North_of_60]

After making billions in profits...

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/4620759.html

The rats are leaving the sinking ship ?
Halliburton leaving is a sign that Bush is leaving. After frauding the US treasury they know very well what's coming for them in a near futur.
Arrest Cheney, now ! US has no extradition treaty with United Arab Emirates.

LOL! Pissed libs because with Halliburton headquartered in Dubai, they won't be subject to libtard regulation!

CLASSIC!

[trish]

Halliburton and it's subsidiaries are fucking war profiteers. Cheney and bush staged this ludicrous war so that Halliburton and mint money. Meanwhile, we're in up to our eyeballs to China and now Halliburton doesn't want to pay the minimal taxes it does pay and it doesn't want to be regulated by the U.S. Yeah, I'm pissed and with good reason; every PATRIOT should be.

Halliburton and it's subsidiaries are fucking war profiteers. Cheney and bush staged this ludicrous war so that Halliburton and mint money. Meanwhile, we're in up to our eyeballs to China and now Halliburton doesn't want to pay the minimal taxes it does pay and it doesn't want to be regulated by the U.S. Yeah, I'm pissed and with good reason; every PATRIOT should be.

LMAO! Ok, I'm handing you the shovel, start digging.

How is Halliburton going to NOT pay taxes to America?

I'm waiting...

[guyone]

Anti-Capitalist Bolshevik Propaganda!

Beware the wily bolshevik. They are destroying the moral fibre of our country!

[olite71]

Halliburton and it's subsidiaries are fucking war profiteers. Cheney and bush staged this ludicrous war so that Halliburton and mint money. Meanwhile, we're in up to our eyeballs to China and now Halliburton doesn't want to pay the minimal taxes it does pay and it doesn't want to be regulated by the U.S. Yeah, I'm pissed and with good reason; every PATRIOT should be.

Rember when Kerry stepped in it with that quote about children going to school and getting an education so they won't have to go to Iraq?

And then GWB followed it up with the quote of how the troops were "plenty smart."


Well while Bush's intent was noble and all that, he was just repeating the lie repeated by all "fortunate sons" who know full well that the "plenty smart" ones sit on the boards of directors of companies like Halliburton and don't suit up and grab a gun.


The soldiers are Plenty brave---yes, and plenty patriotic, yes...but "plenty smart?" What does that make the captains of industry then? Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein?

[Quinn]

How is Halliburton going to NOT pay taxes to America?

I'm waiting...

Please tell me that you're joking. Like most Neocons, your understanding of economics and finance is woefully deficient. Not that said deficiency keeps you from commenting on such things. LOL……….. Still, for clarity here's part an article from one of the world's most respected sources on the matter (The Financial Times):

Halliburton moves CEO to oil-rich Dubai

Published: March 12 2007 19:30 | Last updated: March 13 2007 01:35

Halliburton’s decision to relocate its chief executive from Houston to Dubai and open a corporate headquarters in the emirate drew fire from critics in Washington on Monday, raising the spectre that the oil services group will be forced to defend the move before Congress.

The Texas-based company has long been the target of criticism on Capitol Hill because of its ties to Dick Cheney, the US vice-president who formerly served as chief executive, and allegations that KBR, the company’s government contracting unit, has wasted billions of taxpayer dollars in Iraq.

Democratic senator Byron Dorgan has also called for an investigation into the development.

“I want to know, is Halliburton trying to run away from bad publicity on their contracts? Are they trying to run away from the obligation to pay US taxes? Or are they trying to set up a corporate presence in Dubai so that they can avoid the restrictions that currently exist on doing business with prohibited countries like Iran?” Mr Dorgan said.

Senator Patrick Leahy, the top Democratic member on the judiciary committee, said of Halliburton’s move: “This is an insult to the US soldiers and taxpayers who paid the tab for their no-bid contracts and endured their overcharges for all these years.”

Some lobbyists said that the move could revive debate on the tax implications of companies moving offshore.

Halliburton said that it anticipated “absolutely no tax benefits” from the creation of a headquarters in Dubai, which has a zero tax rate. It said Houston would remain the company’s principal executive office.

But Martin Sullivan, contributing editor at Tax Notes magazine, a non-partisan weekly tax journal, said Halliburton’s move would change its tax situation “significantly” even though the company would still be registered in the US.

Mr Sullivan said that by basing its chief executive in Dubai, Halliburton would be able to argue that a portion of its profits should be attributed to the no-tax jurisdiction.

Charlie Cray, the director at the Center for Corporate Policy, a progressive watchdog group that runs the “Halliburton watch” website, said his primary concern was that the move would further reduce Halliburton’s overall accountability.

“They have proven very adept at circumventing American policy and restrictions by using offshore subsidiaries,” Mr Cray said.

At the very least, you might want to trouble to learn something as basic as "transfer pricing," which will help you understand the basics of corporate taxation and tax evasion. Maybe then you'll understand why only 36 of Halliburton's 143 subsidiaries are based in the US, rather than offshore.

-Quinn

[olite71]

I would add that corporations do not have any fiduciary duty to the nation in which they reside. Their fiduciary duty is to their shareholders.

I'm not asking for corporations to be patriotic. Some corporations choose to go that route for marketing purposes (Budweiser, Pepsi, etc...).

Halliburton however is one of those corporations whos existence depends somewhat on trouble. And when that "trouble" is war, it's even better. It's like being an emergency room doctor in the inner city. If violence ended you'd be out of a job.

I'm not saying the employees of Halliburton are bad people but their in a job which thrives when bad things are happneing. Somebody's got to do it. But there are some people who consciously make a decision not to take such jobs because when they look back on their life's work they don't want to see themselves as having profited from misfortune and evil (even though they are not evil themselves).

Halliburton is a nice scapegoat in times like these--but their decision to escape U.S. taxation is not anti-patriotic--it's just sound business looking for the best bottom line.

The dangerous thing is when corporations that profit from war get huge and powerful they may (and I stress may) dangerously exert influence on the corridors of policy and power in government. And that is something our politicians, if they are faithfully carrying out their jobs, should be ever watchful over.

(See Ike's farwell speech warning of this problem which he called the military industrial complex).

Please tell me that you're joking. Like most Neocons, your understanding of economics and finance is woefully deficient. Not that said deficiency keeps you from commenting on such things. LOL……….. Still, for clarity here's part an article from one of the world's most respected sources on the matter (The Financial Times):

Halliburton moves CEO to oil-rich Dubai

Published: March 12 2007 19:30 | Last updated: March 13 2007 01:35

Halliburton’s decision to relocate its chief executive from Houston to Dubai and open a corporate headquarters in the emirate drew fire from critics in Washington on Monday, raising the spectre that the oil services group will be forced to defend the move before Congress.

The Texas-based company has long been the target of criticism on Capitol Hill because of its ties to Dick Cheney, the US vice-president who formerly served as chief executive, and allegations that KBR, the company’s government contracting unit, has wasted billions of taxpayer dollars in Iraq.

Democratic senator Byron Dorgan has also called for an investigation into the development.

“I want to know, is Halliburton trying to run away from bad publicity on their contracts? Are they trying to run away from the obligation to pay US taxes? Or are they trying to set up a corporate presence in Dubai so that they can avoid the restrictions that currently exist on doing business with prohibited countries like Iran?” Mr Dorgan said.

Senator Patrick Leahy, the top Democratic member on the judiciary committee, said of Halliburton’s move: “This is an insult to the US soldiers and taxpayers who paid the tab for their no-bid contracts and endured their overcharges for all these years.”

Some lobbyists said that the move could revive debate on the tax implications of companies moving offshore.

Halliburton said that it anticipated “absolutely no tax benefits” from the creation of a headquarters in Dubai, which has a zero tax rate. It said Houston would remain the company’s principal executive office.

But Martin Sullivan, contributing editor at Tax Notes magazine, a non-partisan weekly tax journal, said Halliburton’s move would change its tax situation “significantly” even though the company would still be registered in the US.

Mr Sullivan said that by basing its chief executive in Dubai, Halliburton would be able to argue that a portion of its profits should be attributed to the no-tax jurisdiction.

Charlie Cray, the director at the Center for Corporate Policy, a progressive watchdog group that runs the “Halliburton watch” website, said his primary concern was that the move would further reduce Halliburton’s overall accountability.

“They have proven very adept at circumventing American policy and restrictions by using offshore subsidiaries,” Mr Cray said.

At the very least, you might want to trouble familiarize to learn something as basic as "transfer pricing," which will help you understand the basics of corporate taxation and tax evasion.

-Quinn

I'll ignore the condescending tone of your post (ie, I know about taxes and Conservatives don't). It's consistent with your other limosuine liberal posts like (you can rent a flat in one of my apartment buildings). Your attempt to pollute this thread with the disease of affluenza has led you to misread and misconstrue nearly the entire thread.

I'll make it short and sweet, since a male of your affluence is obviously too busy to read (what with all the responsibilities of wealth and all.)

Trish, in typical hysterics, posted "now Halliburton doesn't want to pay the minimal taxes it does pay". Which means that if Halliburton doesn't want to pay "minimal taxes", this move to Dubai is intended to avoid American taxes in entirety.

Or is it that you failed to read your own story because nowhere in it does anyone claim that Halliburton's move to Dubai is intended to, as trish put it, "(not) pay the minimal taxes it does pay".

I'll go through line by line if you want, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and let you reread your own post.

[olite71]

Please tell me that you're joking. Like most Neocons, your understanding of economics and finance is woefully deficient. Not that said deficiency keeps you from commenting on such things. LOL……….. Still, for clarity here's part an article from one of the world's most respected sources on the matter (The Financial Times):

Halliburton moves CEO to oil-rich Dubai

Published: March 12 2007 19:30 | Last updated: March 13 2007 01:35

Halliburton’s decision to relocate its chief executive from Houston to Dubai and open a corporate headquarters in the emirate drew fire from critics in Washington on Monday, raising the spectre that the oil services group will be forced to defend the move before Congress.

The Texas-based company has long been the target of criticism on Capitol Hill because of its ties to Dick Cheney, the US vice-president who formerly served as chief executive, and allegations that KBR, the company’s government contracting unit, has wasted billions of taxpayer dollars in Iraq.

Democratic senator Byron Dorgan has also called for an investigation into the development.

“I want to know, is Halliburton trying to run away from bad publicity on their contracts? Are they trying to run away from the obligation to pay US taxes? Or are they trying to set up a corporate presence in Dubai so that they can avoid the restrictions that currently exist on doing business with prohibited countries like Iran?” Mr Dorgan said.

Senator Patrick Leahy, the top Democratic member on the judiciary committee, said of Halliburton’s move: “This is an insult to the US soldiers and taxpayers who paid the tab for their no-bid contracts and endured their overcharges for all these years.”

Some lobbyists said that the move could revive debate on the tax implications of companies moving offshore.

Halliburton said that it anticipated “absolutely no tax benefits” from the creation of a headquarters in Dubai, which has a zero tax rate. It said Houston would remain the company’s principal executive office.

But Martin Sullivan, contributing editor at Tax Notes magazine, a non-partisan weekly tax journal, said Halliburton’s move would change its tax situation “significantly” even though the company would still be registered in the US.

Mr Sullivan said that by basing its chief executive in Dubai, Halliburton would be able to argue that a portion of its profits should be attributed to the no-tax jurisdiction.

Charlie Cray, the director at the Center for Corporate Policy, a progressive watchdog group that runs the “Halliburton watch” website, said his primary concern was that the move would further reduce Halliburton’s overall accountability.

“They have proven very adept at circumventing American policy and restrictions by using offshore subsidiaries,” Mr Cray said.

At the very least, you might want to trouble familiarize to learn something as basic as "transfer pricing," which will help you understand the basics of corporate taxation and tax evasion.

-Quinn

I'll ignore the condescending tone of your post (ie, I know about taxes and Conservatives don't). It's consistent with your other limosuine liberal posts like (you can rent a flat in one of my apartment buildings). Your attempt to pollute this thread with the disease of affluenza has led you to misread and misconstrue nearly the entire thread.

I'll make it short and sweet, since a male of your affluence is obviously too busy to read (what with all the responsibilities of wealth and all.)

Trish, in typical hysterics, posted "now Halliburton doesn't want to pay the minimal taxes it does pay". Which means that if Halliburton doesn't want to pay "minimal taxes", this move to Dubai is intended to avoid American taxes in entirety.

Or is it that you failed to read your own story because nowhere in it does anyone claim that Halliburton's move to Dubai is intended to, as trish put it, "(not) pay the minimal taxes it does pay".

I'll go through line by line if you want, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and let you reread your own post.

Well the move is going to make taxes less--starting with property tax which on a "headquarters" could be a couple of million a year. But then when you add in the proportional deduction for business "attributed" to dubai, you may be talking tens of millions.

Still--this is irrelevant---Corporations have a duty to their shareholders to be as profitable as possible. I have no problem with that. I have a problem with the government making bad policy because its leaders can't resist the temptation of the corporate lobby.
And I have a problem with people embezzling and getting fat off of government contracts. Doing that kind of stuff in wartime while fathers of children are dying is as bad as being a dirty cop.