Showing posts with label subsidies for wealthy and for politicians. Show all posts
Showing posts with label subsidies for wealthy and for politicians. Show all posts

Saturday, May 31, 2014

Study: American Households Hit 43-Year Low In Net Worth

Study: American Households Hit 43-Year Low In Net Worth
CBS
November 30, 2012

WASHINGTON (CBS DC) – The median net worth of American households has dropped to a 43-year low as the lower and middle classes appear poorer and less stable than they have been since 1969.

According to a recent study by New York University economics professor Edward N. Wolff, median net worth is at the decades-low figure of $57,000 (in 2010 dollars). And as the numbers in his study reflect, the situation only appears worse when all the statistics are taken as a whole.

[Chart of changes between 1983 and 2010:]


According to Wolff, between 1983 and 2010, the percentage of households with less than $10,000 in assets (using constant 1995 dollars) rose from 29.7 percent to 37.1 percent. The “less than $10,000″ figure includes the numerous households that have no assets at all, or “negative assets,” which is otherwise known as “debt.”

Over that same period of time, the wealthiest 1 percent of American households increased their average wealth by 71 percent.

As noted by Daily Finance, from 1983 to 2010 the share of total wealth held by the richest 10 percent of American households increased from 68.2 percent to 76.7 percent. Meanwhile, all the rest of Americans lost financial ground.

An August Pew Research Center study found that many in the middle-class are divided on how they believe his gap widened.

Fully 85 percent of self-described middle-class adults say it is more difficult now than it was a decade ago for middle-class people to maintain their standard of living. Of those who feel this way, 62 percent say “a lot” of the blame lies with Congress, while 54 percent say the same about banks and financial institutions, 47 percent about large corporations, 44 percent about the Bush administration, 39 percent about foreign competition and 34 percent about the Obama administration.

Just 8 percent put “a lot” of blame on the middle class itself.

“This downbeat take on their economic situation comes at the end of a decade in which, for the first time since the end of World War II, mean family incomes declined for Americans in all income tiers,” the Pew Report stated. “But the middle-income tier—defined in this Pew Research analysis as all adults whose annual household income is two-thirds to double the national median —is the only one that also shrunk in size, a trend that has continued over the past four decades.”

Wolff’s focus on total wealth not only measures how much money a household brings in, but also the amount it accumulates. This latter number is very significant — economically secure households are generally more comfortable spending their disposable income, and are less likely to become a drag on the social safety net.

Stark Infographic of Too-Big-to-Fail Banks Represents 1% Consolidation in America
David Harris-Gershon (The Troubadour)
Daily Kos
Fri May 30, 2014

The four banks listed in the infographic below – CitiGroup, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo – have received nearly $93 billion in taxpayer funds ($92,849,517,353 to be exact) since the bailouts began in 2008.

While they make up a small percentage of the 940 bailout recipients which have, to date, received $611 billion dollars from American taxpayers, they represent a significant chunk of those funds. More importantly, their acquisition trajectories represent the consolidation of major banking institutions in America which have made them "too-big-to-fail," or so we've been told.


Click on the infographic above to enlarge.

The graphic above is not a statistical representation, as it does not display the relative sizes of those banks acquired, nor does it indicate which banks disappeared as a result of forced acquisitions. However, it does visually represent how banking institutions in this country are capable of not just dictating regulatory practices with their undeniable influence and size, but are able to get away with holding the country hostage after those criminal and unethical activities which brought our nation's economy to its knees and is serving to widen growing inequalities in America.

Regarding that latter point, income inequality is higher than its been since 1928, which is partly responsible for a crushing wealth gap in which the bottom 60 percent of Americans own only 3.5 percent of the country's wealth. We have a shrinking middle class with disappearing disposable incomes and an increasing number of Americans with no disposable incomes to speak of. Over 46 million Americans are below the poverty line, many of whom are employed but finding that "hard work is just not enough" anymore.

This is at a time in which behemoth financial institutions are getting larger, consolidating more and more wealth, and being not just financially protected by that consolidation – vacuuming up taxpayer funds from a drowning citizenry – but being legally protected as well.

In 2013, Eric Holder admitted that global financial institutions in the U.S. and abroad have become so large as to be above the law. This truth came into stark focus when the British bank HSBC, which does significant business in America, was neither shut down in the U.S. nor pursued with criminal charges after it admitted to laundering billions of dollars for Mexican drug cartels.

This and other criminal activities by those in the banking industry and on Wall Street prompted Elizabeth Warren to say two days ago:

A kid gets caught with a few ounces of pot and goes to jail, but a big bank breaks the law ... and no one even gets arrested.


Yes, they are shielded from the law. However, they have also been responsible for writing (or underwriting) our regulatory and financial laws which have propped up banks such as BoA, which has illegally defrauded its customers, and whose subprime lender, Countrywide, engaged in widespread mortgage fraud with BoA's knowledge.

Which brings us back to the beginning. The richest in our country continue to consolidate and grow their wealth as an increasing number of Americans slide into poverty or out of the middle class. And the consolidation of financial institutions into behemoth entities don't just symbolize what is happening, they are organically at the root of the problem.

If America has truly become an oligarchy, then the infographic above could be considered one of its banners. It is a banner which will continue to wave, I fear, until we hit a breaking point.

Where that point is, I do not know, nor do I know what the popular response will be when it is reached. However, one thing is certain: our current course will not be able to sustain itself without this country falling apart.

Perhaps that's what it will take.

--§--

David Harris-Gershon is author of the memoir What Do You Buy the Children of the Terrorist Who Tried to Kill Your Wife?, just out from Oneworld Publications.

Tuesday, April 01, 2014

Caterpillar skirted $2.4 billion in taxes, Senate report says

Caterpillar skirted $2.4 billion in taxes, Senate report says
From 2000 to 2012, Peoria, Ill.-based Caterpillar moved $8 billion that it earned in the United States to Switzerland after negotiating an effective tax rate of 4 percent with the Swiss government.
By Danielle Douglas
Washington Post
March 31, 2014

Industrial manufacturer Caterpillar shifted billions of dollars in profits from the United States to Switzerland over a decade to avoid paying $2.4 billion in U.S. taxes, according to a Senate report due out Tuesday.

The report from the Senate permanent subcommittee on investigations is the latest in a series of probes into multinational corporations, including Apple, Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard, accused of hiding portions of their global profits from taxation.

Lawmakers have argued that tax shelters are an outgrowth of a broken corporate tax code and allow homegrown companies to defer taxes on overseas income indefinitely if they don’t bring the proceeds home. But lawmakers also say the failings of the tax system are no excuse for companies not to pay their fair share.

“Caterpillar is an American success story, but it is also a member of the corporate profit-shifting club that has shifted billions of dollars in profits offshore to avoid paying U.S. taxes,” Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the subcommittee, said during a news conference Monday.

The subcommittee staff found that from 2000 to 2012, Peoria, Ill.-based Caterpillar moved $8 billion it earned in the United States to Switzerland after negotiating an effective tax rate of 4 percent with the Swiss government. Caterpillar redirected the money it made selling replacement parts for its machines to Swiss affiliate CSARL, according to the report.

CSARL sells parts to Caterpillar’s foreign dealers and pays the parent company a royalty equal to about 15 percent of the parts profits while keeping the remaining 85 percent on its books in Switzerland. Investigators say that Caterpillar started logging a majority of its profits from replacement parts in Switzerland in 1999, although no personnel or business activities were moved to that country.

At least 70 percent of the replacement-parts business — manufacturing, warehousing and distribution — is housed in the United States. There are nearly 5,000 U.S. employees handling the manufacturing, and only 65 workers doing the same in Switzerland, according to the report.

Caterpillar officials said that the investigation looked at only one aspect of its global operations, presenting a limited picture of the company’s tax contribution in the United States. Caterpillar has paid about $600 million a year in federal taxes during the past three years, the company said.

“Caterpillar’s effective income tax rate averages about 29 percent, which is one of the highest for a U.S. multinational manufacturing company,” Julie Lagacy, vice president of the financial services division at Caterpillar, said in a statement. “We comply with the tax laws enacted by Congress, by the states and by all of the many jurisdictions in which we conduct business.”

Lagacy said Caterpillar’s business structure drives its tax structure. But the subcommittee contends that maximizing profits at the expense of U.S. taxpayers has played a much greater role.

It wasn’t always like this. PricewaterhouseCoopers, hired by Caterpillar as a tax consultant and auditor, devised the tax strategy in 1999, when 85 percent of the manufacturer’s profits were booked in the United States, according to investigators. The accounting giant was paid more than $55 million to find ways to lower the tax bill, the report said.

“When Caterpillar and its tax advisers launched this tax- avoidance scheme, almost nothing changed in the real world,” Levin said. “But in the fantasyland that is international tax law, tax lawyers waved a magic wand to make millions of dollars in U.S. taxes disappear.”

The subcommittee also questioned the ethics of PricewaterhouseCoopers acting as Caterpillar’s accountant at the same time it was auditing the company.

Caroline Nolan, a spokeswoman for PricewaterhouseCoopers, dismissed the accusation of impropriety, saying that the company has maintained independence at all times. She said the firm was compensated for six years of extensive work to help Caterpillar improve its operations.

“We stand by the work we did for them,” Nolan said in an e-mail. “Our advice . . . helped Caterpillar evaluate how best to organize its expanding global operations, aligning the economics of such global operations with carefully considered U.S. tax policies.”

In February, Caterpillar revealed in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that the Internal Revenue Service notified the company that it owes additional federal taxes from “certain non-U.S. operations and foreign tax credits.”

Subcommittee staff began looking into practices at Caterpillar after a former employee, Daniel Schlicksup, sued the company in 2009. Schlicksup, who served as global tax strategy manager at Caterpillar, said he questioned the company about the risks of its Swiss tax strategy and was forced to transfer elsewhere in the firm out of retaliation. Caterpillar denied the allegation in the case, which was settled in 2012.

Executives from Caterpillar and PricewaterhouseCoopers are scheduled to testify Tuesday at a subcommittee hearing on the report. Although Levin said the report was a bipartisan effort, the subcommittee’s ranking Republican, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), did not endorse the findings. McCain declined to comment, but his office said he would address the issue at the hearing.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Michele Bachmann: counseling clinic received nearly $30,000, family farm received some $260,000 in subsidies.

Michele Bachmann denies benefiting from government aid
By Richard A. Serrano
Los Angeles Times
June 26, 2011

With a new Iowa poll putting her in a dead heat with the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination, Rep. Michele Bachmann deflected allegations that she and her family had benefited from government assistance programs and said that hundreds of thousands of dollars to her family farm and a counseling clinic went instead to her employees and her in-laws.

"My husband and I did not get the money," she said, appearing on Sunday news talk shows as she prepared to officially open her campaign in her original hometown of Waterloo, Iowa.

The Los Angeles Times reported Sunday that Bachmann, a congresswoman from Minnesota and "tea party" favorite, portrayed herself as a fiscal conservative while also benefiting from government funds and federal farm subsidies. An examination of her record and finances showed that a counseling clinic run by her husband received nearly $30,000 from the state of Minnesota in the last five years, with part of the money coming from the federal government. And a family farm in Wisconsin, where she is listed as a partner, received some $260,000 in federal subsidies.

Bachmann and her staff declined to talk to about the government assistance for the L.A. Times article. But asked about the issue on "Fox News Sunday," she insisted that she and her husband had not benefited at the expense of federal and state taxpayers.

"First of all," she said, "the money that went to the clinic was actually training money for employees. The clinic did not get the money. And my husband and I did not get the money either. That's mental health training money that went to employees."

As for the farm, she said it belonged to her father-in-law. "It's not my husband and my farm," Bachmann said. "And my husband and I have never gotten a penny of money from the farm."

As the Los Angeles Times reported on Sunday, however, in financial disclosure forms, Bachmann reported receiving between $32,503 and $105,000 in income from the farm, at minimum, between 2006 and 2009.


Bachmann also repeated her stance that she was opposed to federal earmarks that sponsored pet projects for politicians back home and said she believed "the states have to build roads and bridges," not the federal government. But asked whether that was an inconsistency given that her family appeared to be benefiting from government aid, she said the clinic money was spent to train employees when they otherwise would have been there working...