« Peace: Still Waiting for Its Chance | Home | The Daily Muck »
From: Warren Reports

Ford: Jobs Cut (Taxes Too!)

user-pic
By Jon Lackow - January 26, 2006, 6:41AM

Ford's 30,000 strong layoff apparently netted them big profits thanks to the "American Jobs Creation Act of 2004."  Not a typo.

PERMALINK | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)

9 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Yeah; "clean air" act designed to increase pollution; "healthy forests" initiative to enable loggers to clear-cut the nation; and the PATRIOT act to -- well, who knows what but it has nothing to do with patriotism.  But Sloan's rhetorical "funning" doesn't help.

When Microsoft can license $16 billion of Windows and Office to a wholly owned Irish sales and marketing company, Round Island One, Ltd., whose only function is to collect European sales revenues and pay $17 million in taxes to Ireland rather than the $500 million it would have to pay to the I.R.S. -- year after year -- there's a problem.

 

 

Posted by Ellen
January 26, 2006 8:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

I seem to remember John Kerry mentioning this over and over again in 2004.  Nice of the media to notice now.

Posted by danbrod11
January 26, 2006 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

Nice catch, Ellen. And while I am glad Bill and Melinda are apparently doing some great things with all of their dough, doesn't the vastness of his fortune probably mean he was overcharging all of us all these years -- and by a lot?

Posted by Paul Theis
January 26, 2006 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

I checked out the link and found that the law in question had to do with a one-time repatriation of tax dollars in 2005, which many companies (including high-tech and pharmaceuticals) took advantage of to save money, hundreds of millions of dollars in some cases.

Now I am waiting for an article to set us straight on just how much this one-time repatriation was responsible for the increased tax revenues we saw last year, as opposed to what the ruling GOP loves to tell us ad nauseam. Remember? The increased tax revenues were supposedly due to their beloved tax cuts, which we must now make permanent of course, in light of this great "success."

Posted by Paul Theis
January 26, 2006 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

Though it was not mentioned in the news coverage of the American plant closings and job losses, I seem to recall that Ford announced a big deal with China just days after President Bush's recent visit there.

Posted by Paul Theis
January 26, 2006 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

Good point.  And let me add another.

It's often said that the U.S. positive international flow-of-funds is proof of the world's estimation of the strength and vibrancy of our economy.  Is it?

Or was that positive balance last year the result of a one-time repatriation of tax-avoidance funds of American companies?  [In the event it did hold bond and mortgage interest rates down]

Posted by Ellen
January 26, 2006 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

Ford paid $40 million for the right to name the stadium where the upcoming Superbowl will be played...

Could their be a better symbol of failing Republican America than Pittsburgh playing at Ford Field? 

 

Posted by monkyboy
January 26, 2006 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

Well, they didn't have to cut jobs in order to take advantage of this particular tax boondoggle, so saying the layoff "netted them big money" from it is, ah, inaccurate. The only connection between jobs and the tax giveaway is in its name.

Posted by SqueakyRat
January 27, 2006 5:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
user-pic

I must confess that I wish I knew more about these economic matters. But I think one thing we should all have learned under Bush II is that skepticism is definitely in order with respect to any administration claim.

I did see later in the day yesterday, on C-SPAN, a repeat of a session with Congressional Budget Office officials and reporters where the question was raised of the impact of this one-time repatriation on tax revenues. The reply given was that economic growth was mostly responsible for the increased tax revenues.

But interestingly, I thought, the specific claim was not made, in this reply, that the tax cuts per se had led to the increased revenues. And I do know that elsewhere I have seen a report of a Merrill Lynch analysis which said that an unprecedented 40% of recent economic growth could be attributed to activity in the various housing markets (some of which are widely acknowledged to be bubbles).

And now today comes word that the GDP was not so great in the fourth quarter of 2005, after all.

At the time, I clearly recall, none other than the dean of the Washington press corps himself, David Broder, was telling a Washington Week audience that the US economy was strong. (No doubt he and other reporters had received a briefing to that effect by administration officials -- one that I happened to catch a few moments of myself, on C-SPAN3.)

Posted by Paul Theis
January 27, 2006 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink

Leave a comment

Recent Reader Posts

All Reader Posts »

Inside Cafe


Cafe Features


January 5-9

Book Cover

January 12-16

Book Cover

January 19-23

Book Cover

January 26-30

Book Cover

February 2-6

Book Cover

February 9-13

The Great Depression

February 16-20

Tear Down This Myth

February 23-27

Demagogue

March 16-20

Engaging The Muslim World



Book Club Archive



Masthead

Editor-in-Chief
Josh Marshall

Site Editor
Lila Shapiro

Intern
Claire Wilcox



Subscribe to TPMCafe's feed.
Subscribe to TPMCafe's reader blog feed.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address