PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[PEN-L:6670] CEOs DEMAND CORPORATE WELFARE (fwd)
- Subject: [PEN-L:6670] CEOs DEMAND CORPORATE WELFARE (fwd)
- From: D Shniad <shniad@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 18:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:13:53 -1000
> From: Jay Hanson <jhanson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Cybernews Publish listserv <CYBERNEWS-PUBLISH-L@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: CEOs DEMAND CORPORATE WELFARE (fwd)
>
> Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 10:16:35 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Janice Shields <jshields@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: CEOs Want Balanced Budget; Won't Give Up Corporate Welfare
>
>
> CEOs DEMAND BALANCED BUDGET BUT WON'T GIVE UP
> CORPORATE WELFARE
>
>
> CEOs of 91 companies signed a letter to President Clinton,
> Senate Majority Leader Dole, House Speaker Gingrich and all members
> of Congress last December, calling on the President and Congress to
> balance the budget. Consumer advocate Ralph Nader responded by
> sending letters to all of the signatories of the CEOs' letter,
> asking them to identify federal subsidies and tax breaks that
> benefit their corporations and to select the subsidies and tax
> expenditures that the CEOs would agree to begin to forego
> immediately in order to help balance the budget. More than five
> months later and after Ralph Nader's Corporate Welfare Project
> contacted a second time the signatories to the balanced budget
> letter, none of the 91 CEOs have identified even one federal
> subsidy or tax break that their companies would give up to help
> balance the budget.
>
> "This is the ultimate form of corporate hypocrisy," said Ralph
> Nader. "Wealthy CEOs demand a balanced budget, but refuse to take
> their snouts out of the federal corporate welfare trough," added
> Nader.
>
> Ralph Nader pointed out in his letter to the CEOs that if
> Congress abolished only five subsidies* for corporations, $5.12
> billion in federal spending would be saved in fiscal year 1996. If
> only five tax breaks* for businesses were eliminated, $46.4 billion
> in additional federal revenue would be collected in 1996. These
> ten subsidies and tax breaks will total $51.52 billion in 1996; in
> its annual report, Aid for Dependent Corporations (AFDC), the
> Corporate Welfare Project identified 153 examples of 1995 federal
> corporate welfare totalling $167 billion.
>
> The Corporate Welfare Project has identified several examples
> of subsidies and tax breaks enjoyed by specific companies whose
> CEOs were signatories to the balanced budget letter. For example,
> Eastman Kodak was able to reduce its 1995 U.S. taxes by $37 million
> due to export sales and manufacturing tax credits; Kodak's 1995
> profits were $1.252 billion. Chevron had deferred payment of more
> than $4 billion in taxes as of the end of its 1995 fiscal year, by
> using accelerated depreciation; Chevron's 1995 profits were $930
> million. Union Carbide received $200 million in Overseas Private
> Investment Corporation insurance in 1995 for its investment in
> Kuwait; Union Carbide's 1995 profits were $925 million.
> AlliedSignal was awarded an Advanced Technologies Program grant for
> $1.2 million in 1995; AlliedSignal's 1995 profits were $875
> million. "CEOs of profitable corporations call for balancing the
> federal budget, but won't give up their federal subsidies and tax
> breaks," said Janice Shields, Coordinator of Ralph Nader's
> Corporate Welfare Project. "Does this mean that these wealthy CEOs
> want the budget balanced on the backs of low and moderate income
> families?," she asked.
>
> *The subsidies come from the Export-Import Bank, the Overseas
> Private Investment Corporation, the Export Enhancement Program, the
> Market Promotion Program and the Foreign Military Financing
> Program. The tax breaks include accelerated depreciation, reduced
> rates on the first $10 million of corporate taxable income, the
> exception to the source rule for the sale of inventory property,
> tax credits for corporations with income in U.S. possessions and
> expensing rather than amortizing research and development costs.
>
> ###
>
> TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE CORPORATE WELFARE LIST:
>
> Send message to: listproc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> In the message section, write:
>
> Subscribe Corporate-Welfare YourFirstName YourLastName
>
> -----
> Janice Shields
> Center for Study of Responsive Law
> P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036
> 202-387-8030 | Internet: jshields@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
- Thread context:
- [PEN-L:6674] Re: Marginal Tax Rates,
Max B. Sawicky Mon 14 Oct 1996, 16:06 GMT
- [PEN-L:6673] Re: 50% Marginal Tax Rate for Working Families,
Max B. Sawicky Mon 14 Oct 1996, 15:33 GMT
- [PEN-L:6672] Re: jobs for environmental economists,
Max B. Sawicky Mon 14 Oct 1996, 15:16 GMT
- [PEN-L:6671] URPE History,
David Laibman Mon 14 Oct 1996, 13:39 GMT
- [PEN-L:6670] CEOs DEMAND CORPORATE WELFARE (fwd),
D Shniad Mon 14 Oct 1996, 01:56 GMT
- [PEN-L:6669] response to bill,
Robert R Naiman Mon 14 Oct 1996, 01:24 GMT
- [PEN-L:6668] response to Doug re: $10 collapse,
Robert R Naiman Mon 14 Oct 1996, 01:07 GMT
- [PEN-L:6667] Re: info,
bill mitchell Sun 13 Oct 1996, 20:53 GMT
- [PEN-L:6666] Re: info,
Gerald Levy Sun 13 Oct 1996, 19:44 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]