Log In | Register
Corporate profits receive a lot of media attention, but what receives considerably less attention are the corporate taxes paid on corporate profits. Do a Google search for "Exxon profits" and you'll get about 8,000 hits. Now try "Exxon taxes" and you'll get a little more than 300 hits. That's a ratio of about 33 to 1.
I'm pretty sure that Exxon's tax payment in 2007 of $30 billion (that's $30,000,000,000) is a record, exceeding the $28 billion it paid last year.
Exxon's 2007 Tax Bill: $30 Billion
Seeded on Thu Feb 7, 2008 3:19 PM EST
Article Source: Energy Sector and Stocks Analysis from Seeking Alpha- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (10)
It's interesting to me to watch the reactions of the public when oil companies post their huge profits. However, very seldom do we notice how much they contribute to the tax base.
#1 - Thu Feb 7, 2008 3:22 PM ESTLet me get this straight. Exxon paid $30 billion in taxes, out of $37 billion in profits?
- 1 vote
In the oil business, these are called after tax profits. So no, it is not $30B in tax out of $37B. Earnings before taxes are in the $60-70B. You can find their financials here.
Don't feel bad for the big boys at the company we used to call the Double Cross.
- 1 vote
I never feel bad for them. Setting the record for most profits 5 years in a row... I don't see why they're only taxed 50%. It's not exactly like oil has trouble selling itself.
- 1 vote
Well, it is a little disheartening that our gas prices keep rising while the oil companies are raking in record profits, but there is nothing wrong with a company making a profit, even a large one. Are we to step in and determine what profits are acceptable and what profits are too much? Isn't that a getting a little too involved in, what should be, a free market system?
- 1 vote
To pretend we are not involved in our "free market" system is disrespectful to the American economy and industry. And, I never complained about Microsoft's profits, or Berkshire Hathaway's profits. I protest the oil companies profiting off the back of a misguided war. I protest such trade in blood money as I protest the sale of blood diamonds. Remember, before Exxon's streak, oil hovered around $30 a barrel.
- 1 vote
Yeah, I have scars from $20 oil and worse still, $12 oil back in '85. When I started in the oil boom of the late '70's, there were forecasts of $50 oil, but nobody took those seriously.
And in '85-'86, when geologists were waiting tables, the saying was 'please lord, give us another oil boom, we won't screw it up this time.'
But look at the financials; profit is going into stock buybacks and increased dividends, not to mention CEO salaries and bonuses.
- 1 vote
It sure is interesting that this "factoid" has sprouted up in a number of websites. Even today in the Columbus Dispatch the "paid tax" figure ballooned to a whopping $81 billion. The Dispatch writer does include the caveat that this amount includes "state and federal gasoline taxes," as if Exxon pays those taxes. This all smells like a propaganda effort on Exxon's behalf.
- 1 vote
#3 - Sun Feb 10, 2008 9:22 AM ESTInteresting but, I believe, flawed analysis. Personally, as you note, I pay taxes on my income not my take home. XOM had income of $404B, that's $404,000,000,000. A quick calc shows that they are only paying about 7.4% tax! Wow, I wish I could have closed door, top-secret meetings with the VP <a href="
">online gambling legislation</a> to work out ways to benefit me at the publics expense.I would like to see the photo copy of the check that exxon paid the government. Also can anybody explain why a company that earns so much money needs tax breaks?
#4 - Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:20 AM EDTust think if XOM's taxable income was in line with the rest of the tax paying public we could totally eliminate taxes for the "lower 50%" and make a step toward
<a href=" leveling the income tax playing field.
#5 - Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:33 AM EDTAn American individual doesn't begin to pay income taxes until he has adjusted gross income of slightly north of $30k. Up to that level deductions serve to negate any income tax.The 35% rate is a marginal US income tax rate. The 41.4% rate is an average rate that covers all sorts of income (much of it outside the US) fro sales, asset dispositions, etc..., some of which is taxed at rates much higher than 35%.Not that you're particularly interested in accurate details...
#6 - Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:39 AM EDTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
