[quote]H factor wrote:
Lol at thinking any of these companies have had tax losses. [/quote]
Your own argument in this thread destroys this attempt at ridicule.
Outside of the fact you have your head in the sand if you don’t think they do post tax losses from time to time.
I’m saying the following:
Poorly written laws are the result of either lack of thought, lack of understanding or done on purpose to benefit the parties involved. I would imagine you could find examples of all three.
Huge manner would depend on what you see as huge. As for “gaming the system” it largely depends on what you mean by “the system”. The IRC is the IRC, accounting principals are accounting principals. If the accounting works in a mannor that ends up with a company not paying large tax bills this year, then so be it. Financial and Taxable income will eventually catch up to each other for the most part, there are perm differences.
Simple timing of transactions, doing what you normally would a couple days early or later, can turn the tides as far as income owed. But this is just a defferal of tax, not an avoidance.
There are many reasons tax reform is fought against, and Jessie Ventura would have you believe the illuminatti gets together and they fight this as one unit to rule the world. When in fact it is more or less hundreds of special interest groups and donors looking out for their own slice of the pie.
Take for example Romney’s reluctance to say which deductions he would limit. You know why? Because once he did, whatever industry benefits from that deduction would give Obama money and fight against Romney.
“Gaming the system” is more a matter of navigation and self preservation, not some giant party were CEO’s laugh at you and me because they have the IRC super secret deductions handbook.