October, 04 2011, 02:56pm EDT
Think Tanks on the Right and Left Agree: Corporate Tax Holidays Lead to Layoffs, Not Jobs
Left-leaning Institute for Policy Studies and right-leaning Heritage Foundation release the same report findings on the same day.
WASHINGTON
The corporate "tax holiday" that major U.S. companies are now pressing Congress to declare will likely lead to no new net job creation, says a new report by the Institue for Policy Studies. Surprisingly, IPS is releasing its report almost simultaneously with a new paper by the conservative Heritage Foundation that draws the identical conclusion: tax holidays do not create jobs.
"When Heritage and IPS, two think tanks on opposite ends of the political spectrum, actually agree on something, policymakers should take notice," says Sarah Anderson, an IPS report co-author. "Our solutions to the problem are polar opposites -- we want corporations to pay the full existing tax rate while Heritage wants to permanently lower them. But we welcome their honest assessment that the proposed tax holiday will not create jobs."
The IPS study -- America Loses: Corporations that Take 'Tax Holidays' Slash Jobs -- shows that most of the companies that claimed a tax holiday in 2004, the last time Congress made such tax holidays possible, actually reduced their national and global workforces.
In fact, 58 of the large corporations that took tax holidays after the 2004 congressional action went on to shed almost 600,000 workers. This downsizing did not stem from recession-linked red ink. These 58 companies today maintain combined cash reserves of more than $450 billion. (See below for other key report findings.)
TO ACCESS THE REPORT:
Click Here: https://www.ips-dc.org/reports/corporations_that_take_tax_holidays_slash_jobs.
For a hard copy, please e-mail lacy@ips-dc.org.
Companies that took advantage of the 2004 tax holiday essentially "repatriated" their offshore profits without having to pay the standard-rate U.S. corporate income taxes that would have otherwise been due on those profits. The new America Loses report details the corporations that have benefited the most financially from the tax holiday and slashed the most jobs.
The report gives a special spotlight to 10 "Layoff Leaders": Citigroup, Hewlett-Packard, Bank of America, Pfizer, Merck, Verizon, Ford, Caterpillar, Dow Chemical, and DuPont. These 10 corporations repatriated billions in offshore profits, many from tax haven countries like the Cayman Islands and Bermuda, then announced layoffs and downsizing from 2004 through 2011.
"Some corporations are pushing Congress for another corporate tax holiday," notes Chuck Collins, an IPS senior scholar, report co-author, and director of the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at IPS. "But history shows that many 'tax holiday' companies use repatriated profits to reward executives and other shareholders, then lay off workers. Corporate tax holidays have resulted in precious few U.S. jobs. They are a bad trip."
The new IPS report's authors examined tax data and jobs numbers for 58 large corporations that made use of the 2004 corporate tax holiday. They looked at employment numbers listed in annual financial reports and layoff and downsizing lists compiled by Forbes.com and the consulting firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas, as well as media coverage of downsizing.
Precise data, America Loses points out, are not publicly available for all "tax holiday" firms, since no federal law requires U.S. corporations to report their U.S. employment numbers.
"We'd love to see corporations providing the number of Americans they actually employ in their annual reports and filings," says Scott Klinger, an IPS associate fellow and one of the report's main researchers. "Until they do, we have to conclude that, based on all available data, corporate tax holidays don't create jobs and constitute exceptionally poor public policy."
The new report's authors also include Sarah Anderson, director of the IPS Global Economy Project at IPS; John Cavanagh, IPS director; and Sam Pizzigati, the IPS associate fellow who edits the Institute's online weekly on excess and inequality, Too Much.
A month ago, four of the co-authors of America Loses released the Institute's annual report on executive compensation. This study, Executive Excess 2011: The Massive CEO Rewards for Tax Dodging, revealed that 25 top U.S. CEOs received more in compensation in 2010 than their corporations paid in federal income taxes.
"With Americans really struggling, Congress should not be subsidizing job destroyers," sums up America Loses co-author Chuck Collins. "We should instead be making investments that boost small and domestic business, the real engines of job creation. America needs real solutions to our job crisis, not another corporate handout dressed up as a 'tax holiday.'"
KEY FINDINGS OF REPORT
"America Loses: Corporations that Take 'Tax Holidays' Slash Jobs."
- U.S. taxpayers provided a huge subsidy to corporations that destroyed jobs. Following a tax holiday on repatriated foreign earnings in 2004, 58 corporations that benefited from the holiday slashed nearly 600,000 jobs through layoffs. These 58 giant corporations accounted for nearly 70 percent of the total repatriated funds and collectively saved an estimated $64 billion from what they otherwise would have owed in taxes.
- These companies have huge cash reserves. Despite claims that repatriation of offshore earnings is needed to create U.S. jobs, these 58 firms are collectively sitting on more than $450 billion in cash, money that could be invested in job creation tomorrow, if corporations desired.
- Tax holidays encourage aggressive profit shifting. Shifting profits offshore has accelerated dramatically since the 2004 tax holiday, suggesting that firms are counting on repeated tax holidays. A year after the 2004 tax holiday, job-destroying corporations had $229 billion in untaxed offshore profits. By 2010, this amount had soared to $696 billion, a 204 percent increase over five years.
- Expanding offshore tax avoidance. Some offshore profits stem from legitimate business operations overseas. But a substantial share of these offshore profits come from accounting acrobatics that shift profits generated from sales in the United States to foreign tax havens where corporations face little or no income tax.
TO ACCESS THE REPORT:
Click Here: https://www.ips-dc.org/reports/corporations_that_take_tax_holidays_slash_jobs.
For a hard copy, please e-mail lacy@ips-dc.org.
Institute for Policy Studies turns Ideas into Action for Peace, Justice and the Environment. We strengthen social movements with independent research, visionary thinking, and links to the grassroots, scholars and elected officials. I.F. Stone once called IPS "the think tank for the rest of us." Since 1963, we have empowered people to build healthy and democratic societies in communities, the US, and the world. Click here to learn more, or read the latest below.
LATEST NEWS
New Jersey Governor Signs Freedom to Read Act Barring Book Bans
The law, said the Democrat, "cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students."
Dec 09, 2024
Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy on Monday signed legislation protecting librarians and prohibiting public schools and libraries from banning books—a move that came as Republican state lawmakers are proscribing a record number of titles, many of them works addressing sexual orientation, gender identity, and racial injustice.
Flanked by educators, librarians, and other advocates, Murphy signed
A.3446/S.2421—known as the Freedom to Read Act—in the Princeton Public Library.
"The Freedom to Read Act cements New Jersey's role on the forefront of preventing book bans and protecting the intellectual freedom of our educators and students," said Murphy. "Across the nation, we have seen attempts to suppress and censor the stories and experiences of others. I'm proud to amplify the voices of our past and present, as there is no better way for our children to prepare for the future than to read freely."
According to a statement from Murphy's office:
Under the law, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are barred from excluding books because of the origin, background, or views of the material or of its authors. Further, boards of education and governing boards of public libraries are prevented from censoring library material based on a disagreement with a viewpoint, idea, or concept, or solely because an individual finds certain content offensive, unless they are restricting access to developmentally inappropriate material for certain age groups.
The legislation "also provides protections for library staff members against civil and criminal lawsuits related to complying with this law."
New Jersey Association of School Librarians President Karen Grant said that "the Freedom to Read Act recognizes the professionalism, honor, work ethics, and performance of school and public library staff" and "promotes libraries as trusted sources of information and recognizes the many roles that libraries play in students' lives."
"The bill will protect the intellectual freedom of students as well as acknowledge that school libraries are centers for voluntary inquiry, fostering students' growth and development," Grant added. "Additionally, we are grateful for the broad coalition of support from so many organizations for this legislation."
The leader of one of those groups—Garden State Equality executive director Christian Fuscarino—said, "Gov. Murphy just made it clear: In New Jersey, censorship loses, and freedom wins."
"At a time when access to diverse and inclusive materials is under attack across the nation, this legislation sends a powerful message that New Jersey will stand firm in protecting intellectual freedom and fostering a culture of understanding and inclusion," Fuscarino added.
The New Jersey law comes amid a near-tripling in the number of books banned or challenged by Republican state lawmakers and right-wing organizations over the past year, with PEN America counting over 10,000 such titles during the 2023-24 academic year—up from 3,362 titles during the previous scholastic year.
With Murphy's signature, New Jersey joins Minnesota and Illinois in passing state legislation to counter GOP book-banning efforts.
As the Chicago Tribunereported Sunday, "a number of school districts, many of them in deeply conservative areas of south and central Illinois," are giving up state grants rather than adopting principles against book-banning."Keep ReadingShow Less
'Completely Un-American': Progressives Slam Trump Plan to End Birthright Citizenship
"Emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," said Rep. Delia Ramirez.
Dec 09, 2024
Progressives in Congress and other migrant rights advocates sharply criticized U.S. President-elect Donald Trump for his comments on immigration during a Sunday interview, including on his hopes to end birthright citizenship.
During a 76-minute interview with NBC News' Kristen Welker, Trump said he "absolutely" intends to end birthright citizenship, potentially through executive order, despite the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Among many lies the Republican told, he also falsely claimed that the United States is the only country to offer citizenship by birth; in fact, there are dozens.
In response,
outgoing Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said on social media Monday: "This is completely un-American. The 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship. Trump cannot unilaterally end it, and any attempt to do so would be both unconstitutional and immoral."
Congresswoman Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) similarly stressed that "birthright citizenship is enshrined in the Constitution as a cornerstone of American ideals. It reflects our belief that America is the land of opportunity. Sadly, this is just another in the long line of Trump's assault on the U.S. Constitution."
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.), the daughter of Guatemalan immigrants, said in a statement: "'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.' It is important to remember who we are, where many of us came from, and why many of our families traveled here to be greeted by the Mother of Exiles, the Statue of Liberty."
Ramirez argued that "the story of our nation wouldn't be complete without the sweat, tears, joy, dreams, and hopes of so many children of immigrants who are citizens by birthright and pride themselves on being AMERICANS. It is the story of so many IL-03 communities, strengthened by the immigration of people from Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Mexico, and Guatemala, among others. It is the story of many members of Congress who can point to the citizenship of their forebears and ancestors because of immigration and birthright."
"Let's be clear: Trump is posing the question of who gets to be an American to our nation. And given that today's migrants are from Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, and Latin and Central America, it is clear he is questioning who are the 'right' people to benefit from birthright citizenship," she continued. "Questioning birthright citizenship is anti-American, and eliminating it through executive action is unconstitutional. Donald Trump knows that."
"But emboldened by a Supreme Court that would use its power to uphold white supremacy rather than the Constitution of our nation, Trump is on a mission to weaken the very soul of our nation," she warned. "I—like many sons and daughters of immigrants and first-generation Americans—believe in and fight for a land of freedom, opportunities, and equality. To live into that promise, we must stand against white nationalism—especially when it is espoused at the highest levels of government."
Although Republicans are set to control both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives next year, amending the Constitution requires support from two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and three-fourths of the state legislatures, meaning that process is unlikely to be attempted for this policy.
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) highlighted the difficulties of passing constitutional amendments while discussing Trump in a Monday appearance on CNN. The incoming chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus was born in the Dominican Republic and is the first formerly undocumented immigrant elected to Congress.
As Mother Jones reporter Isabela Dias detailed Monday:
Critics of ending birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants argue it would not only constitute bad policy, but also a betrayal of American values and, as one scholar put it to me, a "prelude" to mass deportation.
"It's really 100 years of accepted interpretation," Hiroshi Motomura, a scholar of immigration and citizenship at UCLA's law school, told me of birthright citizenship. Ending birthright citizenship would cut at the core of the hard-fought assurance of equal treatment under the law, he said, "basically drawing a line between two kinds of American citizens."
Trump's NBC interview also addressed his long-promised mass deportations. The president-elect—whose first administration was globally condemned for separating migrant families at the southern border and second administration is already filling up with hard-liners—suggested Sunday that he would deport children who are U.S. citizens with undocumented parents.
"I don't want to be breaking up families, so the only way you don't break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back," Trump told Welker.
Responding in a Monday statement, America's Voice executive director Vanessa Cárdenas said, "There's a growing consensus that the Trump mass deportation agenda will hit American consumers and industries hard, but the scope of what Trump and his team are proposing goes well beyond the economic impact."
"Trump and allies are making clear their mass deportation agenda will include deporting U.S. citizens, including children, while aiming to gut a century and a half of legal and moral precedent on birthright citizenship," she added. "In total, their attacks go well beyond the narrow lens of immigration to the fundamental question of who gets to be an American."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Green, Indigenous Groups Warns Arctic Still at Grave Drilling Risk When Trump Returns
"Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is all risk with no reward," said one advocate.
Dec 09, 2024
Wildlife protection groups and Indigenous leaders in Alaska said Monday that they would push to discourage bidding in an oil and gas lease sale just announced by the U.S. Interior Department for part of the Arctc National Wildlife Refuge.
Under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which opened the refuge for oil and gas drilling, the Biden administration announced the second of two lease sales, set to be held on January 9, 2025.
The first Trump administration held the initial lease sale in 2021, but with banks and insurance companies increasingly reticent to back drilling projects in the area, it generated little interest and led to less than 1% of the projected sale revenue.
Releasing its final record of decision, the Interior Department said Monday that 400,000 acres of wilderness in the refuge's 1.6-million-acre northwest Coastal Plain would be put up for bidding at a minimum price of $30 per acre—despite vocal opposition from the Gwich'in Nation and the Iñupiat Alaska Natives.
The land supports local communities as well as porcupine caribou herds and polar bears.
"Our way of life, our food security, and our spiritual well-being is directly tied to the health of the caribou and the health of this irreplaceable landscape," Kristen Moreland, executive director of Gwich'in Steering Committee, toldBloomberg News. "Every oil company stayed away from the first lease sale, and we expect them to do the same during the second."
The record of decision concludes the Bureau of Land Management's process for developing a supplemental environmental impact statement, which was required after President-elect Donald Trump's first administration completed an analysis with "fundamental flaws and legal errors," as the Sierra Club said Monday.
Selling the drilling rights just before Trump takes office could complicate the GOP's plans to hold a more expansive sale later on, but Dan Ritzman, director of Sierra Club's Conservation Campaign, emphasized that regardless of who is in office when the sale takes place, "oil and gas development in the Arctic Refuge is a direct threat to some of the last untouched landscapes on Alaska's North Slope and to the caribou herds that the Gwich'in people rely on."
"The 2017 tax act, forced through Congress by Donald Trump and his Big Oil CEO allies, opened up the Coastal Plain to oil and gas leasing," said Ritzman. "Letting him oversee a lease sale over these pristine lands would be beyond irresponsible. In the meantime, President [Joe] Biden should listen to the Gwich'in and do all that he can to preserve these lands and waters. His legacy is on the line."
Erik Grafe, an attorney at environmental law firm Earthjustice, said the group is "committed to going to court as often as necessary to defend the Arctic Refuge from oil drilling and will work toward a more sustainable future that does not depend on ever-expanding oil extraction."
"Drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is all risk with no reward," said Grafe. "Oil drilling would destroy this beautiful land, held sacred by Gwich'in people, and would further destabilize the global climate, but it offers zero benefit to taxpayers or consumers."
Defenders of Wildlife called on Congress to repeal the 2017 tax law's mandate for leasing sales in the "iconic American landscape" of the Arctic Refuge.
"Turning the coastal plain into an oilfield will obliterate the pristine wilderness of the Arctic Refuge," said Nicole Whittington-Evans, Alaska senior program director for the group, "directly threatening the future of the Porcupine caribou herd and the physical, cultural, and spiritual existence of the Gwich'in people who depend on them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular