Rebuttal to NYT's GE tax "dodge" article

Fortune Article

Related post on going concern

quote:

---

GE’s 2010 financial statements reported a $3.25 billion U.S. “current tax benefit,” which is where the Times, which declined comment, got its $3.2 billion “tax benefit” number. But a company’s “current tax” number has nothing to do with what it actually pays in taxes for a given year. “Current tax benefit” and “current tax expense” are so-called financial reporting numbers, used to calculate the profits a company reports to shareholders.

In other words, the Times left out the tricky stuff or maybe just didn’t a bang-up job explaining the tricky stuff. But framing the shrewd tax planning and lobbyists working for a giant corporation is far more provocative than book-tax differences and defining deferred tax assets. Relevancy be damned!

---

I think it really says a lot about the complexity of our tax code that like 99% of Americans can read this article and not having a fricking clue as to what it means. Too bad the NYT won't receive the criticism it deserves for this shite reporting.