No more Twinkies - Hostess out of business

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The reason that the Walton family is really rich is because they figured out that our society values pricing over all else. Do you really think that Americans are going to start paying 5x as much for the same products because they are American made?

That and the Walton's were tight with the Clinton's.

Hillary Clinton was on the board of directors for Walmart, the Clinton's are big supporters of Walmart.

hmm.. I wonder why Bill Clinton was so excited to sign the free trade agreement with China.... to help Walmart maybe??

http://articles.cnn.com/2000-10-10/p...PM:ALLPOLITICS


Clinton has as big of a hand in this economic mess as any of the other players do.

[cal828]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...m-ireland-move

Here is an interesting article from BloombergBusinessweek. I guess we can't expect companies not to move their corporate headquarters, if we have what seems to be a corporate tax code that is so high, but do we have to reward them for doing so by giving them tax breaks for moving?

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by cal828

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...m-ireland-move

Here is an interesting article from BloombergBusinessweek. I guess we can't expect companies not to move their corporate headquarters, if we have what seems to be a corporate tax code that is so high, but do we have to reward them for doing so by giving them tax breaks for moving?

I wouldn't call it a tax break. Companies are currently allowed to deduct the cost of moving. If the law was changed so that a company could not deduct the cost of moving overseas, that wouldn't stop anyone from moving. The cost of moving is negligible.

[cal828]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I wouldn't call it a tax break. Companies are currently allowed to deduct the cost of moving. If the law was changed so that a company could not deduct the cost of moving overseas, that wouldn't stop anyone from moving. The cost of moving is negligible.

Probably so. I don't imagine that they have to set up much of a corporate headquarters in other countries. Negligible or not, the cost to the treasury of the US is not negligible, but don't get me wrong, if corporate taxes in the US are onerous, I think they should be lowered.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/bu...pagewanted=all

Here is another interesting article from the New York Times. Sounds like a bit of shell game. All perfectly legal of course.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by cal828

Probably so. I don't imagine that they have to set up much of a corporate headquarters in other countries. Negligible or not, the cost to the treasury of the US is not negligible, but don't get me wrong, if corporate taxes in the US are onerous, I think they should be lowered.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/bu...pagewanted=all

Here is another interesting article from the New York Times. Sounds like a bit of shell game. All perfectly legal of course.

If you tax rate was 50% but they gave you write offs to reduce it to a point that you get a refund then what is your tax rate? Do other countries with low tax rates also allow the practice of write offs?

[bigrun]

[Rudeboyelvis]

Pushed by a bankruptcy judge eager to save thousands of jobs, Hostess Brands and one of its biggest unions agreed to mediation on Monday, in a last-ditch effort to avoid winding down Hostess, the bankrupt maker of Twinkies and Wonder Bread.

At the behest of the judge, Hostess Brands and the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers Union, which represents 5,600 Hostess workers, will meet with a mediator on Tuesday to try to narrow their differences toward a labor agreement.

If the mediation succeeds, it could prevent the liquidation of the company and save 18,500 jobs. Otherwise, Hostess is likely to auction off its well-known brands, leaving the fates of those workers in limbo.


http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/11/...-to-mediation/