Largest Insurers Would Face Asset Tax Under GOP Plan

By Richard Rubin | February 26, 2014

  • February 26, 2014 at 1:32 pm
    Libby says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 39
    Thumb down 6

    Yeah! Let’s get our money back from Wall Street!

    • February 26, 2014 at 1:59 pm
      Ratemaker says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 3

      Much as I’d like it to, this proposal isn’t going anywhere.

    • February 26, 2014 at 4:59 pm
      Dave says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 10
      Thumb down 50

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • February 27, 2014 at 9:44 am
        Libby says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 64
        Thumb down 4

        Nobody’s ever paid ME back for the financial meltdown. I lost my job, am making 1/2 of what I was in 2008, and my IRA/401k went to shit; even before I had to take money out of it (and pay a 10% penalty on my own money) to survive while unemployed. Contrary to popular belief, not all liberals want public assistance or “entitlements”.

  • February 26, 2014 at 2:48 pm
    Jon says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 17
    Thumb down 3

    I guess big banking forgot to keep re-election fund donations up to date…

  • February 26, 2014 at 3:07 pm
    blu lightning says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 25
    Thumb down 6

    seems like if its a valid way to raise money in the event of any kind of future financial disturbance then it makes sense to tax all financial instituations-large, medium and small, domestic and foreign.
    Its easy to focus on the big ones, but failure of smaller firms can be just as disruptive and instinctively, it seems unfair to target a part of a group for taxes and not others in that same group who might also need and benefit from gov’t assistance/intervention.

    • February 26, 2014 at 5:07 pm
      Dave says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 8
      Thumb down 6

      So in essence you’re saying you want to guarantee yet another financial meltdown by letting these banks who are too big to fail know that we’ll bail them out if they fail again. If they’re too big to fail, break them up don’t tax them to fund the next bailout. You know how our government works, this money won’t be set aside for another bailout, it will be spent. For Mr. Obama $1 trillion annual deficits are the norm. Debt problem? What debt problem?

  • February 26, 2014 at 3:22 pm
    reality says:
    Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 14
    Thumb down 43

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • February 26, 2014 at 3:49 pm
    Mike Mansel says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 1

    No big deal – these institutions will simply pass the cost along to their consumers.
    Mike

    • February 27, 2014 at 4:21 pm
      Libby says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      Sad, but true, Mike.

  • February 26, 2014 at 5:02 pm
    Dave says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 4

    If these banks are too big to fail, why are they paying a tax? Shouldn’t they be broken up so they’re not too big to fail? I don’t want another bailout. I want to see inefficient operations fail and be replaced by better ones. Should have happened to AIG and the banks who made too many bad loans.

    • March 3, 2014 at 12:32 pm
      Phoenix says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 0

      That IS what happened to AIG. The LOANS made to AIG, all of which were paid back with billions in interest, gave them time to sell off the assets they needed to so they could fulfill their obligations to the banks.

  • February 27, 2014 at 9:38 am
    ComradeAnon says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 2

    Sorry. Republicans aren’t going to let anything happen. This was dead before arrival.

    • February 27, 2014 at 1:21 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 4

      The problem with the country is people like you.

      I’m sorry “comrade” I’m not exactly kosher with your follow the line, label the enemy, type of thought. Even when they are doing what you want them to do.

  • February 27, 2014 at 1:19 pm
    bob says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 5

    Now isn’t this funny.

    Planet makes a post about Wells Fargo raping Des Moines…

    And says republicans are all about corporate welfare…

    When suddenly practically the same day he makes the comment:

    Republicans put in place a tax on assets of big banks. As you would say Captain Planet: SNAP.

    And not just a small snap either, SNAP all CAPS for Captain Cappy poo. :)

  • February 27, 2014 at 5:58 pm
    Don't Call Me Shirley says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 17
    Thumb down 0

    Does this mean that GE might have to actually start paying taxes?

    • February 27, 2014 at 6:21 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 4

      It is more important for a company to not go out of business than to not pay taxes.

      These bigger companies were allowed to write off several years worth of excess losses left over to other years. The companies were treated fairly who ended up paying no taxes as a result of carrying over losses to other years for deductions. That is perfectly fair.

      This also makes sense in light of that. A company may have taxes on a year that they file bankrupt. Taxing them on the money they earned could contribute to this. Giving them a roll over on losses to deduct will result in the public hating them when they don’t pay taxes. Taxing the assets though, would actually only affect companies strong enough to shoulder the burden.

      It’s pretty much good all around.

      • February 27, 2014 at 6:24 pm
        bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 3

        That should read *

        It is more important for a company to not go out of business than to pay taxes. *

      • February 28, 2014 at 9:46 am
        Libby says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 0

        If a company can not operate in the black, why should taxpayers subsidize their bad business decisions? Let them go out of business. That is how a competitive market is supposed to work.

        • February 28, 2014 at 12:21 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 6

          Libby,

          So your motto is to increase the cost of doing business by 20-30%, and let a company fall from a recession (which you say let them go bankrupt for making bad decisions, to which I say HOW DARE YOU most companies did NOT make bad decisions during the recession) rather than to stop taxing them and keep them around for future revenues? This is EXACTLY why jobs are so hard to create. Jack offs like you!

          Make it easy for business to fail?

          And how the #@%#@% is it subsidizing a corporation by giving zero taxes on a year? That’s no cost to the government, keeps the corporation around, and the jobs, and could result in government revenues.

          Further those jobs provide social security tax, and income tax. Even if they paid zero as a corporation it would still bring in government revenues.

          You need to get your head out of your “fairness” argument ass Libby.

          Sorry to be harsh, but you’re acting 5, and you’re spreading class warfare again.

          Go based on numbers, not emotional bull crap.

          • March 1, 2014 at 10:57 am
            KY jw says:
            Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 12
            Thumb down 0

            Ok, Libby said it before me, but I’m going to say it anyway.

            If one company fails, a competitor company will pick up that business. Isn’t that how it works? The companies who make money at it continue and those that operate in the red quit.

            I don’t understand why it’s a problem for companies to fail. That just opens an opportunity for someone else to do a better job and actually make money at it.

        • February 28, 2014 at 1:20 pm
          Libby says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 16
          Thumb down 0

          Bob – if you owe me $5,000 and I say “That’s OK, you don’t have to pay me back.” didn’t that COST me $5,000? How can you say it doesn’t “cost” the government anything? It sure does. It costs them the lost tax revenue, which then you and I have to make up somehow. It’s called corporate welfare.

          If the company goes out of business, that means more business for their competitors, which will bring jobs for the bankrupt company’s employees.

          No-one “bailed me out” during the recession. In fact, I had the privilege of paying the government an additional 10% to withdraw MY MONEY from my own 401k to survive. PLUS PAY MY TAXES. I didn’t take a handout from the government or declare bankruptcy. If these companies can’t get their shit together and operate in the black, they shouldn’t be in business.

      • February 28, 2014 at 3:34 pm
        Don't Call Me Shirley says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 0

        I took a huge loss on the sale of my former home, but I wasn’t allowed to deduct any of it.

  • March 3, 2014 at 10:42 am
    Jeff says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 0

    I would be much less concerned about the “too big to fail” concept if we could get some version of Glass-Steagall.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features