Obama Admin Statements On Koch Industies Tax Status Under Review

[ej510]

Source: Talking Points Memo

Statements made by a senior Obama administration official about the tax status of Koch Industries -- a company whose majority owners are major funders of the Tea Party-supporting group Americans for Prosperity -- are under review by the Treasury Inspector General for the Tax Administration, which oversees the activities of the IRS.

The review, focusing on whether any Obama administration official improperly accessed and disclosed private tax information, was started at the request of Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and six other Republican senators.

The statements under question were made back in August, when a senior administration official talked about Koch Industries on a briefing with reporters. "In this country we have partnerships, we have S corps, we have LLCs, we have a series of entities that do not pay corporate income tax," said the senior administration official. "Some of which are really giant firms, you know Koch Industries is a multibillion dollar businesses."

A White House official said the statements came from information in publicly available sources -- including the Koch Industries website and testimony before the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. But Koch Industries thinks the statements were improper, and claimed to have identified that White House official as Austan Goolsbee.

"As the Inspector General charged with ensuring, among other things, the fair implementation of our Nation's system of tax administration, pursuant to Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration practice, I have ordered the commencement of a review into the matters alleged," J. Russell George wrote in a letter to Grassley.

Read more: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/obama_admin_statements_on_koch_industry_tax_status.php

---

I would love to put these fuckers out of business!

[Democrats_win]

1. Just think how many people could live off of the money they stole from America.

Yet they are the ones complaining.

[DJ13]

2. So we arent supposed to know the truth about how multinationals are taxed?

I would think tax status is publicly disclosed in any corporate earnings statement.

[ej510]

4. There are questions whether tax status is legit anyway.

[ProSense]

3. Sounds like Koch is worried and Grassley is there to cover for them.

Hope they go down.

[Faygo Kid]

5. +1

[notesdev]

6. Nixon redeemed!

Another feature of the Nixon regime - using the IRS to persecute political opposition - finds new life in the new Democratic Party. We should all be so proud!

[ProSense]

7. WTF? n/t

[notesdev]

10. exactly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon%27s_Enemies_List

This admin should know better than to be anywhere near an IRS audit of a political opponent.

[ProSense]

11. Exactly?

This is a bullshit desperate attempt by Grassley

Republicans are simply pissed off because they're being exposed. From the OP article.

George's investigation appears to only focus on whether administration employees improperly accessed and disclosed confidential taxpayer information, which would have been a violation of section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code. But the senators wrote in their letter that making the statements even based on publicly available information might not be proper.

<...>

A spokesperson for the IG's office told TPMuckraker that what is at issue is whether or not any confidential taxpayer information was released. The spokesperson wouldn't say whether talking about confidential tax information that had been disclosed in other forums was in and of itself improper.

President Obama has been critical of AFP and the Supreme Court decision which allowed companies like it to obscure their funding sources.

"Right now all around this country there are groups with harmless-sounding names like Americans for Prosperity, who are running millions of dollars of ads against Democratic candidates all across the country," he said in August. "And they don't have to say who exactly the Americans for Prosperity are."

ATP President Tim Phillips said after his remarks that "the President is now making shrill, desperate attacks on Americans for Prosperity and our 1,200,000 AFP grassroots activists across the nation."

[notesdev]

12. Explain to me

What business is it of a political appointee, the status of a specific company under the tax code?

Mind you, the one who is named (Goolsbee) isn't even in the chain of command for the IRS. How did this end up on his plate at all?

You'd have to be blind not to see that there is political hanky-panky going on with something that should be administered by the bureaucracy alone. Political operatives should never, ever be involved with the IRS in any way, shape or form.

[ProSense]

14. Hmmm?

"You'd have to be blind not to see that there is political hanky-panky going on with something that should be administered by the bureaucracy alone. Political operatives should never, ever be involved with the IRS in any way, shape or form."

What the hell are you talking about?

Got any evidence to support the the President's impeachment?

[sinkingfeeling]

16. Hold on. The investigation is about the statements made about Koch.

The amount of taxes paid by any corporation should be a matter of public record.

[quakerboy]

27. It is the business of a political appointee

to be aware of his opposition. A search of reporting and public records makes it quite clear that the Koch's are indeed the political opposition to Obama. Now, Given that *I* knew the information enclosed in that statement, based on public records, I would expect that he would be aware of this information as well.

Without having a single thing to do with the IRS. And making your whole argument complete bunk worthy of the tea party nut jobs the Koch's fund.

Do you have a cogent argument based on facts, or is unsubstantiated claims that only work on the birther mental wavelength all you have on this?

[notesdev]

28. Is it?

He is a political appointee but not a campaign staffer. His job, if you didn't know, is to chair Obama's council of economic advisers.

Now on the matter of facts, the company in question is a private company - not a publicly traded one - and as such its tax records are not part of the public record.

So where did the information really come from and how did a political appointee whose duties do not include opposition research come about it?

[quakerboy]

29. Hrrm

I may be eating crow here. I just went to look, and I did not find what I had thought I would. I could swear that I had personally noted this information previously, and that this information had been stated in public hearings or forums by Koch industries representatives, but I am having no luck tracking that down. I appologize for the bit of over the topness in my post, given that I cannot back up what I said as well as I would demand of anyone else who said it.

As to the other other question... If it turns out that it was not public information, then there is a bit of a problem. But it it was, I have no problem with an adviser using it. just because he is not on a campaign does not mean they do not have opposition. The opposition isnt limited to campaigns for elected office. In this case it goes quite deep in actively opposing the current government, and I think it is perfectly valid to keep an eye and a focus (via legal means only) on their activities and status, reasons, etc.

[veganlush]

8. some posters seem to be reading this wrong-

---it's the Obama administration that's being investigated for possible wrong-doing, not Koch.

[backtomn]

25. Thank you......

Apparently, current law does not allow this information to be released. If we didn't like this, we had an opportunity in the last 2 years to change. I am not sure much will come of this, but this could easily be reversed on us in the coming years. Be careful what you wish for.

[h9socialist]

9. Grassley obviously knows which side his bread is buttered on!!!

This is pure bullshit!!! The Republicans protecting their neo-fascist benefactors -- that's all.

[madrchsod]

13. chuckles the clown still thinks google is a funny word...

[JDPriestly]

15. Information about the organizational form of a business is publicly available.

I have checked this on businesses a number of times myself. What idiocy! C Corporations pay corporate income taxes. Many other types of business organizations -- in fact most other types of business organizations -- probably do not. That is Corp. law 101. That is why people form LLCs and S corps. and partnerships. Grassley and George cannot be serious about this.

[JDPriestly]

17. Google Koch Industries and on the home page you

read that it is one of the largest privately owned companies in the world. No need to look in the tax files. Koch, Industries is not a publicly owned corporation. Why are the Republicans wasting their time on this?

http://www.kochind.com/Default.aspx

[AlbertCat]

18. Why are the Republicans wasting their time on this?

The same reason they waste the entire country's time in the Senate.

Distraction.


This is a preview of coming attractions if they get elected!.... Whitewater tenfold, about everything, every day. Your tax dollars at work!


Remember they spent 75 million on Whitewater, then said they weren't gonna do anything... even though they could! Yep 75 million came up with the goods to get Clinton.... but they decided not to use what they have. Uh huh.... :eyes:

Let me translate.... 75 million and they got nothin'. This is what we'll get if they win in Nov.

Fear of the Black Man is great among their people......

[backtomn]

26. Why are we worrying about Koch Industries??

Who cares?? If we get our butts handed to us in November, it won't be because of Koch. Let the Repubs waste their time.....we need to keep our eye on the prize.

[independent_voter]

19. They dont pay corporate income tax, because they are not a corporation

they are unusual, in that they are a very large company that has forgone the benefits (and liabilities) of being publicly traded (2nd largest in the USA, after cargill). And it's not artificial, most of the company really is held 'in the family'

part of their success, is that they are run by the actual owners, who couldnt care less about quarterly cents per share. they dont have to answer to wall street

corporations right or wrong, are double taxed, at the corporate and shareholder level

not trying to defend koch per se in their extracuricular political activities, but to proclaim 'they dont pay corporate income tax!!!' is just plain absurd - of course they dont, they're not a corporation

[Taverner]

20. Indite the Koch Brothers!

[Dreamer Tatum]

21. What do you want us to write?

Do you have an address for them?

[Taverner]

24. Bad speller, bad bad!

[Tansy_Gold]

23. I-N-D-I-C-T. n/t

[Dreamer Tatum]

22. At issue, for those who cannot read or simply refuse to read, is that...

...someone in the Administration allegedly accessed tax information on Koch illegally.

If you don't think that's a problem because you don't like Koch, then try the obvious
thought experiment.

[karynnj]

30. That i s rich - they are angry because the administration highlighted publicly available information

about them. It is stunning that the Republicans want to prevent the public from knowing who the 3% of "small" businesses are that are impacted by not extending the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy. It would be interesting, but not publicly available, to be able to compare the amount they get PER YEAR from that tax cut versus the Obama plan and the amount they are KNOWN to have paid in anti-Democratic ads.