Keith Olbermann reveals small businesses 'in name only'

[cal04]

Special report names firms with millions in revenues, run by multimillionaires
video at link
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39317328/ns/politics/


When it comes to discussing tax cuts, the term "small business" is an "utter misnomer," Keith Olbermann said in a special report Wednesday night.

Olbermann, on his msnbc TV show "Countdown with Keith Olbermann," named firms considered small businesses for tax purposes but have millions in income and are run by multimillionaires.

Among them are the "biggest companies in the world and the richest people in this country," Olbermann said on a segment titled, "Small Business in Name Only."

Because IRS tax returns are not public record, the names of companies were ascertained from public documents such as court records or the companies' postings:

Among his examples:

[elleng]

1. Keith and Rachel give Dems SO MUCH FODDER!

I pray that this will be used, early and often.

[xchrom]

2. Recommend

[Hannah Bell]

3. yep. real small businesses get shit, something i learned when i contacted the small biz admin

in our area about a biz our homeless shelter wanted to start to employ some of the residents.

absolutely useless and uninterested.

too small.

[RM84]

4. "S-Corp" Clarification

As a tax attorney, and I a small business owner, I would a little concerned with Mr. Olbermann's "Small business" special last night.

First, "S Corp" does not stand for, "small business." S-Corp actually stands for subchapter corp. This is simply an election made so that entity is a passed-through as a entity. In no way shape or form, does "S-Corp" reflect the size of a business. In fact the only limitation on the size of an "S-Corp" is that an "S-Corp" is limited to 75 shareholders.

Now for some statistics. In 2002, there were 3,154,777 "S-Corps" reportings for a total NET revenue of 185 billion That math works out to an AVERAGE of $58, 64 of reported income per “S-Corp” filing. My source is as follows: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=141441,00.html

Flashing names and income figure for 10 wealthy republicans who own "S-Corps" is in no way indicative of a the average S-Corp. By way, most small businesses are not "S-Corps", that are "LLC" (limited liability companies).

If you want to use complicated rhetoric that’s fine, but the numbers don't lie.

[SargeUNN]

7. ok let's hear your defense

not just your denial. Maybe you can enlighten us on how small business label has NOT been prosituted by the right or maybe you can. Let's see your side or maybe you are just trying to spread propaganda.

[Kalyke]

8. Too bad you didn't actually SEE the show where Keith

explained what an "S-Corp" is.

And, while your numbers aren't lying, they aren't showing how top-loaded that "average" is. Why don't you provide us with the mode or the range rather than averaging the lower incomes in with those who are muscling the middle out?

[Buns_of_Fire]

9. It DOES seem a distinction that makes no difference, doesn't it?

It's like that old comparison of how Bill Gates can walk into my living room, and, just like magic, I'm a multi-billionaire -- when you average out the incomes.

If the AVERAGE income is just over five grand, I don't see how a tax cut is going to have any impact on the AVERAGE Sub-S businessperson, anyway. Five grand doesn't even reach poverty level, and we who inhabit those lofty heights don't pay any income tax anyway -- tax cut or not.

[SargeUNN]

5. opps I posted a thread

about the same time or overlooked this one. Keith did a great job and gave us some wonderful info.

[Hosnon]

6. SBINO? nt.