Obama Administration denies Goldman Sachs $3 billion tax break
source: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/09/obama-administration-denies-goldman-sachs-3-billion-...
-
-
- WakeUpPeople
- added this
This is the right decision. Had the Treasury Department allowed Goldman to reduce its tax liability by using Fannie Mae's tax breaks, it would have potentially opened the door to a severe loss of tax revenue, as other profitable companies would likely have sought to follow suit.
As reported earlier, Goldman Sachs had offered to purchase up to $1 billion of low-income housing tax credits that Fannie Mae had itself purchased during the housing bubble but can no longer use. More recently, the Wall Street Journal reported that Warren Buffett had joined Goldman Sachs in a bid to purchase $3 billion in credits. The credits, designed to encourage additional investment in low-income housing, are useful only if the company claiming them is profitable. And with Fannie Mae currently a very unprofitable company, it does not have much use for the credits. It has lost $59 billion so far this year, and the U.S. government has already given Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, its related government-sponsored entity, almost $100 billion since September 2008.
Goldman Sachs had portrayed its offer to purchase Fannie Mae's tax credits as a "win-win" proposition. It argued that Fannie Mae would benefit because it could take these credits, which are losing value by the day, off of its books, while Goldman would benefit by reducing its tax liability by the amount of the credits.
Unfortunately, Goldman failed to include the interests of the taxpayer in its calculations. For every dollar that Goldman saves, the government -- and, by extension, the U.S. taxpayer -- loses a dollar. This is hardly a win-win situation.
more at link...
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/11/09/obama-administration-denies-goldman-sach...
-
- groups:
- Community, News and Politics, Current Tonight, US Politics, 6 more
-
- tags:
- News, News and Politics, Goldman Sachs, Fannie Mae, 2 more
-
-
2hellnwait
-
B.O.'s TARP oversight team knew that to overlook that deceptive maneuver by G.S. would come back and bite them in their sorry asses big time if they didn't show some token fiscal responsibility.
- 2 years ago
-
2hellnwait
-
-
carmalite
-
I say let it fail because the costs will continue to go up and within a year the average American will realized how these corporatist insurance gangsters are holding everyone hostage and a grassroots organization of middle class non- upper 2 percent Republicans and Democrates will realize that something must be done.
In Switzerland, healthcare is private, but its REGULATED the way our utilities used tated. The companies pay dividends and are traded. They are secure regulated investments and yet they can't gouge or deny patients. Why not here?
- 2 years ago
-
carmalite
-
-
shanklinmike
-
carmalite:
because the corporate republicans and democrats in charge like status quo no matter how much they lie to your face.....
They HATE free markets and know we have had nothing close in almost a century. It is a shame so few people understand what is going on......
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
thebullet
-
IMPORTANT if you care about helping the less fortunate in this county.
The tax credits that goldman was going to by provide most of the low income housing in this country. Here is the important part they ONLY create new units and jobs if they are purchased from the original source, NOT in a secondary transaction like this one. it would be cheaper on the Governmen/taxpayer for the Treasury to buy the tax credits from Fannie or just make Fannie keep them.
Selling those credits on the secondary market hurts tax payer and the working poor that need housing.
- 2 years ago
-
thebullet
-
-
vesher
-
u cant blame them for trying? i mean, they have made some of the most audacious business deals in history, no?
- 2 years ago
-
vesher
-
-
ankab
-
It is for the 2 companies involved..............
- 2 years ago
-
ankab
-
-
thestick
-
Like giving these guys billions in bailouts wasn't enough of a break. They, in turn, used that money to aquire other banks??????
How did that help any one other than these "poor, helpless" banks? Too big to fail means - I like my monopoly the way it is, thanks -In the words of Max Keiser "Barack Obama dances to Goldman Sacs' tune."
Letting Goldman get the credits I think would have awoken the sleeping dog, so it was in the Obamator's interest to do dirty deeds discretely.We still have a long way to get out from under the thumbs of Wall Street. Money doesn't grow on trees Money is a human tool of stratification and prejudice, but some act like it is the work of God. Whenever some thing is brought up in the houses of govt. the first question is how much will it cost? (healthcare insurance) Not do we have the resources, Not is it best for the public/enviroment. Some say money is Liquid, I say it causes friction.
- 2 years ago
-
thestick
-
-
shanklinmike
-
thestick:
The problem is, too many people think government is a mixture between Santa Claus, Superman, and Mother Teresa, a complete fallacy! Government is organized force, something that can not be easily controlled and when it grows economically, it also must use force to protect "its" assets.....even though government has nothing, it must steal to survive and produces nothing at a social marginal gain. It is truly sad, that so many people put faith in the special interest and lobbyist groups that truly run this country....instead of voting to force market pressures on the rich and ending the war on consumerism.
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
derk
-
Can't wait to see how Fox will spin this ...
- 2 years ago
-
derk
-
-
diabolical44
-
derk:
socialism, hitler , big gov't, blah blah blah. tea party. Obama is black. blah blah blah.
- 2 years ago
-
diabolical44
-
-
diabolical44
-
it is hard for me to express in words the hatred I possess for the wall street big banks and their cronies in DC that have single handedly sent this country to hell in a handbasket. as far as I'm concerned, there are thousands of people in these organizations that legitimately deserve the death penalty.
- 2 years ago
-
diabolical44
-
-
Conniepae
-
Now that's change I can believe in.
- 2 years ago
-
Conniepae
-
-
shanklinmike
-
-
Conniepae:
Obama has been in bed with Goldman Sachs for the longest time.....this is not change....this is stabbing your business partner in the back....not saying they don't deserve it the way this apparent government oligopoly has treated the taxpayers, but in all honesty, this is just one business partner stabbing the other one in the back. This is NOT change.....
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
LadybugLady [removed]
-
It's about time that we stand up and tell the banks they don't get anymore help.
- 2 years ago
-
LadybugLady [removed]
-
-
Conniepae
-
LadybugLady:
Not without accountability.
- 2 years ago
-
Conniepae
-
-
thestick
-
LadybugLady:
if we did, the fed will predict that world will stop spinning, like they did before. and the gov't would roll over again. Sit, stay, play dead.....good peasant
- 2 years ago
-
thestick
-
-
shanklinmike
-
LadybugLady:
We're all slaves to their unfree system, this has NOTHING to do with capitalism!
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
CalgarC
-
lol the banks fail harder then windows
- 2 years ago
-
CalgarC
-
-
flyingkick
-
It's not a corporation's job to consider taxpayers' interests. Any corporation that did, wouldn't be functioning properly.
Wouldn't it be great if this latest trend of corporate responsibility towards the environment were to spread out to a responsibility towards taxpayers. Imagine a Shell commercial about preventing tax loopholes instead of preventing oil-spills!
- 2 years ago
-
flyingkick
-
-
CreditFigaro
-
flyingkick:
It is when they are using taxpayer money, just like people getting welfare checks have to answer to the government.
- 2 years ago
-
CreditFigaro
-
-
phillyphil
-
flyingkick:
why shouldn't corporations consider others? they are actually considered persons under our current law, holding the bill of rights as their own. with those rights should come responsibility to the greater community. they are members of our community, we hold others accountable, why not those that have the most power to do harm?
- 2 years ago
-
phillyphil
-
-
flyingkick
-
flyingkick:
A corporation is legally bound to put the interest of it's shareholders before any other interest. They are greed machines. It's a waste of time to hope that corporations become more thoughtful or compassionate.
The answer is legislation and regulation of big business, so things like this economic crisis don't happen again.
- 2 years ago
-
flyingkick
-
-
Maeveeo
-
Greed , Greedy , why do people do this ?
- 2 years ago
-
Maeveeo
-
-
carmalite
-
Maeveeo:
Because no one is stopping them. The unfettered free market is like a bunch of wolves turned loose in a trapped pen of lambs.
- 2 years ago
-
carmalite
-
-
shanklinmike
-
Maeveeo:
THIS IS NOT THE FREE MARKET! Please do your own research, the free market capitalists are against almost every single thing happening right now. Don't fall for the propaganda that slavery is the only answer, it is actually what got us to where we are today, NOT freedom! Maybe freedom for those who enslaved us, but not true free market capitalism, we are screaming corporate welfare murder and have been for decades!
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
Stradius
-
Common financial sense is in the (White) House!
- 2 years ago
-
Stradius
-
-
asherp
-
Good, but not good enough. I still want to see these assholes in jail.
- 2 years ago
-
asherp
-
-
CalgarC
-
asherp:
bad idea... i would rather see them taxed to death :D, jail would be letting them off easy
- 2 years ago
-
CalgarC
-
-
diabolical44
-
asherp:
i want to see them put to death personally. we need a truly radical and violent revolution to take this country back for the average middle class joes.
- 2 years ago
-
diabolical44
-
-
Kay_Bee
-
asherp:
No I would like to see them in jail. But not some pussy white collar jail. I want to see them in actual prison.
- 2 years ago
-
Kay_Bee
-
-
shanklinmike
-
asherp:
Goldman Sachs is in bed with the government, who backed the bail outs(corporate welfare) for these companies again? That's right, the 2 party system.....I say we cut spending, that way we don't need tax revenue at gun point, and using slavery is not the answer to a problem that came from a lack of freedom and more about war on consumer protectionism. The whole problem is that our economy is enslaved to these oligarchs, tax burdens are really a mute point at this junction of American history. We can not afford your wars anymore, nor your unconstitutional big government.....quit stealing liberty! As government grows, liberty decreases....
- 2 years ago
-
shanklinmike
-
-
current89
-
Good.
- 2 years ago
-
current89
-
-
s0uthc0ast
-
Is ANYONE surprised?
Recall Corzine (the defeated democrat from New Jersey) made his billions at Goldman Sachs.
Billions to finance
This is not a coincidence.
It is a quid quo pro.Wake up and get out of the cult.
- 2 years ago
-
s0uthc0ast
-
-
randomly
-
s0uthc0ast:
I'm not sure this comment makes sense. the administration DIDN'T give GS the tax credits.
- 2 years ago
-
randomly
-
-
neocongo
-
s0uthc0ast:
It doesn't have to make sense. southcoast is all about the spin.
- 2 years ago
-
neocongo
-
-
CreditFigaro
-
s0uthc0ast:
Wow, a conservative didn't read anything before farting out an opinion. I guess we could have seen that coming, because it always does.
Way to do your due diligence, champ.
- 2 years ago
-
CreditFigaro
-
-
JulianCommongold
-
s0uthc0ast:
Southcoast
you really do not operate under any logic other than getting Pavlov every time you see the word Obabma...............
do you?do you know what reasoning is?
- 2 years ago
-
JulianCommongold
-
-
Progresshiv
-
"Goldman failed to include the interests of the taxpayer in its calculations." Shocking!
- 2 years ago
-
Progresshiv
-
-
CalPal
-
Progresshiv:
Yeah, really.
Who would've thought that corporate CEO's and owners wanting to keep making billions didn't care about the people, even during an economic crisis?
- 2 years ago
-
CalPal
