TH,
Re that >>" difference of course is that the companies actually have to balance their books and prudently inform investors of impacts "<< and the $1Bn that you posted was a result of HealthCare Reform by "Clowngress", that group of people we elect to represent our interests vs the interests of, let's say, AT&T shareholders.
I just caught the last end of a discussion on CNBC today re this subject and can't tell you what they said accurately but I did read this column by Gail Collins in the NY Times explaining this charge. I gather we taxpayers, that is you and me, were giving AT&T and its shareholders quite a good deal and as a result of the new Reforms which attempt to benefit all Americans (time will tell) that group representing us, you know...Clowngress, has told organizations such as AT&T that the taxpayer largess (is that the same as corporate socialism?) is over. We taxpayers represented by Clowngress have decided we have a better way to use the funds for all Americans.
What do you think about this interpretation?
>>" This week there was an alarming report that AT&T was going to have to reduce its long-term profit estimates by about $1 billion because of the new law — or, as the House minority leader, John Boehner, put it, the newly enacted “job-killing tax increases.” The AT&T charge was for accounting purposes, which is not as much real money as currency-based theology. But still, it did sound bad.
It turned out that the $1 billion goes back to the famous 2003 Medicare prescription drug entitlement passed by a Republican-controlled Congress and paid for through their innovative pretend-it’s-not-there financing system.
In order to keep businesses from ending their drug coverage and dumping their retirees on the federal system, Congress provided a 28 percent reimbursement for the benefits. And, the companies got to deduct the entire cost of the drug plans from their taxes. Including the government subsidy.
Yes! The job-killing tax increase in the new law involves no longer allowing big corporations to take a tax deduction for spending money we gave them. Somehow, this doesn’t seem to have the makings of a Tea Party rally. "<<
nytimes.com 
Regards,
Don |
