Exxon’s 2007 Tax Bill: $30 Billion
Mark J. Perry, PhD | February 05, 2008

Corporate profits receive a lot of media attention, but what receives considerably less attention are the corporate taxes paid on corporate profits. Do a Google search for “Exxon profits” and you’ll get about 8,000 hits. Now try “Exxon taxes” and you’ll get a little more than 300 hits. That’s a ratio of about 33 to 1.

I’m pretty sure that Exxon’s tax payment in 2007 of $30 billion (that’s $30,000,000,000) is a record, exceeding the $28 billion it paid last year.

By the way, Exxon pays taxes at a rate of 41% on its taxable income!

[Update: The $40.6 billion and $39.5 billion figures are after-tax profits. For 2006, Exxon’s EBT (earnings before tax) was $67.4 billion, it paid $27.9 billion in taxes (41.4% tax rate), and its NIAT (net income after tax), or profit, was $39.5 billion.]

Over the last three years, Exxon Mobil has paid an average of $27 billion annually in taxes. That’s $27,000,000,000 per year, a number so large it’s hard to comprehend. Here’s one way to put Exxon’s taxes into perspective.

According to IRS data for 2004, the most recent year available:

· Total number of tax returns: 130 million

· Number of Tax Returns for the Bottom 50%: 65 million

· Adjusted Gross Income for the Bottom 50%: $922 billion

· Total Income Tax Paid by the Bottom 50%: $27.4 billion

Conclusion: In other words, just one corporation (Exxon Mobil) pays as much in taxes ($27 billion) annually as the entire bottom 50% of individual taxpayers, which is 65,000,000 people! Further, the tax rate for the bottom 50% is only 3% of adjusted gross income ($27.4 billion / $922 billion), and the tax rate for Exxon was 41% in 2006 ($67.4 billion in taxable income, $27.9 billion in taxes).

Dr. Mark J. Perry is a professor of economics and finance in the School of Management at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan. ###

Dennis Elam Observation

Okay so what did the US Govt do with $27 B x 3 = $81 B?

Are we more energy independent? Did someone create a nandy solar adjunct water heater so we could all save money on heating bills? Have they worked with car companies or tried to engage an urban planing strategy to allow for more rail or high mileage ultralights (my Kawasaki Mule for the street idea) in suburban neighborhoods? No, none of that! We are no closer to energy independence than we ever were!
Now suppose Exxon had been able to keep even half that money to work on energy research,
who do you think would show more results at the end of the day, Washington or Exxon?

I await your comments on the blog….

Posted in

2 responses to “Exxon Form 1065”

  1. Lhamu Avatar
    Lhamu

    Reading this article, just reminded me of a forward message that I recently recieved from a friend. Both this article and the forward mail (a short story) brought light to the true facts that we don’t want to think about, rather complain that we have to pay taxes at all [comparatively].
    I do not know if you’ve read this before but,
    Here is the forward..
    “It’s called- “Bar Stool Economics”
    Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
    The fifth would pay $1.
    The sixth would pay $3.
    The seventh would pay $7.
    The eighth would pay $12.
    The ninth would pay $18.
    The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
    So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers, he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
    The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers?How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’
    They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
    And so:
    The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
    The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
    The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
    The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
    The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
    The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
    Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
    ‘I only got a dollar out of the $20,’declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,’ but he got $10!’
    ‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’
    ‘That’s true!!’ shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’
    ‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’
    The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
    The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
    And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
    David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
    Professor of Economics, University of Georgia”

    Like

  2. Dennis Elam Avatar

    Good Post Lhamu! this one has been making the rounds of e mails but it hits the hail on the head!No one attacking Exxon asks what the Govt does with the $81 B to make us more energy independent.

    Like

Leave a reply to Lhamu Cancel reply