Questions for those who hate large corporations

I often hear the loathing whine of those who hate "large corporations."  

Just curious...

What line of work are you in?  

How do you avoid purchases from "large corporations?"

In which income class are you?

SheWrites wrote:I often hear the loathing whine of those who hate "large corporations."  

Just curious...

What line of work are you in?  

How do you avoid purchases from "large corporations?"

In which income class are you?

Good questions, She.

I might also add what do they pay in taxes?

I'm thinking more than most.

Corps nearly killed my Dad's spirit, but we went off on our own and it was the best thing for us.

Still, I totally support Corps despite the politics and in fighting.

We'd be far from where we are without them.

speaking for myself, I'm not the least bit "against" corporations that act responsibly, and there are many that do.

It's the robbers like B of A, who pay big bucks to avoid paying taxes and who move their profits off shore, increasing the tax load on the rest of us who deserve our derision.

You want to defend them? I'm listening ...

I saw a manufacturing company which was a corporation which had been in a community since the 1890s. Folks worked there and developed manufacturing methods which made it state of the art by the 1970s. The owner lived in the community. He contributed to not for profits and was a neighbor to many of the folks who worked in his company. He poured his profits back into the plant buying modern capital equipment which increased the income of the company, and the owner took modest dividends and salary in his position as president of the corporation. In 1978 Borg Warner a parts manufacturer in the Automotive industry bought the corporation. None of the board or officers of Borg Warner lived in the community. Suddenly, they were automating the process and laying folks off. Ten years of ownership and huge profits, yet the contributions to the not for profits dried up at the same time executive pay began to escalate.

Then they sold the company to Emerson Electric who was known for moving companies from their original communities. First, the move was to rural KY with half the plant. Then they moved a quarter of the plant to Mexico, and moved half the plant from KY to mexico. Then two years ago they moved the balance to China.

The families who for a century built that entity of ownership had died, and the community who had educated the workforce for a century and who had made innovation and product improvement had outside capital snap this productive facility from the community, and make outrageous profits as wealth through the corporate form stole something a community had built because they had the capital to make more capital by stealing America's wealth and innovation by degrading labor........now across America those who never built or developed America, but are simply the heirs of wealth argue they should pay less taxes and corporations should pay less taxes......American patriotism has been rendered to the Babyboom Anthem.....what about me.

Oats, I know that story well in many small companies that employed manufacturing jobs in the states of AL and NC.

I do agree that many heirs to the handwork, blood, sweat, and tears have become greedy and have moved far away from the ethic of the generation from which they inherited the business/money.

Taxes, overall, have no rhyme or reason and to pay them to a government that wastes money and has no sense of balance and remaining solvent is the most asinine way for men/women who crave power to stay in power. They think we need them to fix the mess.

For the many companies out there who indeed give back with profits before taxes, I say way to go. There is an argument against companies who seem to ravage everyone in their path. But for most, I would say, propaganda has maligned them to the point where today's younger generation and many in our generation bad mouth anything they consider "big business."

Business made America. Without capital, sacrifice, vision, and jobs provided we would still be on the farm. And maybe that's not such a bad thing but if you know world economics we cannot back peddle from where we are without surrender.

And I stick by my statement in the thread where I address the charitable side of corporations.

It's a web for sure. But to totally condemn industry as out to get us...best look to the biggest industry of all, who can't do anything without layers of bureaucracy, and see if that what is best for all.

There's a middle ground with answers...no one is willing to get there.

There's a middle ground with answers...no one is willing to get there.

Yes, there has to be a recognition that like foreign enemies who have armies and bombers, some corporation represent a threat to this nation. When they can steal and rape this country, they must be reigned in or forced to pay the piper. If a company is going to take our wealth and collective knowledge represented by the series of machines and process which fill a factory floor, then they must pay. If a corporation takes its profits and moves them to subsidiaries in another nation, then they must pay. If a corporation steals our wealth and moves those assets to a nation which has no environmental laws, labor laws which protect children, and no recognition of our intellectual property, then they must pay. Collectively if a corporation pays off our congress and garnishes tax credits and subsidy for their control of the same, then they must pay. Never in the last hundred years have corporate entities paid less in corporate taxes as a percentage as determined by adjusted for inflation dollars. they have stolen, and raped the land, but for historical defense of this nation by righteous leaders going all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt, the warnings of Ike, and the vigilance of congress and people like Paul Wellstone there were checks and balances......now we have unheard of inequality which takes us back to our Colonial days when we were an exploited colony where our natural resources were stolen in a fixed racket and our ability to manufacture was restricted by those who controlled the same assets in other nations..........it is time for making corporations accountable to this nation, and the last three Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton were bought and paid for by the same Corporations where we need Teddy Roosevelt and Ike to break the chains of this unequal indenture.

You left out FDR, who comes closer than either his cousin or Ike to dealing with conditions as they relate to today's economic inequality.

SheWrites wrote:Oats, I know that story well in many small companies that employed manufacturing jobs in the states of AL and NC.

I do agree that many heirs to the handwork, blood, sweat, and tears have become greedy and have moved far away from the ethic of the generation from which they inherited the business/money.

Taxes, overall, have no rhyme or reason and to pay them to a government that wastes money and has no sense of balance and remaining solvent is the most asinine way for men/women who crave power to stay in power.  They think we need them to fix the mess.

For the many companies out there who indeed give back with profits before taxes, I say way to go.  There is an argument against companies who seem to ravage everyone in their path.  But for most, I would say, propaganda has maligned them to the point where today's younger generation and many in our generation bad mouth anything they consider "big business."

Business made America.  Without capital, sacrifice, vision, and jobs provided we would still be on the farm.  And maybe that's not such a bad thing but if you know world economics we cannot back peddle from where we are without surrender.

And I stick by my statement in the thread where I address the charitable side of corporations.  

It's a web for sure.  But to totally condemn industry as out to get us...best look to the biggest industry of all, who can't do anything without layers of bureaucracy, and see if that what is best for all.

There's a middle ground with answers...no one is willing to get there.

    

Very well said. Thank you!

SheWrites wrote:Oats, I know that story well in many small companies that employed manufacturing jobs in the states of AL and NC.

I do agree that many heirs to the handwork, blood, sweat, and tears have become greedy and have moved far away from the ethic of the generation from which they inherited the business/money.

Taxes, overall, have no rhyme or reason and to pay them to a government that wastes money and has no sense of balance and remaining solvent is the most asinine way for men/women who crave power to stay in power.  They think we need them to fix the mess.

For the many companies out there who indeed give back with profits before taxes, I say way to go.  There is an argument against companies who seem to ravage everyone in their path.  But for most, I would say, propaganda has maligned them to the point where today's younger generation and many in our generation bad mouth anything they consider "big business."

Business made America.  Without capital, sacrifice, vision, and jobs provided we would still be on the farm.  And maybe that's not such a bad thing but if you know world economics we cannot back peddle from where we are without surrender.

And I stick by my statement in the thread where I address the charitable side of corporations.  

It's a web for sure.  But to totally condemn industry as out to get us...best look to the biggest industry of all, who can't do anything without layers of bureaucracy, and see if that what is best for all.

There's a middle ground with answers...no one is willing to get there.

Please, just who here has been "totally condemning industry?"

The way I see it, thieves should be prosecuted and go to prison.

That includes corporations who, in the pursuit of maximum profits, take actions that are harmful to the entire country.

In my America, nobody's too big to go to prison!!

Wordslinger wrote:speaking for myself, I'm not the least bit "against" corporations that act responsibly, and there are many that do.

It's the robbers like B of A, who pay big bucks to avoid paying taxes and who move their profits off shore, increasing the tax load on the rest of us who deserve our derision.

You want to defend them?  I'm listening ...

Why should they bring those profits to the United States and be forced to pay the highest corporate tax rate in the world after they have paid taxes on that money in the country the profit was made?

They don't "move" their profits offshore, they are EARNED off shore.

Do you pay MORE in income tax than you are required to by law?

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:speaking for myself, I'm not the least bit "against" corporations that act responsibly, and there are many that do.

It's the robbers like B of A, who pay big bucks to avoid paying taxes and who move their profits off shore, increasing the tax load on the rest of us who deserve our derision.

You want to defend them?  I'm listening ...

Why should they bring those profits to the United States and be forced to pay the highest corporate tax rate in the world after they have paid taxes on that money in the country the profit was made?

They don't "move" their profits offshore, they are EARNED off shore.

Do you pay MORE in income tax than you are required to by law?  

They are US corporations chartered in the US. Should they pay no taxes or minimal taxes and sometimes get a refund while the rest of the population pays the price? How much taxpayer money should a corporation suck up before enough is enough? Should we just give them tax amnesty every few years, as REPUBLICAN administrations are wont to do? I posted a video about the Koch brothers and their "reach". Everyone should watch the video, but few will take the time...tick tock

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:speaking for myself, I'm not the least bit "against" corporations that act responsibly, and there are many that do.

It's the robbers like B of A, who pay big bucks to avoid paying taxes and who move their profits off shore, increasing the tax load on the rest of us who deserve our derision.

You want to defend them?  I'm listening ...

Why should they bring those profits to the United States and be forced to pay the highest corporate tax rate in the world after they have paid taxes on that money in the country the profit was made?

They don't "move" their profits offshore, they are EARNED off shore.

Do you pay MORE in income tax than you are required to by law?  

They are US corporations chartered in the US.  Should they pay no taxes or minimal taxes and sometimes get a refund while the rest of the population pays the price?  How much taxpayer money should a corporation suck up before enough is enough?  Should we just give them tax amnesty every few years, as REPUBLICAN administrations are wont to do?  I posted a video about the Koch brothers and their "reach".  Everyone should watch the video, but few will take the time...tick tock

Do you pay MORE in income tax than you are required to by law?

Did you post a video on the reach of convicted felon George Soros?

Please explain exactly how a corporation "sucks up" taxpayer money.

The Gulf of Mexico has been irreparably harmed by an entity which has no loyalty to this country and may have damaged millions of Americans, yet this idea that corporations are good things just because is for simpletons. Corporations which create jobs, are good neighbors, pay their share of taxes, do not seek special subsidy from our government, or laws which allow them to harm America are always welcome partners in this country, but corporations who using their international wealth seek to export our jobs, ignore our environmental laws, ignore being good neighbors, or hiding their profits after seeking billions in special interest subsidy and exceptions......those folks need to pay, and it is time to collect.

Meanwhile the dead zone expands.

2seaoat wrote:The Gulf of Mexico has been irreparably harmed by an entity which has no loyalty to this country and may have damaged millions of Americans, yet this idea that corporations are good things just because is for simpletons.  Corporations which create jobs, are good neighbors, pay their share of taxes, do not seek special subsidy from our government, or laws which allow them to harm America are always welcome partners in this country, but corporations who using their international wealth seek to export our jobs, ignore our environmental laws, ignore being good neighbors, or hiding their profits after seeking billions in special interest subsidy and exceptions......those folks need to pay, and it is time to collect.

Meanwhile the dead zone expands.

I seriously believe people are brainwashed. It's the only explanation for the idiocy that appears here every day. Other than Markle, and we all know what his gig is.

2seaoat wrote:The Gulf of Mexico has been irreparably harmed by an entity which has no loyalty to this country and may have damaged millions of Americans, yet this idea that corporations are good things just because is for simpletons.  Corporations which create jobs, are good neighbors, pay their share of taxes, do not seek special subsidy from our government, or laws which allow them to harm America are always welcome partners in this country, but corporations who using their international wealth seek to export our jobs, ignore our environmental laws, ignore being good neighbors, or hiding their profits after seeking billions in special interest subsidy and exceptions......those folks need to pay, and it is time to collect.

Meanwhile the dead zone expands.

You want to force higher wages be paid to unskilled American workers along with higher taxes to the corporations who pay those wages.

THEN you feign shock and indignation when those corporations move any and all jobs possible to other countries so they can remain competitive.

Do you pay more in federal income taxes than you are required? Why not?

Do you pay more in federal income taxes than you are required? Why not?




Because I spend hundreds of millions of lobbyist fees and payoffs to get the tax laws which allow me to not hardly pay any taxes at all, and the whipped cream.....is the great subsidies I get.

2seaoat wrote:There's a middle ground with answers...no one is willing to get there.

Yes, there has to be a recognition that like foreign enemies who have armies and bombers, some corporation represent a threat to this nation.   When they can steal and rape this country, they must be reigned in or forced to pay the piper.   If a company is going to take our wealth and collective knowledge represented by the series of machines and process which fill a factory floor, then they must pay.   If a corporation takes its profits and moves them to subsidiaries in another nation, then they must pay.   If a corporation steals our wealth and moves those assets to a nation which has no environmental laws, labor laws which protect children, and no recognition of our intellectual property, then they must pay.  Collectively if a corporation pays off our congress and garnishes tax credits and subsidy for their control of the same, then they must pay.   Never in the last hundred years have corporate entities paid less in corporate taxes as a percentage as determined by adjusted for inflation dollars.  they have stolen, and raped the land, but for historical defense of this nation by righteous leaders going all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt, the warnings of Ike, and the vigilance of congress and people like Paul Wellstone there were checks and balances......now we have unheard of inequality which takes us back to our Colonial days when we were an exploited colony where our natural resources were stolen in a fixed racket and our ability to manufacture was restricted by those who controlled the same assets in other nations..........it is time for making corporations accountable to this nation, and the last three Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton were bought and paid for by the same Corporations where we need Teddy Roosevelt and Ike to break the chains of this unequal indenture.

Tell us which corporations.

Break the chains of this unequal indenture. Wow...that's pretty cool. Makes no sense but it still sounds pretty cool.

2seaoat wrote: The Gulf of Mexico has been irreparably harmed by an entity which has no loyalty to this country and may have damaged millions of Americans, yet this idea that corporations are good things just because is for simpletons.  Corporations which create jobs, are good neighbors, pay their share of taxes, do not seek special subsidy from our government, or laws which allow them to harm America are always welcome partners in this country, but corporations who using their international wealth seek to export our jobs, ignore our environmental laws, ignore being good neighbors, or hiding their profits after seeking billions in special interest subsidy and exceptions......those folks need to pay, and it is time to collect.

Meanwhile the dead zone expands.

You do enjoy your fantasy world don't you?

2seaoat wrote:Do you pay more in federal income taxes than you are required? Why not?




Because I spend hundreds of millions of lobbyist fees and payoffs to get the tax laws which allow me to not hardly pay any taxes at all, and the whipped cream.....is the great subsidies I get.

You don't pay any federal income taxes do you?

Let us start with these 10 who paid a 9% tax rate....and then tell me about equity and the righteous corporations who are being overtaxed. Tell the people who are dying in the Gulf because of the greed of BP to cut corners, kill people, and condemn a generation of Americans to death and disease......


http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/08/10-most-profitable-companies-9-taxes/

2seaoat wrote:Let us start with these 10 who paid a 9% tax rate....and then tell me about equity and the righteous corporations who are being overtaxed.   Tell the people who are dying in the Gulf because of the greed of BP to cut corners, kill people, and condemn a generation of Americans to death and disease......

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/08/10-most-profitable-companies-9-taxes/

You don't pay any federal income taxes do you?

2seaoat wrote:Let us start with these 10 who paid a 9% tax rate....and then tell me about equity and the righteous corporations who are being overtaxed.   Tell the people who are dying in the Gulf because of the greed of BP to cut corners, kill people, and condemn a generation of Americans to death and disease......

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/08/10-most-profitable-companies-9-taxes/

Your cherry picked radical summary of a worldwide corporations payment of taxes is amusing at best and ludicrous at worst. You list doesn't even show where they pulled figures.

Why should a corporation pay taxes in the first place?

Here is a very, very brief summary of their economic situation the first quarter. Here is what you posted:
#1 Exxon Mobil (XOM)

Pre-tax earnings: $73.3 Billion

Tax Provision: $31.1 Billion (42%)

Actual Taxes Paid to U.S. federal government: $1.5 Billion (2%)

Exxon paid $1.5 billion to the U.S. federal government in 2011 and deferred paying an additional $1.6 billion. It paid the majority of its taxes to foreign governments where it operates ($28.8 billion).


Exxon Mobil Corporation Announces Estimated First Quarter 2014 Results
May 1, 2014 - 08:56 AM EDT
Dateline:
IRVING, Texas

EmailPDFPrintRSS
Public Company Information:
NYSE:
XOM

IRVING, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)--
Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM):


First Quarter
2014 2013 %
Earnings
$ Millions 9,100 9,500 -4
$ Per Common Share
Assuming Dilution 2.1 2.12 -1

Capital and Exploration
Expenditures - $ Millions 8,436 11,775 -28

EXXONMOBIL CHAIRMAN REX W. TILLERSON COMMENTED:

“ExxonMobil’s first quarter earnings and cash flow reflect the company’s continuing focus on delivering profitable growth and creating long-term shareholder value. Strong performance in the Upstream benefitted from improved production mix and increased unit profitability.

“First quarter 2014 earnings were $9.1 billion, down 4 percent from the first quarter of 2013. Upstream earnings were $7.8 billion, up 11 percent from the previous year.

“Capital and exploration expenditures for the first quarter were $8.4 billion, down 28 percent from the first quarter of 2013.

“The Corporation distributed $5.7 billion to shareholders in the first quarter through dividends and share purchases to reduce shares outstanding.”

FIRST QUARTER HIGHLIGHTS

Earnings of $9.1 billion decreased $400 million or 4 percent from the first quarter of 2013.
Earnings per share (assuming dilution) were $2.10, a decrease of 1 percent.
Capital and exploration expenditures were $8.4 billion, down 28 percent from the first quarter of 2013, reflecting the absence of the $3.1 billion Celtic Exploration Ltd. acquisition.
Oil-equivalent production decreased 5.6 percent from the first quarter of 2013. Excluding the impact of the expiry of the Abu Dhabi onshore concession, production decreased 2.9 percent.
Cash flow from operations and asset sales was $16.2 billion, including proceeds associated with asset sales of $1.1 billion.
Share purchases to reduce shares outstanding were $3 billion.
Dividends per share of $0.63 increased 11 percent compared with the first quarter of 2013.
ExxonMobil announced the start of natural gas production at the Damar field off the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia. The Damar field has a projected capacity of 200 million cubic feet of gas per day and will provide additional gas supplies to help meet Malaysia’s power and industrial needs.
With the State of Alaska, ExxonMobil and its partners signed a Heads of Agreement (HOA) regarding the proposed Alaska LNG Project. The HOA provides a roadmap for the ramp up of the preliminary front-end engineering design stage and establishes a framework for negotiating multiple project-enabling agreements.
ExxonMobil Chemical announced the opening of a world-scale manufacturing facility to produce up to 50,000 metric tons per year of synthetic base stocks at its integrated refining and chemical complex in Baytown, Texas. The new unit will help meet growing demand for advanced synthetic base stocks for high-performance lubricants.

First Quarter 2014 vs. First Quarter 2013

Upstream earnings were $7,783 million in the first quarter of 2014, up $746 million from the first quarter of 2013. Higher natural gas realizations, partially offset by lower liquids realizations, increased earnings by $410 million. Production volume and mix effects increased earnings by $20 million. All other items, including asset management impacts, increased earnings by $320 million.

On an oil-equivalent basis, production decreased 5.6 percent from the first quarter of 2013. Excluding the impact of the expiry of the Abu Dhabi onshore concession, production decreased 2.9 percent.

Liquids production totaled 2,148 kbd (thousands of barrels per day), down 45 kbd from the first quarter of 2013. The Abu Dhabi onshore concession expiry reduced volumes by 118 kbd. Excluding this impact, liquids production was up 3.3 percent, driven by project ramp-up, mainly at Kearl, and lower downtime.

First quarter natural gas production was 12,016 mcfd (millions of cubic feet per day), down 1,197 mcfd from 2013, primarily due to lower demand.

Earnings from U.S. Upstream operations were $1,244 million, $385 million higher than the first quarter of 2013. Non-U.S. Upstream earnings were $6,539 million, up $361 million from the prior year.

Downstream earnings were $813 million, down $732 million from the first quarter of 2013. Weaker margins, mainly in refining, decreased earnings by $740 million. Volume and mix effects increased earnings by $80 million. All other items decreased earnings by a net $70 million. Petroleum product sales of 5,817 kbd were 62 kbd higher than last year's first quarter.

Earnings from the U.S. Downstream were $623 million, down $416 million from the first quarter of 2013. Non-U.S. Downstream earnings of $190 million were $316 million lower than last year.

Chemical earnings of $1,047 million were $90 million lower than the first quarter of 2013. Weaker margins decreased earnings by $90 million, while volume and mix effects increased earnings by $40 million. All other items decreased earnings by $40 million. First quarter prime product sales of 6,128 kt (thousands of metric tons) were 218 kt higher than last year's first quarter, driven by increased Singapore production.

Corporate and financing expenses were $543 million for the first quarter of 2014, up $324 million from the first quarter of 2013, due primarily to the absence of favorable tax impacts.

During the first quarter of 2014, Exxon Mobil Corporation purchased nearly 41 million shares of its common stock for the treasury at a gross cost of $3.9 billion. These purchases included $3 billion to reduce the number of shares outstanding, with the balance used to acquire shares in conjunction with the company’s benefit plans and programs. Share purchases to reduce shares outstanding are currently anticipated to equal $3 billion in the second quarter of 2014. Purchases may be made in both the open market and through negotiated transactions, and may be increased, decreased or discontinued at any time without prior notice.

Estimates of key financial and operating data follow.

ExxonMobil will discuss financial and operating results and other matters during a webcast at 10 a.m. Central time on May 1, 2014. To listen to the event live or in archive, go to our website at exxonmobil.com.

Cautionary statement

Statements relating to future plans, projections, events or conditions are forward-looking statements. Actual results, including project plans, costs, timing, and capacities; capital and exploration expenditures; resource recoveries; and share purchase levels, could differ materially due to factors including: changes in oil or gas prices or other market or economic conditions affecting the oil and gas industry, including the scope and duration of economic recessions; the outcome of exploration and development efforts; changes in law or government regulation, including tax and environmental requirements; the outcome of commercial negotiations; changes in technical or operating conditions; and other factors discussed under the heading "Factors Affecting Future Results" in the “Investors” section of our website and in Item 1A of ExxonMobil's 2013 Form 10-K. We assume no duty to update these statements as of any future date.

Frequently used terms

This press release includes cash flow from operations and asset sales, which is a non-GAAP financial measure. Because of the regular nature of our asset management and divestment program, we believe it is useful for investors to consider proceeds associated with the sales of subsidiaries, property, plant and equipment, and sales and returns of investments together with cash provided by operating activities when evaluating cash available for investment in the business and financing activities. A reconciliation to net cash provided by operating activities is shown in Attachment II. References to quantities of oil or natural gas may include amounts that we believe will ultimately be produced, but that are not yet classified as “proved reserves” under SEC definitions. Further information on ExxonMobil's frequently used financial and operating measures and other terms is contained under the heading "Frequently Used Terms" available through the “Investors” section of our website at exxonmobil.com.

Reference to Earnings

References to corporate earnings mean net income attributable to ExxonMobil (U.S. GAAP) from the consolidated income statement. Unless otherwise indicated, references to earnings, Upstream, Downstream, Chemical and Corporate and Financing segment earnings, and earnings per share are ExxonMobil's share after excluding amounts attributable to noncontrolling interests.

The term “project” as used in this release can refer to a variety of different activities and does not necessarily have the same meaning as in any government payment transparency reports.


Attachment I


EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION
FIRST QUARTER 2014
(millions of dollars, unless noted)
First Quarter
2014 2013
Earnings / Earnings Per Share

Total revenues and other income 106,773 108,357
Total costs and other deductions 91,546 92,319
Income before income taxes 15,227 16,038
Income taxes 5,857 6,277
Net income including noncontrolling interests 9,370 9,761
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests 270 261
Net income attributable to ExxonMobil (U.S. GAAP) 9,100 9,500

Earnings per common share (dollars) 2.1 2.12

Earnings per common share
- assuming dilution (dollars) 2.10 2.12

Other Financial Data

Dividends on common stock
Total 2,732 2,561
Per common share (dollars) 0.63 0.57

Millions of common shares outstanding
At March 31 4,294 4,446
Average - assuming dilution 4,328 4,485

ExxonMobil share of equity at March 31 176,398 167,001
ExxonMobil share of capital employed at March 31 200,811 184,375

Income taxes 5,857 6,277
Sales-based taxes 7,416 7,492
All other taxes 8,857 8,781
Total taxes 22,130 22,550

ExxonMobil share of income taxes of
equity companies 1,820 1,939

Attachment II


EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION
FIRST QUARTER 2014
(millions of dollars)
First Quarter
2014 2013
Earnings (U.S. GAAP)
Upstream
United States 1,244 859
Non-U.S. 6,539 6,178
Downstream
United States 623 1,039
Non-U.S. 190 506
Chemical
United States 679 752
Non-U.S. 368 385
Corporate and financing (543 ) (219 )
Net income attributable to ExxonMobil 9,100 9,500


Cash flow from operations and asset sales (billions of dollars)

Net cash provided by operating activities
(U.S. GAAP) 15.1 13.6

Proceeds associated with asset sales 1.1 0.4

Cash flow from operations and asset sales 16.2 14.0

Attachment III


EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION
FIRST QUARTER 2014

First Quarter
2014 2013
Net production of crude oil, natural gas
liquids, bitumen and synthetic oil,
thousands of barrels daily (kbd)
United States 442 435
Canada/South America 315 264
Europe 195 195
Africa 480 453
Asia 666 804
Australia/Oceania 50 42
Worldwide 2,148 2,193

Natural gas production available for sale,
millions of cubic feet daily (mcfd)
United States 3,412 3,590
Canada/South America 336 328
Europe 3,465 4,473
Africa 7 9
Asia 4,519 4,515
Australia/Oceania 277 298
Worldwide 12,016 13,213

Oil-equivalent production (koebd)1 4,151 4,395



1 Gas converted to oil-equivalent at 6 million cubic feet = 1 thousand barrels.

Attachment IV


EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION
FIRST QUARTER 2014

First Quarter
2014 2013
Refinery throughput (kbd)
United States 1,811 1,810
Canada 378 430
Europe 1,432 1,394
Asia Pacific 702 790
Other 186 152
Worldwide 4,509 4,576

Petroleum product sales (kbd)
United States 2,605 2,532
Canada 488 436
Europe 1,513 1,460
Asia Pacific 762 894
Other 449 433
Worldwide 5,817 5,755

Gasolines, naphthas 2,401 2,355
Heating oils, kerosene, diesel 1,865 1,792
Aviation fuels 428 453
Heavy fuels 429 460
Specialty products 694 695
Worldwide 5,817 5,755

Chemical prime product sales,
thousands of metric tons (kt)
United States 2,392 2,364
Non-U.S. 3,736 3,546
Worldwide 6,128 5,910

Attachment V


EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION
FIRST QUARTER 2014
(millions of dollars)
First Quarter
2014 2013
Capital and Exploration Expenditures
Upstream
United States 2,092 2,090
Non-U.S. 5,172 8,757
Total 7,264 10,847
Downstream
United States 228 259
Non-U.S. 312 350
Total 540 609
Chemical
United States 397 114
Non-U.S. 233 202
Total 630 316

Other 2 3

Worldwide 8,436 11,775


Exploration expenses charged to income
included above
Consolidated affiliates
United States 35 127
Non-U.S. 280 316
Equity companies - ExxonMobil share
United States 1 1
Non-U.S. 22 1
Worldwide 338 445

Attachment VI

- See more at: http://news.exxonmobil.com/press-release/exxon-mobil-corporation-announces-estimated-first-quarter-2014-results#sthash.nXm6RmKD.dpuf

You and your "source" are really GREAT at compiling one of the worlds largest corporations into fewer than 10, very carefully chosen figures.

othershoe1030 wrote:In order for society or the "emotional" financial system to work there needs to be a basic sense of fairness going on. I agree that most corporations pay nothing close to the top corporate rate. Given the current state of corporate and big money influence on the workings of government, ALEC and the rest, this is no surprise. The pendulum will swing back, I hope, in the next few years but it won't be easy.

When corporations get special treatment re taxes, neglect the well being of their workers to the point that many are subsidized by us, the tax payers and then claim they shouldn't be held liable for harm they do (think GM and the ten year recall they postponed) then also claim "personhood" when they want to play that card...well it is enough to piss off the Pope, that is if you are paying attention at all.

It is not the corporations per se that gets me upset, it is the uneven way they take advantage of the system to the detriment of the middle class and our general economic well being.  When this balance gets this far out of whack it needs to be corrected. This is my 'take' on this and I don't think I am alone.

No, you're most definitely not alone. BP is not a US corporation, but many US investors are tied to BP profitability. Most of these corporations are global in reach and apparently believe they're not answerable to any government, or to the general population. Koch Industries (among others) has decided to advance their agenda (profit above all else) by serious meddling in local elections, education...and let's face it...buying politicians outright. The Supreme's Citizens United opened the floodgates to this behavior, which has gone on for decades but was covert...look what happened in 2008...the financial sector gone wild, and the culprits..."too big to jail".

We need a major shift in policy in this country, or we're headed for a "New World Order".