The state of the American economy and its politics: is it time to shoot the fox?

Posted on November 4, 2011 by William Brighenti

Groucho Marx: we need the eggsThe state of our political and economic situation in America reminds me of an old Groucho Marx joke about a guy who goes to a psychiatrist. He runs into the psychiatrist’s office and screams, “Doctor, doctor, you’ve got to help me!” The psychiatrist says, “Sure thing. Why don’t you just lay down on the couch and tell me what your problem is. I am certain we can solve your problem, whatever it is.” To which the guy says, “Doctor, you don’t understand. I don’t have a problem. It’s my brother: he thinks he is a chicken!” The psychiatrist, somewhat startled, then replies, “Gee, that’s terrible! Well, why don’t you bring him in and we’ll fix him up for you.” The guy then says, “Doctor, we’d like to do that but we can’t.” The psychiatrist, at this point somewhat annoyed, says, “Why not?” The guy then anwers, “Because we need the eggs!”

The elite 1% of our population has virtually all of the eggs. We need the eggs; however, since our elected officials get their very own eggs from this elite class by serving its interests, we get fewer and fewer eggs, if any, while this 1% continues to get more and more eggs. Our Presidents, Representatives, Senators, Governors, et al, regardless of party affiliation and except for a few honest politicians, who are becoming fewer and fewer in numbers as the years pass, are essentially on corporate payrolls, earning their salaries and bonuses, i.e., their eggs, at our expense. Although we keep needing the eggs, we keep not getting the eggs; in fact, we are at the point of not getting any eggs at all.  All we get are mere promises of future delivery of eggs if only we further reduce taxes on the elite 1% so they can produce more eggs and keep more eggs.

And we continue to believe this prescription, this trickle down nonsense, as the economic gospel of Adam Smith, when, in his Wealth of Nations he warns us of the dangers of government colluding with commerce: that is, passing laws favoring the wealthy, bestowing upon corporations the rights and privileges of individuals as in the Citizens United case, eliminating competition, not enforcing a level playing field in commerce, and assisting the big corporations to drive small businesses out of the marketplace.

fox guarding the hen houseWe have the old dilemma of the fox guarding the hen house. Is it time to shoot the fox?

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A matter of incompetency at the Internal Revenue Service. What criteria determine the hiring of employees at the Internal Revenue Service?

Posted on November 2, 2011 by William Brighenti

IRS Competency TestRecently I faxed a Form 2848, granting me Power of Attorney on behalf of a business client, to the Internal Revenue Service in order to obtain necessary transcripts to assist in the preparation of Form 1120.  On this form I requested authorization for all tax matters relating to income taxs, employment taxes, and civil penalties associated with such.

When I requested a transcript showing any and all income received by the corporation for the specified years, I was informed by the Internal Revenue Service employee on the telephone that there was no information available for that time period.  Puzzled I asked if there were any 1099s received by the IRS for that corporation, to which the IRS employee replied that he could not respond to my question since I had not specified 1099s under the caption “Tax Form Number” on Form 2848.

Anyone who has ever filled out a Form 2848 before knows that the Tax Form Number refers to the appropriate applicable and general tax form associated with the Tax Matter described on the form.  For instance, when declaring authorization for income taxes,  for “Income” tax under “Tax Matters”, the appropriate general income tax form for the reporting of that tax matter customarily would be the appropriate income tax return for the tax entity granting Power of Attorney.

For income tax matters, 1040 would be the “Tax Form Number” for individuals, 1120 or 1120S for corporations, 1065 for partnerships, 941 for trusts and estates, etc.  Of course, all informational forms pertaining to that general tax form of the entity would be included since they would constitute individual income or expense items reportable on the general income tax form. 

Since the IRS employee appeared young and inexperienced, I requested to speak to his superior.  However, his superior also asserted that she could not disclose any information that had been reported on Forms 1099 for that corporation since that form number had not been included under the caption “Tax Form Number”.

At this point, I became quite upset with the incompetency of these two IRS employees.  Employees hired by the federal government to service informational needs of tax preparers, tax attorneys, certified public accountants, individuals, or businesses should understand that certain general tax forms include those of the individual and specific items comprising the elements of the general tax matter and form.  For corporate income, various 1099 forms are often issued to the corporation reporting nonemployee compensation, rent, interest, and the like in order to assist the corporation in the preparation of its Form 1120.  For these two IRS employees to not understand the hierarchal nature of the informational forms displays a serious lack of understanding of the Internal Revenue Service tax forms; it also exhibits on their part an embarrassing degree of incompetency.

Frustrated, I attempted to report this incompetency to the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Douglas H. Shulman; however, a telephone number was not published on the internet.  Nor was such available in a published federal phone directory.  Perhaps if Commissioners of governmental offices published their telephone numbers, they would be made aware of the incompetency of some of their employees, I wondered.

After calling my Congressman, John Larson, and speaking to one of his aides, I was able to contact a staff employee of Douglas H. Shulman and report my complaint.  Several days later I received a call from a manager at the Internal Revenue Service who acknowledged that there was a “misunderstanding” involving the IRS employees who had refused to provide me with the 1099 information and that she would do so.  She added that training materials needed to be clarified to prevent such misunderstandings in the future.  To my disappointment, she did not apologize for the inconvenience to me from the “misunderstanding” on the part of the IRS agents.

But is this simply a misunderstanding on the part of two IRS employees?  Or is this indicative of a lack of competency on the part of the employee and his supervisor?  This is not the first time that I have detected such upon calling the Internal Revenue Service.  Perhaps you have called the IRS only to be transferred an infinite number of times to different individuals, indicating not only a lack of an answer to your question at hand but also not even having the faintest idea of where to transfer the call in order to obtain an answer.  Over the years I have detected a consistent pattern of incompetency on the part of a significant number of employees at the Internal Revenue Service; certainly not all of the employees but definitely a significant number.  What can account for this level of incompetency of employees at the Internal Revenue Service?

I can only surmise what may be the root of this level of competency at the Internal Revenue Service.  Can it be that instead of stressing education, experience, and certifications as appropriate criteria for hiring, the IRS has placed too much emphasis on other criteria?  One can only wonder and surmise.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Herman Cain’s economic plan: let them eat pizza. The pizza guy delivers lots of anchovies with his nein-nein-nein tax proposal.

Posted on October 22, 2011 by William Brighenti

Herman Cain nein-nein-neinI cannot figure out what Herman Cain is…can you? Is he animal, mineral, or vegetable? I get the feeling at times that this pizza guy ate one pepperoni too much. Or that he is just too full of sausage or mozzarella. Or do I smell anchovies?

His nein-nein-nein final solution (aka, 9-9-9) to our country’s fiscal problems would plunge our country into a depression from which we would never recover. Imagine only taxing the rich 9% of their incomes;Nein nein nein they presently pay around 15%.  Think of the dramatic increase in poverty resulting from imposing 9% taxes on the incomes of the poor as well as on every purchase made by the poor, including those for basic everyday living expenses.  Instead of the poor receiving a much needed, helping hand in the form of tax credits, they would be shot with a double-barrel shotgun blast of two taxes!  Talk about class warfare, my dear Paul Ryan:  that’s a very confused–or should we say mercenary–Robin Hood stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

This guy actually graduated with a degree in mathematics?!?!  It must be some sort of new math because I cannot figure out his 9-9-9 answer to our country’s never-ending recession (which in reality is a depression, but the politicians and banksters are too afraid to tell us so).  Can you follow his math?!  Perhaps he forgot to carry a 1 somewhere?

But Cain is not pure evil in his Garden of Pizzas:  he would not kill the super big and enormously profitable corporations with a triple tax.  Unlike his biblical predecessor, he would lovingly spare the corporations from a fate that Republicans regard worse than death:  i.e., an income tax.  God bless this servant of the Lord.

And I love his take on those suffering Americans without a job: “Don’t blame Wall Street, don’t blame the big banks, if you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself!” Doesn’t that remark remind you of Marie Antoinette’s insensitive dismissal of the millions of starving peasants of France with her memorable, Caineseyan economic plan:  “let them eat cake”? To venture this remark clearly shows that this pizza guy has three of what I only have two of; but little upstairs, if anything.

I ask you, Professor Cornel West of Princeton University, is Herman Cain trying to outwit Barack Obama as the new “Black Mascot of Wall Street”? Or is he just trying to sell more books, sell more pizzas, book more honorariums, and…gosh, could it be, just make lots and lots of money with his cheesy sloganisms?  Recall that Herman Cain is a motivational speaker:  yeah, Herman, you already told us a million times how anyone can become a billionaire making, selling, and delivering pizzas.  Yeah, we know, just look at all those Greeks rolling in dough down at the corner pizza restaurant.

Cain's campaign slogan: free pizza and beerNevertheless, Herman Cain is leading other Republican candidates in recent polls.  Americans sure love their pizzas, especially when they are topped with cheesy slogans.  Well, thought out, economic plans are too hard to digest for the American gastroeconomateur, but sugar-coated, bite-size candynomics are so much easier to swallow.  And your dittoheads love them!  Ask Rush.  He’ll tell you.

No complex mathematical algorithms or detailed campaign strategy for Herman Cain.  Just simple slogans for the simple minded, who are wolfing them down as if they were double-cheese pizzas.  This motivational speaker knows how to keep the kiddies coming back for more. 

But let’s not give too much credit to Herman Cain for the success of the 9-9-9 slogan.  Remember how one politician was leading in the Republican polls four years earlier with a very similar campaign platform except for two (2) numerical digits?  And do you remember how many times Rudy Giuliani, while running for President, repeated the word 9-1-1 so that it eventually assumed the appearance of his entire campaign platform?  If you do, then you must be Albert Einstein reincarnated because I lost count after infinity raised to the nth power.  But to Giuliani’s credit, he was not as redundant as Herman:  at least he included another digit in his mystical refrain.

But that’s the power of mysticism, isn’t it?  Adolf Hitler and Joeseph Goebbels brainwashed the peoples of an entire country by repeating a big lie many, many times.  In fact, Goebbels further believed and said, “the bigger the lie, the more it will be believed.”  Then the lie was that the Jews caused the economic depression of Germany in the 1920s and early 1930s; now it’s our oppressive taxes on corporations and the rich causing our economic misery.  Herman and other Republicans exclaim, if only we eliminate taxes on both, they will benevolently create jobs here in America.  Sound familiar?  Isn’t this just Ronald Reagan’s Lauffer-curve, trickle-down nonsense rehashed for the present generation and the previous generations suffering from Alzheimers? 

Imagine calling the White House in 2012 and hearing, “America’s Pizza…can I take your order?”  “Herman, I want a pepperoni pizza….and please, no anchovies this time.” 

Herman Cain’s tax and economic plan for America sure smells fishya pizza in every oven to me.  What’s your next cheesy slogan, Herman?  A pizza in every oHerman Cain's campaign slogan: a pizza in every ovenven?  Oops, excuse me, but did he already say that?!

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Let’s Elect Warren Buffett for President! He has the guts to raise taxes on the rich!

Posted on October 22, 2011 by William Brighenti

Warren Buffett with President Barack ObamaWe need someone honest and patriotic like Warren Buffett to run for President of the United States. He is courageous and bold enough to say what needs to be said about our country’s fiscal problems: that we need to raise taxes on the rich, since the top 1% have had a tax holiday for the past thirty years.

We were all snookered by Barack Obama back in 2008 when he was running for President, promising to raise taxes on individuals with taxable incomes over $250,000 per year. However, three years later, nothing has changed. President Barack Obama never even proposed that tax increase; in fact, Obama agreed to the extension of the Bush tax cuts last December instead of raising taxes, hinted at lowering corporate tax rates, and dramatically reduced the estate taxes on the rich. So we have all been conned by “the Black Mascot of Wall Street” (as the black professor from Princeton, Cornel West, has rightfully dubbed him).

Warren Buffett knows that even the rich do better when the wealth is spread around. Gross Domestic Product increases since consumers now have the money to purchase the cars, computers, ipods, homes, appliances, etc., that revs up manufacturing and the wheels of production. Stock prices increase and the rich even make more money.

The Republican proposal, to lower taxes on the wealthy, and to eliminate corporate taxes entirely, would drive our country and the entire world into a deep depression, the likes of which have never been witnessed. Jobs in this country would not result from such a Calvin Coolidge tactic. Only more dividends for the rich and more investment monies for plants in China would be its results.

Wake up, America. It’s time to assemble and rebel against the banksters of Wall Street and their Democratic and Republican politicians who are on their corporate payrolls in the form of political contributions. Demand economic justice. Support someone for President who knows what’s good for Wall Street, for America, and for everyone’s wallet. Sign the petition below to draft Warren Buffett for President.


Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

A Letter from Susan Bysiewicz, Democratic Primary Candidate for the U.S. Senate from Connecticut, on Leaving Iraq

Posted on October 21, 2011 by William Brighenti

Date:  Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 3:39 PM
Subject:  Leaving Iraq

Susan Bysiewicz for U.S. Senate
Dear William
I wanted to share with you a statement that I just released to the press about President Obama’s decision to remove all troops from Iraq by the end of the year. As you know removing our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan as soon and as safely as possible is something I care deeply about. I look forward to talking with you soon. You’ll find the Statement Below:

Susan Bysiewicz’s Statement on President Obama’s Decision to Leave Iraq

For Immediate Release
October 21, 2011
“Like many Americans I was very glad to learn of President Obama’s announcement today to remove all troops from Iraq by the year’s end. I have been calling for the immediate and safe withdrawal of all our troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan for over a year. We owe our soldiers and their families our deepest thanks and gratitude for the sacrifices they have made and the excellent job they have performed. President Obama should make the same decision in Afghanistan and bring all our troops in Afghanistan immediately and safely.”

Sincerely,

susan bysiewicz's signature

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Melissa Harris-Perry explains why the American economy performs better under Democratic Presidents. Reverend Al Sharpton’s Politics Nation, Monday, October 17, 2011, MSNBC TV

Posted on October 20, 2011 by William Brighenti

Get the Flash Player to see this content.

Reverend Al Sharpton of MSNBC TV's Politics NationSHARPTON: Folks, sometimes a picture says a lot more than words ever could. Just take a look at this photo of Mitt Romney from his days as a Wall Street businessman at Bain Capital.

This is Willard right here in the middle. They`re posing with dollars and big bills, even dropping literally out of his suit.

This is the man that is obviously in the culture of where they think it`s just fine to have money literally dropping out of their pockets, just money everywhere, rolling in money. This is the man that wants to preach austerity.

At Bain Capital, Romney was a “vulture capitalist.” That`s in quotes.

He often bought companies just to break them up and sell them off for large profit, laying off thousands of workers in the process. Some of those laid-off workers spoke out in this political ad from 1994 when Romney was running for Senate against Ted Kennedy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don`t like Romney`s creating jobs, because he took every one of them away.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I worked there 30 years, and I never dreamed that I`d lose my job.

NARRATOR: Mitt Romney says he helped create 10,000 jobs. The former workers at SCM in Marion, Indiana, say something else.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If he`s created jobs, I wish he could create some here, you know, instead of taking them away.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: All those worker layoffs made Romney a lot of money. He`s now worth between $190 million and $250 million, yet his estimated rate is just 14 percent. Fourteen percent is his estimated tax rate, much lower than 35 percent tax rate paid by working class folks like teachers and firefighters.

Fighting that kind of injustice and inequality is what the Wall Street protests are all about. That`s why thousands of people turned out for our jobs rally on Saturday.

It`s clear what the American people want. They want justice. It`s clear what Wall Street wants. They want Willard Mitt Romney, because he`s their kind of guy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

Mitt Romney, Republican Presidential candidate for 2012ROMNEY: Corporations are people. There are people who work there. There are customers that are people. Shareholders are people. They`re people. Raising taxes on corporations is raising taxes on people.

When you tax corporations, either the employees are going to pay or the shareholders are going to pay or the customers are going to pay. And so corporations are people.

We could raise taxes on people. That`s not the way —

AUDIENCE: Corporations!

ROMNEY: Corporations are people, my friend. We can raise taxes on —

AUDIENCE: No they`re not!

ROMNEY: Of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people.

(LAUGHTER)

ROMNEY: Where do you think it goes?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SHARPTON: Joining me now, MSNBC contributor Melissa Harris-Perry, Tulane professor and columnist for “The Nation.”

Melissa, can a Wall Street candidate like Willard really succeed in this political climate today?

Melissa Harris-Perry, Professor of Political Science, Tulane UniversityMELISSA HARRIS-PERRY, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: Possibly, and here`s why. Because we have a big mismatch between what we think is true about how Republicans perform economically and how Republicans actually perform economically. So, ,after I talked with your producers, I was so excited that we were going to be on set today. I did a little bit of my wonky research and was looking up to be sure that I wasn`t going to misstate any facts here.

SHARPTON: Well, you`re our favorite wonk. So what did you come up
with?

HARRIS-PERRY: Well, from the period of FDR until 2000, we had just as many years with Democratic presidents as we had with Republican presidents. So it makes a nice kind of comparison.

And when you look at economic performance on all the major economic indicators, Democratic presidents outperformed Republican presidents on GDP growth, on full employment, on relative equality — there`s always a great deal of inequality in the system, but relatively more equality in the system when Democrats are presidents than when Republicans are. And yet, business leaders tend to prefer Republicans as candidates.

SHARPTON: OK. Now, let`s take this slow. Let`s un-wonk this for those that are at home like me that are not wonks.

You`re saying that since FDR, we`ve had just about an equal amount of Democrats in the White House as Republicans, but that the gross —

HARRIS-PERRY: GDP, which is sort of gross domestic product, how much the economy is growing —

SHARPTON: — grew more under Democrats than Republicans?

HARRIS-PERRY: Consistently.

SHARPTON: But isn`t their calling card that they grow the economy?

HARRIS-PERRY: It turns out they actually grow the deficits. Deficits get higher under Republican presidents. GDP gets higher under Democratic presidents. Relative equality under Democratic presidents, higher inequality under Republican presidents.

But business leaders consistently prefer Republican candidates. Do you know why?

SHARPTON: Let me show this to help support your argument to the American jury watching.

Under George Bush, the economy, 2002 to 2007, 65 percent of economic gains went to the rich.

HARRIS-PERRY: Yes, and that`s why. So the reason —

SHARPTON: This is to the top one percent.

HARRIS-PERRY: That`s right. The reason business leaders prefer Republicans isn`t because they`re better for the economy. It`s because they`re better at growing the individual wealth of the wealthiest group.

So the one indicator that goes way up under Republican presidents is that the very top percentage actually accumulates a higher percentage of the wealth.

SHARPTON: You see, you`re answering something that I didn`t understand, because I got up yesterday morning to go to the King Memorial dedication, and I see in “The New York Times” this story that Wall Street, who President Obama helped bail out, is giving their money to Romney.

Look at this. I mean, how do you have a guy bail you out and then you contribute more to the guy that`s trying to run him out?

Look at the figures — $1.5 million has gone to Romney already. Only $270,000 has gone to President Obama. That doesn`t make sense — or maybe it does.

HARRIS-PERRY: Look, it`s a really clear formula. The fact is that we actually do better as a country when we spread the wealth around.

Remember those kind of, oh, he wants to spread the wealth around, he`s some kind of communist, socialist, that sort of discourse? But the fact is, just in a capitalist system, just in a system where we want to grow our economy, have more consumers, have demand for the products that people are creating, all of that actually does better when working class people have disposable income to purchase homes, to purchase cars, to purchase iPads, all of those things. But what Republican administrations typically do is grow deficits, because they grow military spending and they cut taxes and they grow the wealth of the tightest top one percent.

SHARPTON: Wow. Well, thank you.

That`s why everybody thinks I`m smart. I talk to you, and then I walk out and I just rehash it. Sometimes I give you credit. Just sometimes.

Melissa Harris-Perry, thanks for being with us.

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

President Obama’s Jobs Bill is an Insult to the American Workers and Unemployed

Posted on October 15, 2011 by William Brighenti

President Obama the ClownPresident Obama is touring the country touting his $447 billion proposal as a “jobs bill”; however, this characterization of the bill as creating jobs is an insult to the American workers and vast numbers of unemployed in this country.

Only $140 billion of that bill will be spent on public works construction projects, commonly called infrastructure spending.  The majority of the bill is merely an extension of tax cuts and other benefits, crumbs to the American public, to create the impression that Obama shares your pain and is proposing something in response.

For decades our country’s infrastructure has been deteriorating.  Economists estimate that we are in need of immediate repairs to roads, bridges, and other structures of at least $2 trillion, ranking us high on the list of the shabbiest countries in the world:  we are ranked a poor 24th on the list of best infrastructure countries.  Spending $2 trillion on infrastructure projects in the United States would create millions of jobs in our country now.  Didn’t we spend $1.6 trillion destroying and rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan over the past ten years?  So why not propose what economists have been urging ever since Obama was elected in 2008 in order to get this country out of a depression:  propose a major infrastructure bill, and tax the rich and those mammoth multinational corporations to fund the measure?

Recall in 2008 economists were arguing that an infrastructure bill of $1.5 trillion was needed to reverse our economic downslide into a deep and never-ending recession.   So what did Obama propose?  A $767 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act providing a measely $111 billion in infrastructure spending.  Imagine if he had been bold enough then, with a Democratic House and Senate behind him, to propose a $1.5 trillion infrastructure bill?  Imagine the jobs that would have been created and the state of our economy now?

$140 billion is merely a crumb thrown to union bosses so that they will rally the troops to support this moronic, Wall Street President.  It is a band-aid for a heart transplant patient bleeding to death.  I voted for this clown in 2008, for “hope and change”.  For him to tout this measely $140 billion as a job creator is an insult to the American consciousness.  It’s Marie Antoinette saying to the starving mobs of Paris, “let them eat cake”. 

It’s time to replace this buffoon.  The problem is that there are even bigger clowns running against this President on the Republican side.  Every Presidential candidate in the race today (except, perhaps, for Ron Paul) is a puppet of Wall Street, catering to that 1% elite group that contribute and support their politicial campaigns.

Only a few politicians would ever challenge Wall Street:  Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, Alan Grayson, Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, and a few others.  The majority are on the corporate payroll.

If there is anything worse than a Republican, it’s a Democrat in the hands of Wall Street pretending to represent the interests of the lower and middle classes.  Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton served the interests of Wall Street very well, promising much to the general populace but all in all doing very little for them.  Deregulating Wall Street, endorsing NAFTA, appointing Wall Streeters to key cabinet positions contributed to the economic collapse of our economy.  Obama’s bailout of Wall Street at the expense of the middle class has only contributed to middle America’s hardships.  Both are guilty of treason.

Incidentally, for all you Fox News addicts and Russ Limbaugh dittoheads, when taxes are raised on corporations and the rich, the corporations invest in capital assets in order to minimize their tax liabilities, thus creating jobs.  Duh?!

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

A Need for Term Limits to Public Office at the National, State, and Municipal Levels of Government

Posted on September 22, 2011 by William Brighenti

Term Limits for Elected Officials at National, State, and Municipal Levels of GovernmentIsn’t it time to limit the public service of all individuals by adopting term limits?  Haven’t we all witnessed enough fraud, malfeasance, and misappropriation of public funds by now to realize that by allowing individuals to serve endless terms in office, power becomes entrenched and concentrated in the hands of a few?  Despots, tyrants, dictators, and God have unlimited terms.  Democracy thrives on the participation of the many, not just the few.

An effective internal control system necessitates rotation of duties.  Without such, individuals are more likely to perpetuate and conceal acts in violation of public trust.  It is not unreasonable to limit an individual’s service in a public office to no more than two terms.  We limit the term of the President of the United States to two terms; in fact, none other than Richard Nixon proposed a one term limitation to the holding of public office of six years duration.  Recall that Watergate occurred because of his desire to win a second term of office.  Imagine how different our history might have been written if he had only been allowed to serve one term in office.

Of course, term limits apply to public positions at the local level as well.  In fact, there may even be a greater need for term limits at the town level of government than at the national and state levels since a municipality often lacks adquate funds for a full-time, independent, and sufficiently-staffed internal audit department to monitor its personnel and operations on an ongoing basis.  The general public is often unaware that annual financial audits performed by outside certified public accountants are not designed to detect fraud.  Unfortunately, fraud investigations are typically initiated only after the malfeasance and misappropriation have already occurred.

Perhaps it is time for the citizens of Berlin, Connecticut and those of every municipality to consider the terms of their presently elected officials and to determine if it is time for a healthy change of public officials.  The Red Cross recognizes the need for fresh blood; and so should the residents of Berlin, Connecticut and those of other towns throughout the United States.  Rotation of duties is essential to any good internal control system and should be implemented in the public as well as in the private sphere in order to mitigate any possible abuses of entrenched power.

 
Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Connecticut Congressman Chris Murphy’s response to my question, what are you doing to create jobs?

Posted on September 19, 2011 by William Brighenti

Chris Murphy, U.S. Representative from ConnecticutThe Barefoot Accountant has repeatedly attempted for months to interview Chris Murphy, the United States Representative from Connecticut’s 5th District and a candidate in the Democratic primary for the United States Senate.  Unlike Susan Bysiewicz—former Secretary of State of Connecticut and also a Democratic candidate for the United States Senate—who readily made herself available for a one-hour video-taped interview, Chris Murphy has never agreed to an interview.  Consequently, out of frustration and disappointment, the Barefoot Accountant sent Chris Murphy an email asking the following question:  “what are you doing to create jobs?”

Herein is his reply to the Barefoot Accountant’s email, received on August 15th.  A video and transcript of Susan Bysiewicz’s response to virtually the same question can be found at The Barefoot Accountant interviews Connecticut’s Democratic candidate for the United States Senate, Susan Bysiewicz. Video and transcript of interview, Part I: How the government can create jobs.

Dear William,

I hear politicians talking all the time about “creating jobs”. But the people I meet throughout Connecticut rightly ask, “Great, but what are you doing about it?”

So I wanted to give you a quick update on what I’m doing in Washington and Connecticut to improve consumer confidence and spur immediate and long term job creation.

Last Friday, I hosted a press conference in Waterbury to call on Congress to pass a major investment in funding for roads, bridges and rail lines. The Republican leadership of the House of Representatives is proposing to slash funding for infrastructure projects which could cost us 6,000 jobs here in Connecticut. Senator Blumenthal joined me for the event, which was attended by over 100 workers engaged in the construction trades.

Last week I released the results of a survey of 151 Connecticut manufacturers conducted by my office. The news was good – half of all manufacturers reported plans to add jobs in the next year. This is the kind of good news our economy needs, and I held a press conference with Senator Blumenthal this week to announce the good news. And the data from the survey regarding the obstacles manufacturers face in creating these new jobs is already helping me develop new legislation to attack these problems. The survey proved what I have been saying for years – manufacturing is far from dead in this country—in fact, the industry in on the verge of a rebirth that will put Americans back to work, and I’m working hard to ensure that Connecticut leads the way.

In July, I successfully passed an amendment to the State Department funding bill that would apply the language of the Buy American Act to purchases made for items used by the State Department overseas. Currently, Buy American provisions only apply to the purchase of items that will be used within the United States, but in FY09 and FY10 alone, the Department of State spent over $1 billion on articles, materials and supplies manufactured outside the United States. Requiring our embassies to comply with the Buy American Act is a simple but effective way to create American jobs through smarter procurement policy.

And earlier this year, I introduced the American Jobs Matter Act, which would require all federal contracting officials to accept and solicit information from businesses regarding how many American jobs would be retained or created if their bid was chosen. We came close to passing this common sense legislation in the House, but it ultimately was rejected by the new majority (we lost by 4 votes!). The good news is that this bill has a new, strong champion in West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who has introduced the American Jobs Matter Act in the Senate.

I will keep you informed as these efforts move forward, and let me know what additional ideas who think will help us get our state’s economy up and moving again.

Sincerely,

Congressman Chris Murphy

The obvious question is:  why did Chris Murphy wait until this year to act on creating jobs when our country has been in a deep recession for years?  Similarly, why has President Barack Obama waited nearly three years to raise taxes on millionaires in order to reduce deficit spending instead of his previous willingness, over the past year, to consider cuts to social security, medicare, medicaid, and other social programs?  Could it just be merely election-year talk to get re-elected?  LOL!

The Barefoot Accountant

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Barefoot Accountant’s interview of Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut candidate for U.S. Senate. Part II: Fair Trade Agreements; Corporate Taxes; Corporate Control of Government

Posted on September 3, 2011 by William Brighenti

On August 5th, 2011, the Barefoot Accountant interviewed Susan Bysiewicz, a Connecticut Democratic candidate for the United States Senate.  In part 1 of that interview, Susan Bysiewicz discussed how the government can create jobs in America today.

In the second part of that same interview, presented herein, Susan discusses how to make free trade fair trade, government contracts to foreign entities, corporate taxation and repatriation of profits, Citizens United case and the Clean Elections Law.

How to Make Free Trade Fair Trade?

The Barefoot Accountant: We have free trade agreements, but do you think they are fair trade agreements? A lot of jobs have been sent overseas. I recently called the Hartford Courant regarding my subscription, and I contacted someone in the Philippines. I was surprised by that. And when I call AT&T and Comcast for my local service, I am transferred to someone in India, China, the Philippines, or elsewhere.

What can we do to make our free trade agreements fair trade agreements?

Susan Bysiewicz: That’s precisely the issue. NAFTA, it is estimated, has sent about a million jobs out of our country. And we have negotiated some other free trade agreements. I’d like to see free trade agreements become fair trade agreements.

And by that I mean there should be a level playing field. And there isn’t at the moment because other countries do not have the environmental regulations, the safety regulations, the labor laws that we do, that protect our workers and protect our environment.

And I am a very strong supporter of the Fair Trade Act that Representative Michaud of Maine has proposed. And what that legislation says is that we should renegotiate the free trade legislation that has been passed to make sure that it is fair. That is, if there is a level playing field with other countries with respect to labor, environmental, and safety laws.

Government Contracts to Foreign Entities

The Barefoot Accountant: Related to that, I have witnessed a number of tax returns of people working overseas in the Middle East, they are working for companies that were set up by companies here in the United States to avoid the labor laws and the tax laws. I won’t mention any names, but these are government contracts and we are giving them to foreign entities who are not complying with our labor laws and so forth.

How would you address problems such as these?

Susan Bysiewicz: I guess I would say this. If we are going to give government contracts to private companies, then we ought to look at whether they are complying with all of our laws and regulations because we certainly shouldn’t reward companies with lucrative federal contracts if they are not abiding by other federal laws, particularly tax laws.

And I think you’ve alluded to another issue with your question, which is, should we change some of the tax laws that actually encourage American companies to go overseas. And I think that’s important to take a look at because we shouldn’t have a tax code that encourages our companies to go outside of our own country.

Corporation Taxation – Repatriation of Corporate Profits

The Barefoot Accountant: Let’s explore that further. Would you be in favor of repatriating corporate profits at 3% to 5%? Congress and the Administration are already talking about that. These large corporations now, instead of paying 35% or 38% corporate tax rates, want to bring their corporate profits back to the United States and only pay 2-1/2%, 3%, maybe 5% at most.

Susan Bysiewicz: Look, I think that we should explore ways to get companies back here and encourage them to be investing in our country. I think an even bigger problem though is this: it’s estimated by the Congressional Budget Office that 55% of American companies are not paying any corporate income tax. And so what we ought to be doing is reviewing our tax code to ensure that we streamline it: that we get rid of a lot of our tax loopholes because the sad reality is we have the best tax code that money can buy.

You have a lot of really big corporations that have used lobbyists and PACs down in Washington to get very favorable tax treatment. And it’s not fair. So if we want to get our country out of this huge hole that we are in, it seems to me that we should revise our tax code, get rid of those loopholes, and we probably could even reduce the corporate tax rate because we’d be raising more revenue because every corporation would be paying their fair share.

Sherman Anti-Trust Act – Citizens United Case

The Barefoot Accountant: We are touching upon a subject that I wanted to discuss at the end of our interview, so maybe we can talk about it now. It’s about the size of big business. When I was growing up, I would hear the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. I don’t hear that term much anymore. There seems to be these large conglomerates, and they are too big to fail, too big to jail. And they seem to have a lot of influence on our government. Some even think that they control the government. How can we control and separate big business from government?

Susan Bysiewicz: Well, I think that one of the reasons we are in this place has to do with a Supreme Court decision called the Citizens United case. And that case in essence says that corporations are people and that corporations can spend as much as they want to support or to defeat particular candidates. And I believe that history will show that this is one of the worst decisions that the Supreme Court has made over the past hundred years.

Unlimited corporate contributions were never allowed prior to that case. And so, I tell you this, that the first bill that I would co-sponsor when I get to Washington will be the one that has currently been proposed to create a clean elections law at the federal level parallel to the clean elections law that I fought for here in Connecticut.

And that law is very simple. It says that in Connecticut if you would like to run for statewide office or for the legislature, you’d have to raise a large number of small contributions to show support. And then once you do that, each candidate for that office who participates in the program gets the same amount of money from the clean elections fund. And I think that we should have that same system in place at the federal level.

We now had a couple of very successful elections in Connecticut. And as a result, the elections are about people and issues, and they are not about special interests or political action committees. And I think that is very, very healthy for the process, and I would love to see that same system brought to our federal government.

The Barefoot Accountant: I agree 100%.

[End of Part II of Interview.]

Click the following link for Part I of the Barefoot Accountant’s Interview of Susan Bysiewicz, Connecticut Democratic candidate for the United States Senate:  How the Government Can Create Jobs.

For those of you who wish to support and contribute to Susan Bysiewicz’s campaign, you may do so by clicking on the following link:

Goal Thermometer

The Barefoot Accountant

Posted in Accountants CPA Hartford, Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments