Monday, June 16, 2014

America Is Globally Shamed For Its Pathetic Minimum Wage

America is treating its low-wage workers so badly that it's starting to get shamed by the rest of the world.

The International Monetary Fund on Monday cut its forecast for U.S. economic growth this year, warned of sluggish growth for years to come, and made a bunch of suggestions for getting America's economic house in order -- including raising the abysmally low federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.

"[G]iven its current low level (compared both to U.S. history and international standards), the minimum wage should be increased," the global financial-stability group wrote in its annual assessment of state of the U.S. economy. "This would help raise incomes for millions of working poor and (help) ensure a meaningful increase in after-tax earnings for the nation’s poorest households."

The IMF didn't say how much it thought the minimum wage should be, exactly. President Barack Obama has proposed an increase to $10.10 an hour. If the minimum wage had been adjusted for inflation regularly, it would be at least $10.68, according to the National Employment Law Project. Many fast-food workers would prefer $15 an hour. If wage floors had been raised to keep up with productivity, then they would be closer to $22 an hour.

However you figure it, the wage is too low, and one of the lowest among the world's developed economies.

The point is moot at the moment, because Republicans in Congress want nothing to do with a higher minimum wage. States and cities are starting to take matters into their own hands, led by Seattle, which recently raised its minimum wage to a highest-in-the-nation $15.

In fact, Republicans in Congress oppose many of the suggestions the IMF made for getting U.S. economic growth moving again, including infrastructure investment and immigration reform. Without such things, the IMF said, it expects U.S. gross domestic product growth to average 2 percent a year for "the next several years," below its historic average of more than 3 percent. The IMF also cut its forecast for growth this year to 2 percent from an earlier estimate of 2.8 percent.

Then again, the IMF also called for the U.S. to "fundamentally reform" Social Security, so there's stuff in this report for Americans on the left to hate, too.

Saturday, June 14, 2014

Homophobia Is Hurting The Economy

Homophobia could be costing the Indian economy as much as $30.8 billion every year, according to an upcoming study for the World Bank. And it's not just India that is losing as a result of LGBT discrimination.

According to economist and study author M.V. Lee Badgett of the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, the economic impact of discrimination against LGBT individuals is threefold:

  1. Workplace and education discrimination lead to lower wages for LGBT individuals, which results in less tax revenue reaped by the government.
  2. A higher poverty rate due to low income means more government spending on social programs.
  3. And poor health, in the form of higher rates of depression, suicide and HIV/AIDS, means higher government health care costs and decreased participation in the workforce.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Badgett said her preliminary findings represent a case study that could be applied to any nation that discriminates against LGBT individuals. The study focuses on India because of the availability of certain economic data provided by health research and LGBT organizations within the country.

"Even in countries where the laws are very equal, you can still have discrimination and health disparities," Badgett told The Huffington Post. "For me, the takeaway is, every country has some cost associated with homophobia and transphobia."

In January, India's Supreme Court ruled to uphold a colonial-era ban on gay sex, outraging LGBT rights activists and the nation's own ruling party. Violation of the ban can be punished by up to 10 years in jail. The government, along with seven human rights groups, had petitioned the court to overturn the ban.

Based on available data, Badgett estimated that LGBT individuals in India make an average of 10 percent less in wages than heterosexuals in comparable positions:

The second part of Badgett's analysis looks at health disparities between the LGBT community and the rest of the population. Based on the higher rates of depression, suicidal thoughts and HIV/AIDS among LGBT individuals, Badgett was able to calculate the years of life or quality of life lost, and thus the loss of economic productivity caused by these health problems.

The true costs to India's GDP are likely far greater than these estimates, Badgett told HuffPost. That's because of a dearth of data on how discrimination against LGBT individuals may contribute to "brain drain" -- mass emigration -- as well as the economic and social costs to family members of LGBT individuals, who may also face discrimination.

"This is just the tip of the iceberg," Badgett said during a presentation of her preliminary findings to a World Bank panel in March.

In the United States, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that acceptance of the LGBT community makes for a healthier economy. Legalizing gay marriage, for instance, has already been proven to add hundreds of millions of dollars to a state's coffers. One year after New York passed the Marriage Equality Act, New York City alone had generated an extra $259 million in revenue, mainly from a boom in the wedding industry.

Badgett told HuffPost that discrimination against the LGBT community is undoubtedly costing the U.S. in a number of ways.

She suggested a few federal policy changes that would likely increase the economic contributions of LGBT individuals. Enacting federal non-discrimination laws, for example -- particularly governing the way LGBT individuals are treated in schools -- would likely promote more positive economic outcomes in the workplace, she said.

But, she cautioned, "Even if you have the best policies in the world, there's still likely to be some underlying homophobia in these institutions, or present in the attitudes [of a community]. These things get embedded deeply in our culture, and it doesn't get immediately dislodged by a policy change."

Thursday, June 12, 2014

Walgreen Ponders $4 Billion Tax Dodge

Walgreen, the biggest U.S. retail drugstore chain, is considering decamping to Switzerland in a quest for bigger tax breaks, just two years after reaping a hefty package of Illinois tax credits in exchange for keeping corporate jobs in the state.

Such a move, through a maneuver called an inversion, would cost the U.S. treasury $4 billion in tax revenue over the next five years, according to a new report by Americans For Tax Fairness, a tax reform advocacy group. It also may prompt other U.S. retailers, which typically pay high tax rates compared with large multinationals like Apple and General Electric, to seek foreign acquisitions in order to dramatically lower their bills.

Americans For Tax Fairness calculated Walgreen's possible tax savings based on determinations by outside analysts, who figured the company could lower its rate to about 20 percent from the current 35 percent if it were to incorporate in Switzerland. (Reincorporating abroad would not necessarily mean substantive changes in where company personnel and operations are housed.)

Because Walgreen's bottom line is significantly bolstered by taxpayer-funded Medicare and Medicaid drug benefits, accounting for one-third of all pharmacy sales, relocating offshore would represent an especially egregious exploitation of the leaky U.S. tax code, Americans for Tax Fairness concludes in the new report.

"Our research shows that Walgreens relies heavily on the U.S. taxpayer for its profits, and that an inversion would deprive our country of significant resources while giving the company an unfair advantage over its competitors," the report says.

A Walgreen inversion may be possible next year, should shareholders approve the purchase of the the Swiss company Alliance Boots, Europe's largest pharmaceutical wholesaler and retailer. In 2012, Walgreen bought a 45 percent stake in the company. At a meeting in April in Paris, some Walgreen shareholders pushed for an inversion, touting the potential tax savings, according to the new report. This seemed to prompt a shift in tone from company executives, who had previously downplayed the possibility of an inversion.

"We’ve never been a proponent of paying more taxes than we have to," said Rick Hans, a Walgreens vice president, at a later conference, according to the new report.

On Wednesday, in response to the report, Walgreens issued a statement. "As we’ve said before, we continue to analyze a number of issues as we move toward the window for exercising the second step of our transaction with Alliance Boots, and we will do what is in the best long-term interest of our company and its shareholders," spokesman James Graham said in an email.

Inversions are possible when U.S. companies incorporate in another country, so long as 20 percent of company stock is owned by a foreign entity. After the inversion, the original U.S. company becomes a subsidiary of the foreign parent company, yet the foreign company is controlled by the shareholders of the original U.S. corporation.

The tax savings of moving a corporate address abroad can be enormous. Companies are no longer on the hook for paying U.S. taxes on profits earned abroad, potentially a huge benefit for companies with big overseas sales. Walgreens, because its stores are located primarily in the U.S., would likely realize big tax savings in a different way: By shifting large amounts of debt from its foreign operation to its domestic operation in order to offset profit, said Frank Clemente, the executive director of Americans for Tax Justice.

Recently, the U.S. pharmaceutical giant Pfizer tried -- and failed -- to acquire the British drug company AstraZeneca, a deal at least partly motivated by tax savings that might be realized through an inversion.

Over the last decade, tax aversion has become a standard corporate business practice. A recent study found that Fortune 500 companies have created a whopping 7,827 offshore shell companies to stash nearly $2 trillion in places like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands in order to avoid paying U.S. taxes. One common way U.S. companies exploit such shell companies is by transferring patents or trademarks abroad, and then paying their subsidiary licensing fees for the right to use those patents, thus reducing domestic profit.

U.S. retailers, though, typically pay taxes at or close to the 35 percent corporate rate. That's because they book all or most of their revenue in the U.S. and have few options for making it seem as if that revenue was earned elsewhere.

Though it is likely that Walgreen will complete its purchase of Alliance Boots, it is difficult to evaluate the odds the company will attempt an inversion. The New York Times has reported that at least one shareholder, the CtW Investment Group, cited the risk of removal from the S&P 500 and other stock indices as an argument for why the company should remain headquartered in the U.S.

The CtW group owns less than 1 percent of Walgreen's shares.

Updated with response from Walgreens.

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Uncle Sam Wants Coders To Leave Silicon Valley For D.C.

President Obama delivers remarks about the error-plagued launch of Healthcare.gov in the Rose Garden. (Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

Washington -- There may be no foosball tables or luxury buses ferrying employees to work, but a new startup in the nation’s capital is offering other incentives to lure tech talent away from Silicon Valley.

It is sharing its work on GitHub, a popular website for open-source software, to appeal to coders. It is opening another office in San Francisco for those who don’t want to live in Washington. And it is convincing civic-minded techies to build websites, apps and other digital tools that serve their country.

It’s all part of an effort to persuade computer wizards to reject the lure of Google or Facebook and work for someone who isn’t thought of as an innovator: Uncle Sam.

Wednesday, June 4, 2014

McDonald's CEO: 'We Will Support' A Minimum Wage Hike

McDonald's might finally have figured out that paying its low-wage workers more would actually be a good thing for McDonald's.

McDonald's CEO Don Thompson recently suggested his company would support a bill, proposed by President Barack Obama, raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 an hour from $7.25. Such a wage hike likely wouldn't satisfy his workers, some of whom recently stormed the company's Oak Brook, Ill., headquarters demanding $15 an hour. But it would be a noticeable shift in attitude for the world's biggest restaurant chain, which has so far been neutral as the debate about higher wages has roiled around it.

Saturday, May 24, 2014

GM: Recalls May Last Until Mid-Summer

DETROIT (AP) — General Motors is telling Wall Street that a recent spate of recalls may last until mid-summer as the company continues to review unresolved safety issues.

The news comes a day after The Associated Press learned that GM CEO Mary Barra told members of Congress that the company cannot make ignition switches fast enough to keep up with demand in its recall of 2.6 million small cars.

The ignition switch problem has been linked to at least 13 deaths in crashes involving Chevrolet Cobalts and Saturn Ions. Congress and the Justice Department are investigating why GM knew about the switch problem for at least a decade but only started recalling the cars this February.

Friday, May 2, 2014

Ford Names Mark Fields Its New CEO

DEARBORN, Mich., May 1 (Reuters) - Ford Motor Co said on Thursday that its chief operating officer, Mark Fields, will succeed Alan Mulally as chief executive officer, effective on July 1.

Mulally, 68, is credited with transforming the No. 2 U.S. automaker from a money-loser to a company that expects to realize a pretax profit of up to $8 billion this year. He joined Ford in 2006 after a career at Boeing Co.

The naming of 53-year-old Fields as the next CEO, which the company's board approved on Wednesday, was expected. Mulally said the transition was moved up from year-end because he felt the team and Fields were ready.