Quote:
Originally Posted by alexamenos
The bailouts would lose by a huge margin, without question. The notion that the Federal Government is a government of, by and for the Peeps is a laughably naive notion. It's why I usually don't bother to vote, such as I didn't vote this year - voting is a waste of time, nothing more than an act of subservience where one pretends to have have an impact upon pre-ordained outcomes.
|
along this^^^ line...
Quote:
Operating mostly under the radar screen, Congress, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service have been rolling back various provisions of the tax code to help out industries and investors caught up in the turmoil.
...
the Treasury Department declared that the cash infusions for banks won't be considered "federal financial assistance." Normally, that type of funding would count as taxable income for the recipients, and could trigger other unfavorable tax consequences for banks receiving assistance that take part in mergers.
...
The most controversial move so far is an obscure IRS ruling that gives banks the unfettered ability to use the "tax losses" of banks they acquired.
Typically, companies are permitted to carry over tax benefits from years when they lose money to help offset taxes when they return to profitability. However, for decades, Congress has restricted the amount of those losses that can be used in a given year, to prevent companies from buying and selling other firms solely to benefit from the tax strategy.
In a one-sentence ruling issued on Sept. 30, the Treasury Department effectively lifted that restriction if the company being bought is a bank and the losses are attributable to a portfolio of loans.
Sen. Charles Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, has complained about the sudden loosening of the rules. "Congress should have been informed and consulted before Treasury took such an extraordinary action that likely will add billions of dollars to the deficit," he said.
|
Informed and consulted? Congress is absolutely, legally responsible for adding and subtracting (the latter in theory) dollars from he deficit. It's much, much too weak to say that they should be "informed and consulted", instead they should "vote and enact."
That last line is a stunning acknowledgement of the extent to which a duly elected representative congress has abdicated its power. We aren't governed by a representative government subject to the rule of law, but at least in times not-too-distant past that facade has been carefully maintained. But now it's like the powers that be are saying, "we've got too much on our hands to worry about what you peons think." Interesting times.