Sarah Palin Blast Donald Trump On Carrier Deal??? Say It Ain't So

[Yamcha]

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2016/12/06/trump-tax-plan-could-cost-bank-america-44-billion.html

Most of what the incoming Trump administration has proposed in terms of economic and regulatory policies would be a boon for big banks, but there is one policy that cuts both ways: Trump's desire to lower the corporate tax rate. According to one of the nation's leading bank analysts, Keefe, Bruyette & Wood's Brian Kleinhanzl, the move could reduce Bank of America's (NYSE: BAC) tangible book value by $4.4 billion.

Under ordinary circumstances, this is obviously a good thing. The less companies have to pay to the government, the more left over for shareholders. And over the long run, it'll be good for Bank of America as well. However, thanks to a combination of the financial crisis and a specific provision in the tax laws, there's a short-term downside to lower corporate taxes from the North Carolina-based bank's perspective.

The downside can be traced to $33.3 billion worth of deferred tax assets that currently sit on Bank of America's balance sheet (see page 225 of its 2015 10-K here). These relate to losses incurred in the financial crisis that were too large to be absorbed by its income at the time. Under tax law, these can be carried forward in the form of deferred tax assets and used to offset its tax liability in future years.

The catch is that the deferred tax assets must be used within a certain amount of time. The statute of limitations for domestic deferred tax assets is 20 years. It's half that for those that offset foreign income, according to regulatory filings by Bank of America's close competitor Citigroup.

By lowering the tax rate, in turn, these assets become less valuable, as future tax liabilities will accordingly shrink. Even more importantly, it calls into question whether Bank of America will have time to use the entirety of its deferred tax assets before they expire.

The answer to this remains to be seen. After all, we still don't know whether the corporate tax rate will in fact fall, much less when exactly it might do so.But if it were to happen, KBW's Kleinhanzl predicts that it would cause the value of Bank of America's deferred tax assets to drop by $6.6 billion. When you net that against the positive impact of a lower tax rate on certain of Bank of America's liabilities, it means that the  the bank's tangible book value would decline by $4.4 billion, according to KBW's analysis.   

[polychronopolous]

What are you going on about? Being politically conservative is not all about those issues. Conservatism involves wise fiscal actions as well, etc.
You're not exposing the left if you do dumb things with our economy as well. Not saying he has as we don't know everything about the deal yet.

I hardly find it a loser belief to prevent murder, though.

Eventually you will understand how this game is played.

Quit nitpicking the insignificant bullshit.

Trump summed up the abortion issue the best "Leave it up to The States"

Done. Now lets get back to WINNING.

Let the Liberals do all the infighting and get forced into extinction.

@ 2:40 - 2:48

[mazrim]

Eventually you will understand how this game is played.

Quit nitpicking the insignificant bullshit.

Trump summed up the abortion issue the best "Leave it up to The States"

Done. Now lets get back to WINNING.

Let the Liberals do all the infighting and get forced into extinction.

@ 2:40 - 2:48

Once again, your post had nothing to do with what was going on in the thread. Noone was posting about abortion/gays, etc.
Its not "winning" if you spend, etc. like liberals if this becomes the case.
A vast amount of conservatives voted for Trump simply because of the supreme court. Without them he would not have won.

If "winning" means becoming like the liberals, thats not a "winning" I want. That is what your post appeared to me. Not saying that is what you meant to convey as I agree with a lot of your other posts from what I've seen.

Noone was nitpicking anything, so to throw that out there was off base, imo.

Leaving the majority of things up to the states is a conservative idea.

Also, being against murder is not a loser belief no matter how much the sugarcoating is. If you truly think that is "insignificant" then you are already "liberalized" with your ideologies in that way. He has gone a bit back and forth on this issue already yet conservatives still came out and voted for him.
However, you don't just sit back and say, "Okay, Boss", etc. if there is something that is not right just because someone has "Republican" next to their name.

It appears that most of the real "infighting" comes from liberal republicans like McConnell, McCain, Ryan, etc. who do not want a return to more politically conservative ideas.

Trumps campaign was much more politically conservative then both of his predecessors (McCain and Romney) and he won because he pushed a lot of conservative ideas.

It is a liberal idea to not be able to disagree with someone on a particular issue and to not have your own ideas/beliefs. They are sheep of a like mind in all areas or beaten psychologically until they simply follow what they are told is true/right. That is what I see promoted in what you just posted.

[polychronopolous]

Once again, your post had nothing to do with what was going on in the thread. Noone was posting about abortion/gays, etc.
Its not "winning" if you spend, etc. like liberals if this becomes the case.
A vast amount of conservatives voted for Trump simply because of the supreme court. Without them he would not have won.

If "winning" means becoming like the liberals, thats not a "winning" I want. That is what your post appeared to me. Not saying that is what you meant to convey as I agree with a lot of your other posts from what I've seen.

Noone was nitpicking anything, so to throw that out there was off base, imo.

Leaving the majority of things up to the states is a conservative idea.

Also, being against murder is not a loser belief no matter how much the sugarcoating is. If you truly think that is "insignificant" then you are already "liberalized" with your ideologies in that way. He has gone a bit back and forth on this issue already yet conservatives still came out and voted for him.
However, you don't just sit back and say, "Okay, Boss", etc. if there is something that is not right just because someone has "Republican" next to their name.

It appears that most of the real "infighting" comes from liberal republicans like McConnell, McCain, Ryan, etc. who do not want a return to more politically conservative ideas.

Trumps campaign was much more politically conservative then both of his predecessors (McCain and Romney) and he won because he pushed a lot of conservative ideas.

It is a liberal idea to not be able to disagree with someone on a particular issue and to not have your own ideas/beliefs. They are sheep of a like mind in all areas or beaten psychologically until they simply follow what they are told is true/right. That is what I see promoted in what you just posted.

Trump won because he knew how to win The Rust Belt. Something that had not been done since the 80's.