 RobIn Deo speramus.Premium join:2001-08-25 Kendall, FL kudos:3 | Queue the lobbyists Some empty promises here and there and Verizon should be back on track in no time. | |
|
 |  camaro92Question everythingPremium join:2008-04-05 Westfield, MA | Re: Queue the lobbyists Agree, they will slide right in to there offices with shit eating grins and money and tell the people in charge that this is good for the consumer trust us. | |
|
 |  spewakR.I.P DadkinsPremium join:2001-08-07 Elk Grove, CA kudos:1 Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
| said by Rob:Some empty promises here and there and Verizon should be back on track in no time. Agreed! Verizon will tell Congress that if the tax loophole is eliminated, then the halls of Congress will not be wired for FIOS and the Franchise agreement will be null and void.  -- The weekend is here, grab a can of beer!
| |
|
 |  | | The Reverse Morris Trust, made legal since 1997 should be illegal and never should have been made legal in the first place. All it does is screw us the consumer.And it screws the goverment from getting the taxes it should get. | |
|
 SabreDi relung hatiku bernyanyi bidadari join:2005-05-17 | US, not WV According to the article, the provision banning it was actually attached to a federal law, not a state law. It was not anything specifically passed in Charleston, but this link concentrates on the impact in WV since it's a WV paper. | |
|
 |  | | Re: US, not WV Whoops, corrected -- thanks! | |
|
 |  |  SabreDi relung hatiku bernyanyi bidadari join:2005-05-17 | Re: US, not WV No problem. Thanks for all the hard work! | |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD | Probably Not Going to Help If these rural markets are not profitable for Verizon, then there's still nothing stopping them from selling them off anyway. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  tshirtPremium,MVM join:2004-07-11 Snohomish, WA kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Probably Not Going to Help said by pnh102:If these rural markets are not profitable for Verizon, then there's still nothing stopping them from selling them off anyway. No, there is not, but it would be less tempting/expensive to do, without the tax break, provided by the RMT.
The intent of the RMT was to allow Corp. to spin off SUCCESSFUL divsions into seperate businesses, IF they no longer matched the Corp.s core business, without excess tax liability for either the parent, shareholders, or the new business. A valuable tool for de-consolidating businesses before they became "too large to fail". However, it didn't have the safegaurds to prevent it from being used to dump unwanted assets and DEBT onto the discarded portions, benefiting ONLY the parent. Don't know if it should be illegal, but the conditions should be HIGHLY regulated against these abuses. | |
|
 |  |  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD 1 edit | Re: Probably Not Going to Help said by tshirt: The intent of the RMT was to allow Corp. to spin off SUCCESSFUL divsions into seperate businesses ... You could make the argument that these divisions were successful. If they were failures, in terms of not making a profit, Verizon would have pulled the plug on them on their own, with or without selling them off.
The problem in Verizon's eyes were that these areas were profitable, but not profitable enough. In all the cases, you can easily note the mistakes that were made by the companies that bought these assets. They quickly turned something that was moderately profitable into a loser. -- "Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
 |  |  |  tshirtPremium,MVM join:2004-07-11 Snohomish, WA kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Probably Not Going to Help But they are exactly verizons core business. The part that's wrong, is them loading debt on the new business entity, while taking the tax advantage for themselves, The RMT idea was a clean cut, equal assets and debt spun into the new business and the shareholders/parent recieved stock in return, so no tax liability as no value changed hands. This case is a defacto sale and should be taxed as such (in which case, verzion would probably not proceed) (not that the proposed law will effect this sale) | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |
 Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| Handwriting on the wall.. No doubt they'll get one last shot at jettisoning the last northeast unprofitables.. but will have the door slammed firmly shut on selling any significant portion of their rural midwest and west coast assets which folded GTE and PacBell into what is now Verizon wired & wireless services. Then Verizon will have to do battle with its remaining footprint for upgrading to fiber and/or lte on an accelerated time scale. Verizon will have to choose which one is cheapest to install.. and we all know that answer: LTE, nearly as cheap as AT&T's deployment of DSL. | |
|
 |  | | Re: Handwriting on the wall.. Pacbell isn't part of Verizon. We here in California are part of Ma Bell aka AT&T. | |
|
 |  |  Reviews:
·ooma
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Handwriting on the wall.. said by unoriginal:Pacbell isn't part of Verizon. We here in California are part of Ma Bell aka AT&T. When Verizon became the premier telco long before AT&T got self made with BellSouth they acquired GTE so they are part of the landscape of California telco. If you look carefully at the deal assets had to switched back & forth so that the deal could pass anti-trust. No doubt some CA municipalities got switched around and some former PacBell assets wound up in Verizon hands too as part of the deal and some GTE assets went to Pacbell. What happened after is irrelevant.. to how Verizon.. a former northeast telco wound up with West Coast telecom wireline assets in the last mile. | |
|
 VanPremium join:2009-07-08 New Orleans, LA | I would not be that surprised if it stayed in, Karl though most of the time I would agree, I think the need for any sort of financial help to this country revenue wise may for the first time in a LONG TIME outweigh Verizon throwing around their weight in DC
With that said, I am probably wrong and under-estimating how utterly corrupt the government can be  | |
|
 | | :-) I hope frontier dies a horrible death and goes bankrupt just not at everyones else expense lol. Talk about poor service from verizon they couldnt even manage to provide a reliable 768K dsl to my house and thats being in one of the larger cities in wv in not in a riral area but I can get 20mb on cable go figure | |
|
 LinklistPremium join:2002-03-03 Longport, NJ kudos:5 1 edit | Verizon transaction exempt from law
Before everyone gets real excited about this affecting the current Verizon spin off to Frontier, there is a provision in the law that exempts any transaction that was agreed to in a contract BEFORE Mar 15, 2010. I guess it will be up to the lawyers on whether Verizon & Frontier already have a binding agreement.
Go to page 43 of the PDF report on the law »frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin···.111.pdf
The provision applies to exchanges occurring after the date of enactment.
However, the provision does not apply to any exchange in connection with a transaction which is (i) made pursuant to an agreement which was binding on March 15, 2010, and at all times thereafter, (ii) described in a ruling request submitted to the Internal Revenue Service on or before such date, or (iii) described on or before such date in a public announcement or in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The actual bill. See Sec 302 for who is exempted from the law because of effective date: »thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?···C_34052&
(c) Effective Date-
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (2), the amendments made by this section shall apply to exchanges after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) TRANSITION RULE- The amendments made by this section shall not apply to any exchange pursuant to a transaction which is--
(A) made pursuant to an agreement which was binding on March 15, 2010, and at all times thereafter,
(B) described in a ruling request submitted to the Internal Revenue Service on or before such date, or
(C) described on or before such date in a public announcement or in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Looks to me like Verizon already has their loophole in the bill already. -- NCAA® March Madness on Demand® | |
|
 GbcueP.E.Premium join:2001-09-30 Santa Rosa, CA kudos:8 | Isn't this what Enron Did? Isn't this what Enron Did? Spun off their debt to shell companies (read: Frontier) to make the parent company (Verizon) look like it had record profits? Or am I confusing it with a different company? -- My Blog 2.0 | |
|
 |  markofmayhemWhy not now?Premium join:2004-04-08 Pittsburgh, PA kudos:5 | Re: Isn't this what Enron Did? No, Frontier isn't a subsidiary of Verizon. This isn't like Enron. | |
|
 |  | | Enron's problems (which are miniscule compared to some of the FannieMae/FreddieMac shenanigans of more recent history!) were off balance sheet -- Sarbanes-Oxley was billed as the 'fix' to that. | |
|
 1 edit | hmm The WV State Public Service Commission will most likely reject the Frontier Sale in wv. Unless they wanna relive a reenactment of "Matewan" Most states fight with lawyers. We use Shotguns LOL | |
|
 | | Reverse Morris Trust illegal? Well, I suppose it is OK to outlaw the RMT as long as the Reverse Cowgirl still is OK. | |
|
 | | Icing on the cake The problem with these deals at heart isn't the tax treatment. It's that essentially, what Verizon seems to be doing is offloading its debts onto a company that then fails, leaving the creditors (who presumably lent the money based on Verizon's debt rating, not that of the other company) high and dry.
The fact that they get favorable tax treatment is as the subject says, icing on the cake. | |
|
 SnowymIRC unix.ro UnderNetPremium join:2003-04-05 Kailua, HI kudos:6 Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Clearwire Wireless
| Special interest group vs Special interest group "Given Verizon's "makeover" (selling off all rural DSL and landline markets) has involved tens of thousands of terminated employees -- unions have been lobbying hard to have the Reverse Morris Trust eliminated from the Verizon accounting arsenal."
Hell, let's just rewrite the history books to reflect modern day America! "and that government of the special interest group, by the special interest group, for the special interest group, shall not perish from the earth." | |
|
 TechieZeroTools Are Using MePremium join:2002-01-25 Gibsonton, FL | See If Verizon India Cares... If it's too much money here they are just going to move it there anyway. | |
|
 batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium join:2003-02-06 Netcong, NJ | Verizon to take $970M charge from health care bill Corporations pay taxes; who do you think is going to pay for health care.
quote: NEW YORK The corporate tax impact of the recent health care overhaul grew Thursday as Verizon Communications Inc. announced it will record a related $970 million non-cash charge in the first quarter.
| |
|
 |
|