A judge in Arkansas rejected the effort by Walmart (owned by the richest family in the nation, the Waltons) reduce their property taxes.
Max Brantley of the Arkansas Times writes:
County Judge Barry Hyde, sitting as the county court in considering appeals of appraisals of property for tax purposes, held that Walmart had failed to meet the burden of proof to reduce the assessor’s valuation of the property, and thus its tax bill in the county by about $4.5 million. The reduction would mostly be felt by public school districts, but city and county governments, libraries and Arkansas Children’s Hospital as well.
Walmart is attempting this theory all across the country. Its “dark store” theory is that its stores, even though currently immensely profitable, would have far less value for any other purpose if vacant and have also been negatively affected by Internet competition.
This is an interesting theory. If my house were vacant, it would havelessvalue so I should have my property taxes reduced even if my house is not vacant.
Why does the Walton Family want to reduce their taxes? They increase their wealth by $4 million an hour!
Why do they think it just to cut public school funding and other public services solely to enrich them?
Taxes are the price we pay for civilization. Clearly the mega billionaire Walton Family believes that civilization is not necessary so long as they can find people to work for them at low wages and can hire an army to protect them.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I think when a member of the richest 1-percent dies, 99-percent of their gross worth over $5 million should be taxed at 99-percent.
For instance, if Bill Gates died today, his wife and children get $ 5 million + 1-percent of his gross worth. NOT net worth but gross worth. All if his holdings (stocks, property, houses, et al) would have to be sold.
As of this morning, Bill Gates net worth is $103.7 billion USD. If BG expired today, his wife and family would get about $1-billion-42-million and the rest of his gross worth woud go to pay off the national debt, support the public sector (but not the military and CIA), and update infrastructure.
Does anyone reading this think that Bill Gates wife and his children would suffer undue hardships from an inheritance of only $1-billion-42-million?
Make his wife and kids show grit… no inheritance.
Make Bill show that his first success wasn’t a fluke. Make him demonstrate the ease of upward mobility by impoverishing him.
I like your ideas.
Yes, let’s strip the 0.1 percent of all of their gross worth/wealth and let them prove they are special (better than the rest of us) by having them start over from homeless.
The combined net worth of the 2017 class of the 400 richest Americans was $2.7 trillion, up from $2.4 trillion in the previous years.
Imagine all the jobs that would be created using all of that money to rebuild the infrastructure across the U.S. Instead of all that wealth being locked up, it would be circulating repeatedly through the economy generating even more jobs.
An all-new power grid.
High-speed rail, all new.
All new bridges.
Free solar panels on every roof.
All new airports.
And that is just for starters.
Epstein didn’t lock up his money. He spent it to ferry powerful men to his mansions where children waited.
Lloyd and Diane,
C’MON! Stop berating Walmart.
Taxes and a dignified, civilized way of life – as well as true democracy – are overrated. Aren’t may of us too busy and distracted shopping at malls and watching sports – maybe on those low priced Walmart big screen TVs – to notice anything?
I say let’s give more money to the Waltons. They need it.
In Massachusetts, you pay what is called a “personal property” tax on the chattel within your building/house (sofa, blender, computer, etc.). Walmart pays none of it because they made the case that the merchandise they have in the stores (chattel) technically is not theirs, but it on the market to be sold to the public. It’s not as though they hold onto their bathrooms towels, Corelle china, or Scrubbing Bubbles forever, so therefore they don’t really own the merchandise. In some cases, they don’t pay for any items until they get sold to the public, Hence, if they are not seen to really be owning chattel, they don’t have to pay tax on it.
Yup! . . . .
I think you wrote your “alleged” support for Wal-Mart with tongue stuck firmly in cheek while cackling like a flock of frantic roosters that have no hens.
Correct, Lloyd.
Gates has said he’s not leaving his kids any inheritance. We’ll see exactly how that plays out….
Gates says one thing but means another. He might not be leaving his kids an inheritance but he is leaving them the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation, his tax haven that hides his money. His children are already managing the Gates Foundation and no matter how much Gates gives away, his foundation keeps growing and adding more money to hide from taxes.
When Gates dies, his children’s inheritance is the Gates Foundation.
I don’t believe for a minute that Gates is leaving nothing to his children.
Warren Buffett told the same self-serving lie. Then, a few years ago he gave hls kids’ foundations, $600,000,000. (His wife gave the kids the seed money for the foundations.) One of the Buffet sons is at the southern border hobnobbing with people who are cruel to refugees (allegedly funding them).
Do you believe Gates will leave his children penniless?
Maybe he considers $100 million to be “nothing.”
From what I have read, his children manage the Gates Foundation and are paid a hefty salary to do so.
Bill Gates claimed he was going to give all his money away but never spelled out what that meant. He gave his wealth to his foundation that acts as a tax shelter and all he has to do is give away 5% of its value annually to qualify to invest the other 95% and continue to grow his fortune.
When the Gates Foundation was formed in 2000, Bill Gates was worth $40 billion.
Today, Bill Gates net worth is estimated at $103.7 billion. Instead of giving his money away, he is increasing his net worth with help from a foundation that shelters that money from paying more in taxes.
After Bill and Melinda Gates are gone, their children and their children and their children et al. will live off what the Foundation pays them. Through the foundation, that wealth also will continue to buy them endless power.
Lloyd makes the case not to spare the progeny.
Lloyd, are we all complaining again??? Why don’t the rest of us just do the same. We should just establish foundations and trusts.
If any of you are interested, I will summon my pilot and private jet to pick you up and meet me at on of my twelve 20,000 square foot mansions throughout the countries, where you can lodge and dine in one of the wings of each house (or in the buses houses in each compound) and we can hold a summit on how to do this for ordinary folk.
Middle class and poor people deserve to have the same privileges as billionaires, aren’t they?
Does anyone know a good event planner these days. Good help is SO hard to find . . . . . .
Bill Gates house in Washington State has more than 60,000 square feet, not a paltry 20k. If Gates took a walk every day and never left that house, how many miles would he have to walk to visit all of its rooms?
Google his yacht. That may be as large as his mansion.
All the links from Google say Bill Gates rents his yachts. When he does, he spends about $5 million per week for the rental.
Why? They are insatiable leeches.
Billionaires like the Waltons have no need for the common good. Therefore, they resent paying their fair share to support it. With lower taxes, they will then have more money to force everyone else to knuckle under to their vision of society in which the predestined “betters” take advantage of the “lesser” poor.
Speculation: The Walton’s will convert closed stores into charter schools with indoor gyms and they will do so with federal facilities dollars…or “pubic- private partnerships” not different from privately managed prisons and toll roads.
Ripping off the gullible in order to make money “at scale” is on the way for infrastructure projects most of these put on hold after much PR from Trumpsters.
In the case of schools, look for budget-minded cities and school boards to get on with profit-seeking “partnerships” partnerships in name only. From Jeremy Mohler In the Public Interest:
Writing in the Washington Post, In the Public Interest’s Jeremy Mohler urges Prince George’s County to halt their rush to become the first county in the country to use ‘public-private partnerships’ to build and maintain school buildings. “Prince George’s residents and school staff deserve to know why the county is planning to sign a pricey contract that will stretch for decades. What risks are involved? How is it better than the alternatives? What strings will be attached? (…) Perhaps Prince George’s County’s experiment will end up being a bargain. Maybe the county will right the ship for public-private partnerships after decades of failure around the globe. But the public deserves to know the stakes of the deal before it signs on the dotted line.”
Connecticut: In an important move that could lead to much greater transparency for ‘public-private partnerships,’ Attorney General William Tong has decided that the state’s $300 million partnership with hedge fund giant Ray Dalio’s philanthropic group to invest in Connecticut’s schools is subject to the Freedom of Information Act. The judge was responding to a request for clarification from a Republican lawmaker, House Minority Leader Themis Klarides (R-Derby). “The House minority leader noted that while the venture is based — in part — on a generous contribution from Dalio Philanthropies, it also involves tens of millions of dollars in public funds.
Klarides also warned that trying to exempt a venture with such strong ties to a core public function — local schools — would be problematic. ‘Everything is supposed to be done in the light of day,’ she told the CT Mirror last month. ‘I don’t know what happens if a publicly elected official has a fiduciary responsibility to this nonprofit corporation. What rules do I follow?’” Gov. Lamont says he’ll abide by the decision. More at https://www.inthepublicinterest.org/privatization-report-denver-says-no-to-private-prison-corporations-p3s-for-schools-and-more/
SETDA, funded by Gates, is public employees in every state promoting public private partnerships. A former director said SETDA lobbies. Are they lobbying for Gates, for private partners of the association or, for publicly paid education tech directors? And, what is received in return?
If the Waltons were as smart as they are greedy, they’d put 8 goats on the property and call it a farm. Trump did. He reduced his taxes from $462 and acre to $9 an acre.
I presume that the Waltons will take a page from Bill Gates and try to defeat the reelection of the judge, assuming he runs for office.
Legislators can be bought on the cheap in poor states. The Waltons must have forgotten to buy the judiciary.
In recent years, the vampire Waltons and all the other vampires are doing all they can to buy and control the justice system, too.
Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society.
There was an article in the NY Times today comparing modern American capitalism and slavery plantations. I’d say that’s about right.
By definition, slaves don’t pay income taxes. Romney pegged it at 47% of Americans.
(Then, there are the ugly rich who hide income and avoid taxation.)
Perhaps Walmart is doing this on behalf of the shareholders. Calpers owns about $329 million in Walmart stock. Granted that is not close to the over $2.3 billion in Apple, $1.8 billion in Microsoft, $1 billion in Facebook or nearly $1 billion in Exxon that the public employees of California depend on, but a penny saved is a penny earned for the public retirees in California.
Holdings of Calpers: https://www.calpers.ca.gov/docs/forms-publications/annual-investment-report-2018.pdf
No, TE, the Waltons are fighting to increase their personal wealth.
They want it to grow by $5 million an hour, not $4 million.
They are greedy pigs.
When I see the words “greedy pigs”, I think of the pigs the Chinaman owned in the TV Series “Deadwood”.
Pension systems wouldn’t be forced to choose among so few possible firms for investment if concentrated wealth hadn’t strangled economic growth. Without middle class demand, entrepreneurs face bleak odds, worsened by an American market characterized by monopoly.
The Walton and DeVos investment in Theranos is proof of the problem.
Gates and Zuck cannibalizing the kids of labor is further proof. Anticipated ROI on digital schools-in-a-box, 20%.
There are more mutual funds than there are companies in which to invest.
Linda,
Did you look at the 373 page long list of all the investments CalPERS makes? They own equity in over 100 domestic companies and 110 international companies whose names begin with the letter W that are not Walmart. They don’t invest in Walmart because there are no other choices.
TE,
What is your point? Are you implying that the Waltons are fine and honorable people because CALPERS invests in Walmart?
TE, What about CalSTRS, the public teachers’ retirement system in California? Has CalSTRS invested in Wal-Mart’s vampire stores, too?
$6.4 bil. in 210 companies makes my point.
te
Wilshire 5000 stock index (1974), current number identified in Wikipedia, 4500, but, estimated by other sources as 3,486.
You really shouldn’t be allowed to teach.
te
To help you think it through- CalPers can’t throw hundreds of millions to a firm with operations too small to absorb the capital. A firm has to have a market of sufficient size before additional capital can guarantee a profit. CalPers may prefer to invest its billions in lots of Mom and Pop solar panel companies in the U.S. but, is it a feasible investment strategy?
Dr. Ravitch,
My point is that the retired public employees of California and elsewhere can be confident of their continuing pension benefits because the people running corporations around the world continue to strive for high returns on equity.
Ah, yes, they strive for high returns on equity while crushing unions, underpaying their employees, and destroying Main Street.
Diane, you left out the part where corporations like Walmart and Hedge Funds want to or have already raided as many public pensions as possible to bankrupt them and get rid of any retirement benefits so no one will ever be able to stop working.
The vampire capitalists want the working people to be born slaves and work to the end until we die, always poor, always in debt to them, always hungry, always obedient to the want-to-be masters at the top.
They are vile.
hmm… Theranos was a less risky addition to the Walton portfolio than increased shares of Walmart?
TE,
To put the $329 million CalPERS has invested in Wal-Mart in perspective, compare it to the total assets of $309.3 billion that CalPERS currently holds. Correct my fast math if I am wrong but that works out to be 0.0001% of CalPERS assets.
Of course, I want to throw up thinking of anyone shopping or investing in Wal-Mart.
Lloyd,
You may need to get a bucket before you read this.
I looked up the equity holdings of CalSTRS for you. Of course your pension fund invested in Walmart, owning about $264 million in stock. Again it is lower than the $765 million in Exxon, $1 billion in Facebook shares, $1.5 billion in Amazon shares, and $1.8 billion in Apple shares that they own in order to pay you your pension. Your pension fund also holds about $23 million in Walmart bonds.
Domestic equity: https://www.calstrs.com/investment-table/domestic-equities#W
Debt securities: https://www.calstrs.com/investment-table/debt-securities#W
TE,
Again, you do not present a clear, understandable picture and it seems you deliberately ignored what percentage of CalPERS portfolio was invested in Wal-Mart.
CalSTRS current portfolio is worth $227.8 BiLLION.
Let’s see. If you are correct, then:
CalSTRS owns about $264 million in Walmart’s vampire stock and $23 million in Walmart’s vampire bonds.
That means Walmart represents 0.125-percent of CalSTRS total portfolio, about one-tenth of one percent.
And what is your purpose in pointing this out about CalPERS and CalSTRS investing in WalMart? California’s teachers and public employees have lno control over how their retirement funds are invested and the teachers’ unions also have no control over what CalSTRS invests in.
Llyod,
I am surprised that you think teachers have no control over how their retirement funds are invested. CalSTRS is governed by a 12 member governing board. By statute, 3 of those members must be teachers elected by current educators in California! A fourth member of the board must be a retired teacher who is appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate, and a fifth board member represents school boards, also appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate.
Currently, the Chair of the Teachers Retirement Board is Sharon Hendricks. She is an instructor at LA City College and Treasurer of The Los Angeles College Faculty Guild, AFT 1521. The Vice Chair of the Board is Harry Keily, a teacher in the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District and former Chair of the California Teachers Association Political Involvement Committee. The third teacher member is Dana Dillon, a K-8 instructor in the Weed Union Elementary School District. Ms. Dillon is a former member of the California Teachers Association board of directors and the National Education Association board of directors.
The board set the investment rules for CalSTRS.
Biographies of all the board members can be found here: https://www.calstrs.com/board-members
TE,
How do four members control a 12-member board?
Do the math.
I think TE’s ability to reason logically is seriously impaired.
TE, I was a public school teacher in California for thirty years (1975 – 2005) and I know for a fact that the teachers in the school district where I taught were never asked to vote for for THREE of the members that were on the board for CalSTRS. I wonder what “current educators” were allowed to vote for the THREE out of TWELVE members of the CalSTRS board? The term “current educators” doesn’t mean all of the public school teachers get to vote for those THREE our of TWELVE.
“The Teachers’ Retirement Board administers CalSTRS and sets policies and rules to ensure benefits are paid according to the law.
The 12-member board is composed of:
Three active CalSTRS members elected by current educators.
One retired CalSTRS member appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate.
Three public representatives appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate.
One school board representative appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate.
Four board members who serve in an ex-officio capacity by virtue of their office:
Director of Finance, State Controller, State Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Treasurer.
The board appoints a chief executive officer to administer CalSTRS consistent with the board’s policies and rules and selects a chief investment officer to direct the CalSTRS Investment Portfolio in accordance with board policy.”
Click to access fastfacts_2018.pdf
TE, if possible, please explain to me how those the three board members that were elected by “current educators” have enough votes to stop the “chief investment oficer” that was appointed to direct the CalSTRS Investment Portfolio in accordance with board policy, a policy that came about due to a majority vote of the twelve members.
Correct me if I”m wrong, but nine out of twelve is a majority, not three out of twelve.
I was just checking on other equities own by CalSTRS and noticed that they have $5 million invested in the The GEO Group, a firm that specializes in privatized jails. You can read about that company here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEO_Group
TE, your flawed logic allegedly is insinuating that the 266,244 public school teachers in California that are active members of CalSTRS are all responsible for making the decisions behind what to invest in as if all of those active teachers have the time to monitor the decisions of the one person and that person’s staff that were hired and approved by the majority of the twelve-person board that overseals CalSTRS to invest CalSTRS portfolio wisely.
TE, I think you must be watching too much Hannity or Limbaugh to think as you do.
The majority vote of the twelve-person board appoints a chief executive officer to administer CalSTRS consistent with the board’s policies and rules and selects a chief investment officer to direct the CalSTRS Investment Portfolio in accordance with board policy.
Click to access fastfacts_2018.pdf
California State Teachers Retirement System Investment policy and management plan updated March 2019. – by the way, the active members of CalSTRS do not vote on this plan. The plan is approved by a majoirty vote of the baord.
Executive Summary:
“The California State Teachers’ Retirement Board believes that to manage growth of assets in a prudent manner, it is necessary to establish Investment Beliefs and a clear investment policy and a planning statement under which the Investment Branch will operate. The Board has sole and exclusive fiduciary responsibility to administer the investment assets in a manner that will assure the prompt delivery of benefits and related services to the plan participants and their beneficiaries. As a public pension fund, the California State Teachers’ Retirement System is not subject to ERISA, which governs corporate pension plans. The CalSTRS investment decision-making criteria are based on the “prudent expert” standard, for which the ERISA prudence standards serve as a basis. Additionally, the California Constitution, Article 16, Section 17, subsection (d) and Education Code Section 22250 (c) require diversification of risk across asset classes and minimization of employer costs.” …
Click to access a_-_investment_policy_and_management_plan.pdf
Remember, TE, if you read through the lengthy CalSTRS policy and management plan and find something you can cheery pick like Hannity and Limbaugh do all the time, everyone that reads Diane’s blog can also click-the- link and read that policy and management plan beyond your cherry-picking methods.
Lloyd,
The answer your question about who is allowed to vote for the teachers on CalSTRS board can be found in the Board Policy Handbook.
For the two K-12 representatives, the handbook states “This member shall be elected by the active members of the Defined Benefit Program and active participants of the Cash Balance Benefit Program who are employed by a school district that provides instruction for grades K to 12, inclusive, or county office of education, pursuant to regulations adopted by the board, for a four-year term commencing on January 1, 2004”
For the community college representative, the handbook states “who shall be elected by the active community college members of the Defined Benefit Program and the active community college participants of the Cash Balance Benefit Program, pursuant to regulations adopted by the board, for a four-year term commencing on January 1, 2004.”
See https://www.calstrs.com/sites/main/files/file-attachments/trb_policy_manual.pdf
Okay, TE Hannity-Limbaugh, continue to ignore the fact that 3 is not a majority in the CalSTRS Board of 12.
Okay, TE Hannity-Limbaugh, continue to ignore the fact that the CalSTRS Board does not decide how to invest the CalSTRS portfolio. The majority of the board voted to give that responsibility to someone hired for that job.
Okay, TE Hannity-Limbaugh, continue to ignore the fact that the person the majority of the board agreed to hire to be in charge of investing CalSTRS portfolio also has to follow the “Investment Policy and Management Plan” that the majority of the board approved.
Click to access a_-_investment_policy_and_management_plan.pdf
Who was allowed to vote for three teacher members on the CalSTRS Board has nothing to do with how the man or woman hired to manage the investments does the job according to the CalSTRS Investment Policy and Management Plan.
Ah, another brilliant strategy to reduce funding for public schools, which are in most towns the primary beneficiaries of property taxes. Walmart, we see you and are not fooled!
Oh, to be a fly on the wall when the Waltons decided to invest in the easy-to spot-as sketchy Theranos instead of in Walmart or, in the room where the DeVoses decided Theranos was a preferable investment to Amway.