Halliburton Moving HQ To Dubai

theodp writes "Much-maligned defense contractor Halliburton is moving its corporate headquarters from Houston to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. Dubai's friendly tax laws will add to Halliburton's bottom line. Last year the company earned $2.3B in profits. Sen. Patrick Leahy called the company's move 'corporate greed at its worst.' Halliburton, once headed by VP Dick Cheney, has been awarded contracts valued at an estimated $25.7B for its work in Iraq."

You can't make this crap up

[iPaul]

This is from a company who's been dealing with Iran on a pipeline [msn.com] with a very thinly veiled subsidiary in the caribbean [washingtonpost.com]. Really, truth is more complicated and stranger than fiction.

Not a move

[peipas]

NPR says [npr.org] they aren't moving their headquarters, just opening up another one. This of course calls into question the definition of "headquarters," but there seems to be conflicting information. The linked article's alarmism is from yesterday, for what it's worth.

Not moving headquaters, not moving corporate state

[Overzeetop]

Now, I'm going to take a chance on this that the information on NPR today was accurate, namely:

A second local "headquarters" will be set up in Dubai, and the CEO will reside there.
The current "headquarters" will remain in Houston, TX.
The Dubai office is to get closer to the action and get some PR separation from us dirty Americans

The corporation will still be registered, and taxable, in the US. Changes to the laws make offshoring more difficult, including needing to have 10% of the Halliburton workforce located in Dubai in order to swith their corporate tax liabilities out of the US. Given the size of Halliburton, that's likely not going to happen.

Finally, the major support contracts for the US military are held by a subsidiary of Halliburton which will be spun off as an independent US corporation next month.

Now, one final disclaimer: this is all from memory based on a short bit on te radio. Feel free to fill in the blanks and correct the errors (be they in my memory or by the reporting staff at NPR).

Re:Not a move

[iPaul]

link to UPI [upi.com] and msnbc [msn.com] It looks like their moving their CEO and their headquarters overseas.

Get your facts straight

[RichPowers]

Listen, I'm not a fan of Halliburton screwing over the American taxpayers. I'm also against their huge no-bid contracts.

But as Slate's "Explainer," well, explains, Halliburton "is still incorporated in Delaware and remains subject to U.S. law and taxes." The article goes on to say that Halliburton would have a hell of a time incorporating in Dubai, but moving its workforce overseas is not out of the question.

After all, 55% of the company's business comes from the Eastern hemisphere. This move makes perfect sense, given their long-term business plans.

PS: The company's defense component, KBR, is set to become its own company. Halliburton's new HQ should not affect KBR.

http://www.slate.com/id/2161652/fr/rss/ [slate.com]

Re:Not a move

[peipas]

There seems to be an awful lot of confusion over the move of the CEO to Dubai and Halliburton uprooting from the U.S. The NPR audio from the above-linked article describes how U.S. laws changed in 2004 placing additional conditions on a corporation changing its U.S. tax obligations, conditions Halliburton is not likely to be meeting any time soon.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[Wah]

Cheney has NOT been paid by Halliburton since he began running for VP almost 8 yrs ago.

That's not true.

Vice President and Mrs. Cheney filed their federal income tax return for 2004 today. The income tax return shows that the Cheneys owe federal taxes for 2004 of $393,518 on taxable income of $1,328,678. During the course of 2004 the Cheneys paid $290,855 in taxes through withholding and estimated tax payments. The Cheneys paid $102,663 upon filing their tax return.

The wage and salary income reported on the tax return includes the Vice President's $203,000 government salary. In addition, the tax return reports the payment of deferred compensation from Halliburton Company in the amount of $194,852. In December 1998, the Vice President elected to defer compensation earned in calendar year 1999 for his services as chief executive officer of Halliburton. This amount was required be paid in fixed annual installments (with interest) in the five years after the Vice President's retirement from Halliburton.

[pretty good source [whitehouse.gov]

Additionally, before he became Vice President, he excercised options worth over $30,000,000.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[dreamchaser]

That's actually not the lion's share of their business. They are an Oil Services company, and one of only two or three in the world that can do what they do. Even with regards to their Government contracts, the vast bulk of that work is in the Middle East.

People are starting to just grasp at straws now, either out of hate for Haliburton or a dislike of corporations in general.

Besides, the UAE doesn't enforce Sharia law, so that means there are hotties running around with very little clothing on!

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[twiddlingbits]

Deferred compensation that was paid AFTER he left, the article makes it seem like he was paid as CEO and as VP AT THE SAME TIME. He earned that money in years before 1999 due to performance incentives in his contract and it was due him by his contract that he was given when he was hired. Halliburton had to pay him whether he was VP or was off playing Golf. If they hadn't paid he could have sued. If YOU had met certain incentives wouldn't you want your money? If your options were in the money wouldn't you exercise them? Get the fuck off this, he earned the compensation, options and the money due him just like anyone else. No one gripes that Bill Clinton makes millions "consulting" and has a wife that is a Senior Senator from NY. Talk about influence!

Re:Not only taxes

[iPaul]

I'm sorry, but the planet you're from, what is it called? The US labor unions have been almost eviscerated in the last 20 years this link your tax dollars paid for. [bls.gov] Actually, it's more likely the janitor cleaning an office building is not unionized in the US. Dubai [gulfnews.com] has no real unions. Most unions outside of Western Europe and the US are actually powerless. In many countries even things like health and safety regulations are a weakly enforced or even non-existant.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[tempestdata]

You are completely and totally wrong. As a person who was brought up in a suburb of Dubai (I'm not a UAE citizen) I can tell you that Iran and the UAE do NOT get along. Iran tolerates the UAE, and the UAE fears Iran. Simple as that. Do a google on the island of "Abu Musa" (or Abu moosa) and you'll see why. The UAE is very pro US, and Iran as we all no, isn't. The UAE is THE most liberal and open of the Arab societies (with the possible exception of Jordan) .. Iran is one of THE most conservative and religiously fanatical countries of the region. Iran is Shiite. The UAE is mostly Sunni (a significant chunk of which is Wahabi). The LAST thing dubai wants is a nuclear Iran.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[workindev]

Wrong. No crime was prosecuted because the prosecutor knew on the first day of the investigation that the "leaker" was Armitage - a man who was against the war and had no motive to intentionally discredit Wilson. But instead of closing the investigation once he discovered who the "leaker" was (which is what he was chartered to do), he continued for 2 years to "investigate" a crime that he knew wasn't committed just so he could prosecute an innocent man for not recalling the exact time and content of conversations he had several years ago, even though the testimony against Libby was just as inconsistant and full of error.

And yes, perjury (what clinton was charged with) is a crime.

Re:Let them leave then cancel ALL contracts!

[phantomlord]

Congress could cancel the contracts but they cannot single out a person/company and unfairly punish them (by extreme taxation in your case). Doing so would create a bill of attainder which is Unconstitutional as per Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[that this is not und]

Where did you get that 90% figure? You know, I trust, that KBR is a small subsidiary of Haliburton, and their primary business focus is in the Oil Industry.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[workindev]

Libby lied. Oh, but he has such a feeble mine that he can't remember or articulate even the most basic things. When it's convenient for him, he's just the biggest bumbler in history. Some people lapped it all up, and are probably holding teary candlelight vigils for the bastard. That's irrelevant. The fact is that the jury, when presented with the facts, didn't buy it.

Lied about what? Libby was NOT the leaker, and Fitzgerald knew that when he interviewed him 3 different times. I'd challenge you to remember, under oath, the exact date and content of a handful of conversations you had several years ago. Apparently if you get some dates mixed up, it's only criminal if you are a Republican.

And remember, the Jury wasn't presented with all of the facts. They were not presented with the covert status of Ms. Plame. They were not presented the identity of who actually "leaked" her role at the CIA. They were not presented with the lies her husband told to the press, and they were not presented the motivations behind the actual leaker. Nope -- they were presented with a handful of conflicting testimonies from different reporters who all agreed that Libby didn't leak any covert agents name, but disagreed about what day they actually talked to Libby on.

I'd like to see Rove and Cheney go down for this too

Of course you would. That was the clear goal from the moment this farce of an investigation was started.

the evidence implicates them pretty heavily

Implicates them with what? The leak did NOT come from the White House! It came from the State Department, from a person who disagreed with the war. The only thing the White House can be implicated on is doing a piss poor job of discrediting a critic that was spreading open lies about them that the NY Times was lapping up.

Just admit it: you've invested so much personal effort into defending Bush from any and all criticism that you're just going to take the pro-Bush stance on everything without a serious appraisal of the facts.

I'd recommend that you re-evaluate your "serious appraisal of the facts" to include, well, facts. Yours is a laughable argument considering the majority of the rabid left Bush-haters "facts" include cheering a spirited op-ed and placing a sticker on their car with a lined-out "W" on it. Wow, that sure does wonders for factual political discord, doesn't it?

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[Stephen Maturin]

Sorry to be a geography nazi, but Dubai is only one Emirate in the United Arab Emirates. The Capital is Abu Dhabi.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[lobos]

I'm an accountant. You don't understand deferred compensation. 401(k) plans are almost useless to executives because they max out their contribution limits quickly. Additionally, a corporation may only expense, for tax deductions, salary below $1 million for the 5 highest paid employees (unless it is tied to performance.) Usually, executives are allowed to forego current salary and essentially reinvest it in the company. The executives picks a fund, and the company more or less guarantees to pay the exexcutive the same amount who would have received had he invested the funds in his chosen investment. Normally, these payments are received after the employee retires from working at the company. After retirement, the company is no longer subject to the $1 million compensation limit because the person is no longer an employee.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are a Boeing, you may make the best airplanes, but you have a heavily government subsidized Airbus to go up against.

Since 1992 Boeing has received around $ 23 billion in US subsidies. Moreover, the US Government continues to grant Boeing around USD 200 million per year in export subsidies under the Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act (the successor to the "FSC" - Foreign Sales Corporations legislation), despite a WTO ruling expressly declaring these subsidies illegal.

The latest and most flagrant violation consists in massive subsidies of about US $ 3.2 billion, inter alia in the form of tax reductions and exemptions and infrastructure support for the development and production of Boeing's 7E7, also known as "Dreamliner"

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[stephanruby]

I'd challenge you to remember, under oath, the exact date and content of a handful of conversations you had several years ago. Apparently if you get some dates mixed up, it's only criminal if you are a Republican.

The dates were not the only things that got mixed-up. Apparently, he also had trouble telling the difference between Dick Cheney and his reporter friend. May be the next time around, he should just ask Dick Cheney and his friend to wear name tags or something.

Re:Halliburton was founded in 1919

[stephanruby]

Halliburton was founded in 1919.
By 1982, it had 115,000 employees [wikipedia.org]. A company with over 100,000 people is very much "something", not "nothing".
Cheney was Secretary of Defense in 1989.
So you, stephanruby, are either a frickin liar or just plain ignorant.

You're right. I'm a complete dumb ass. I tried, but couldn't substantiate the details of what I asserted.

The Halliburton stock did almost hit rock bottom, but that was when Cheney was the Minority Whip -- a couple of years before he became Secretary of Defense.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=HAL&t=my&l=on&z=l& q=l&c= [yahoo.com]

Also, my claim that Dick Cheney knew about the asbestos liability time-bomb before he got into asbestos seems to be contradicted by this otherwise very insightful anti-Cheney article.
Also, my claim that Dick Cheney's first job in the private sector was as CEO of Halliburton was false. He had worked in the Private Sector once before.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/6450422 /the_curse_of_dick_cheney [rollingstone.com]

All in all, I got outraged and I got lazy, that's why I wrote so much unsubstantiated gibberish in my previous post.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[workindev]

1) He lied when he claimed he was sent to Africa under the direction of VP Cheney's office. That's the whole reason reporters started digging into this in the first place because it didn't make sense that Cheney would send a war critic to verify WMD claims. It turned out that it was his wife, not Cheney, who sent him.

2) He lied when he claimed that his trip did not find any facts to support the claim that Iraq had sought Uranium from Africa. In fact, it was his testimony [factcheck.org] to the CIA that confirmed Iraq had sent an delegation to Niger for the purpose of "uranium yellowcake sales". The Senate Intelligence Committee report concluded that Wilson's trip to Niger "lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal."

3) He lied when he claimed that the identity of his wife was revealed by the White House in an effort to rebuke him for disagreeing with their war stance. We know for a fact that the identity of his wife was accidentally revealed by Richard Armitage, a State Department war critic who didn't have any motive to criminally disclose the identity of Wilson's wife.

Re:What are they avoiding (besides paying taxes)?

[workindev]

I forgot one more:

4) He lied about his wife's covert status. We know now from Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald that Ms. Plame had a desk job at the agency and had not been "covert" for years, and that the CIA did not deny her identity to reporters who called to confirm.