2007-03-13 12:54:52 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
They cannot prevent Halliburton from moving its assets overseas unless Halliburton has already been convicted of something, or is under a court ordered freeze or seizure of assets pending specific charges.
I haven't heard of any charges already having been filed, so there are no grounds for seizure of assets.
2007-03-13 13:00:52 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
They aren't fleeing to avoid prosecution... NO ONE IS PROSECUTING THEM!!! .. No one is even coming CLOSE, or even preventing them from getting more government contracts...
They just want to take their newfound (and ill-gotten) wealth somewhere else, and since they've already invested heavily in the Middle East, it made sense to go there.
Anyways, there's nothing that the federal government can do to stop the move (we are capitalists, after all), as much as it pains me to see them rob and run. At least THAT decision by Haliburton is not illegal. Can't say the same for other things they've done (with or without the knowledge of the Bushit Gang...)
2007-03-13 13:33:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
tch tch tch...the pelosi playbook again. fleeing WHAT prosecution. haliburton is an american company and as such is subject to american laws regardless of the company location. as ms pelosi is ending the energy credits to dole out BILLIONS...her own words...of dollars for ridiculous farm aid by denying tax energy exploration credit, where do you expect them to go. the reason is to be closer to the energy wholesalers. you see, when the pelosi/reid regime concots tax and spend schemes, businesses leave, its just that simple. again, its perfectly legal and does not flee anything. let me assure you if they were fleeing the liberal extremist spin doctors would have a field day. nice try liberal but you need a fact checker, not a spin doctor on this one.
2007-03-13 13:03:25 · answer #3 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think they should keep them here so they don't get the tax breaks they are looking for. Some of the richest people in the world have their hands in the pockets of Haliburton. This is not fiscal conservatism, it's fiscal suicide.
2007-03-13 13:02:17 · answer #4 · answered by apple juice 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, they should. Haliburton is moving its headquarters to dubai. There is a little matter of a missing 10 billion dollars.
It's alot cheaper to move a headquarters than to pay it back.
2007-03-13 13:02:50 · answer #5 · answered by Vernon 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, but once they leave they should not be allowed to get any more US Government contracts. That is what I think, however I am a realist, and I know that would never happen. Chalk one more up to the Military-Industrial Complex.
2007-03-13 13:19:40 · answer #6 · answered by Amphibolite 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. They should revoke their no-bid contracts. Port Authority can't go to a company with it's HQ in Dubai, so why should Haliburton be allowed to keep theirs? It's a conflict of interests and a breach of national security.
But, if I missed some info, please, someone email me. I'm at sjsosullivan@yahoo.com. Thank you.
2007-03-13 13:01:46 · answer #7 · answered by sjsosullivan 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Of course they should!
But because George W and his Daddy are major stakeholders in the company, what do you think will happen.
2007-03-13 13:52:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Haliburton isn't going anywhere, Bunky. The CEO is setting up offices in Dubai, to expand business..............
Prosecution from what???????
Sheeeeese
2007-03-13 12:59:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
They are keeping a headquarters in Texas so they cannot flee far.
2007-03-13 12:58:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋