Halliburton

[Docta]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030506/pl_afp/iraq_us_company_oil_030506212551

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawmaker cites Halliburton links to "axis of evil" countries
Tue May 6, 5:25 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Halliburton, the US oil services giant once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites), has done business in Iran, Iraq (news - web sites) and Libya for years despite US embargoes, according to documents released by a lawmaker.

A letter from Representative Henry Waxman, obtained Tuesday, said Halliburton's dealings with countries cited by Washington as state sponsors of terrorism or members of the so-called "axis of evil" dates back to the 1980s.

The dealings "appear to have continued during the period between 1995 and 2000, when Vice President Cheney headed the company; and they are apparently ongoing even today," said Waxman, a Democrat and frequent critic of President George W. Bush (news - web sites)'s administration.

Waxman, who has previously expressed concern about Halliburton's multimillion-dollar contracts for postwar Iraq, made his latest comments in a letter dated April 30 to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

"Halliburton has recently been awarded a leading -- and lucrative -- role in the US war against terrorism," Waxman wrote.

"Yet there is also evidence from press accounts and other sources that indicates that Halliburton has profited from numerous business dealings with state sponsors of terrorism, including two of the three members of President Bush's 'axis of evil.'"

The "axis of evil" first cited by Bush in early 2002 included Iraq, prior to the US-led war, Iran and North Korea (news - web sites).

Waxman stopped short of saying Halliburton's actions violated US laws that prohibit business dealings in certain countries, but maintained that Halliburton "appears to have sought to circumvent these restrictions by setting up subsidiaries in foreign countries and territories such as the Cayman Islands."

Waxman said he was concerned that the US government was awarding new contracts to Halliburton despite its ties to certain countries.

He wrote to Rumsfeld, "I would like to know what the Defense Department knows about these ties and whether you think this should be a matter of concern to the Congress and the American taxpayer.

"Rather than being criticized, the company is rewarded with valuable government contracts."

Some of the involvement of Halliburton is detailed in company documents including its annual reports.

Halliburton spokesman Wendy Hall did not dispute the Waxman allegations, but said the company operates within the law while trying to remain competitive with US and foreign rivals.

"Putting politics aside, we and our affiliates operate in countries, to the extent it is legally permissible, where our customers are active as they expect us to provide oilfield services support to their international operations," Hall said in a written statement.

"Where the United States government has mandated that United States companies refrain from commerce, we comply, often to the advantage of our international competitors. We do not always agree with policies or actions of governments in every place that we do business and make no excuses for their behaviors."

As for the actions of Halliburton offshore subsidiaries, Hall said, "The company believes that the operations of its subsidiaries are in compliance with US laws. These entities and activities are staffed and managed by non-US personnel."

Halliburton, through a subsidiary, recently obtain a firefighting contract in Iraq that could be worth up to seven billion dollars.

Waxman has asked the General Accounting Office (news - web sites), the investigative arm of Congress, to probe whether the firm had received favorable treatment by the administration.

Meanwhile, a spokeswoman for Cheney, contacted about the letter, gave no immediate response.

But Citizen Works, a consumer advocacy group founded by onetime presidential candidate Ralph Nader (news - web sites), said Halliburton's treatment by the government was questionable.

"It's extremely troubling that our government is using taxpayer money to deliver lucrative contracts to companies like Halliburton that have used offshore subsidiaries to maneuver around restrictions on doing business with state sponsors of terrorism," said spokesman Charlie Cray.

[Docta]

here's a link to the letter, it's a big pdf file (over 1meg)

http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdfs/pdf_inves/pdf_admin_halliburton_contract_april_30_let.pdf

[Docta]

so i guess ya'll are peachy with this eh?

that's right, f'ck the french for their anti-americanism but a US company helping the "axis of evil" is ok. as a matter of fact, here's a few billion bucks of taxpayers money for your efforts. yay capitalism!

[slow-dog]

Originally posted by Docta
so i guess ya'll are peachy with this eh?

that's right, f'ck the french for their anti-americanism but a US company helping the "axis of evil" is ok. as a matter of fact, here's a few billion bucks of taxpayers money for your efforts. yay capitalism!

*LOOK AT ME*

*LOOK AT MY THREAD*

Oh, OK.

I'm not going to download the letter, because I'm on dial up at the moment, but does it cite some specific acts? The article is pretty vague about what exactly these deals were with the axis of evil. I checked around to get more info, but sites I figured would have something on this were blank.

I'm perfectly willing to be outraged by this once I know what was done.

[dcXhc]

Originally posted by Docta
so i guess ya'll are peachy with this eh?


Well I'm not peachy with it if it eats into the 24.2% gain I've made on HAL since February 14 when Dudeman and I squared off on which oil services company would outperform (http://msg.woxy.com/showthread.php?threadid=6188&perpage=20&highlight=schlumberger&pagenumber=2) in an Iraqi war.

SLB is only up 16.2%

[DudeMan]

Originally posted by dcXhc
Well I'm not peachy with it if it eats into the 24.2% gain I've made on HAL since February 14 when Dudeman and I squared off on which oil services company would outperform (http://msg.woxy.com/showthread.php?threadid=6188&perpage=20&highlight=schlumberger&pagenumber=2) in an Iraqi war.

SLB is only up 16.2%
Unlike you, dc, I would not be so crass as to engage in triumphalism for something so petty as making a couple of bucks more than someone else on a stock pick.


(at least not until the day SLB barely inches ahead of HAL, however long into the future that is, at which time I will spare no expense to hire a private detective to hunt you down and give you a price chart from day 0 to day X, with a mocking "See, I told you so... sucker!")

[tobedawg]

so i guess ya'll are peachy with this eh?

I'm just as outraged as you are by this!! There have been ties between the Bush family and the Bin Ladens for years.. but in order for the "American Public" to see it, there needs to be proof..
Unless the President says there are "Weapons of Mass Destruction and that Saddam is a Danger and a threat to our nation's security and can provide an attack worse than 9/11", then the American public can't go on heresay.

[Docta]

"The Senate agreed to an amendment by Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican, that would dramatically cut taxes on corporate profits repatriated from abroad. Currently the companies that bring earnings back to the United States are subject to the top corporate tax rate of 35 percent. The amendment provides a one-year window in which repatriated profits will be taxed at 5.25 percent."

oh, who would profit from this huge tax cut this year..... wait, nevermind....

[tobedawg]

oh, who would profit from this huge tax cut this year..... wait, nevermind....

And I love the way that Bush is trying to push his tax cut by saying that it will benefit "The hardest working Americans".. Good ol' Trickle-down-economics is back!!

[BigSugar]

So, you would rather those monies stay in France, or Russia, or China and benefit those countries, versus coming back to the states, providing working capital, creating jobs and putting money in the cofers of the govt. to provide for the needs of the people. If that money stays offshore, then the govt. doesn't even get the 5.25% this provides for.

notice the 1 year window. it's not a permanent change. The message is, bring the money back now, help the economy now. So instead of that cash being in foreign banks and creating jobs in foreign countries, it will be here, making money for the US govt., the state govts. and creating jobs here.

hmmmmmm.......pretty short sighted criticism.

and tobe, tell me again what is so bad about cutting taxes?? do you really like giving the govt. all your money? if so, please pay my portion of the tax burden too....i would really appreciate it. thanx.

[Docta]

my beef is not bringing back money into the us, it is cutting taxes so severely on the money that will already be brought back into the country. yes, it is a one year thing, just enough time for the bulk of the money to be made from rebuilding what our government tore apart. seizing this opportunity to make a quick buck by having it only be for one year is even more sleazy in my mind. not only are we handing halliburton and the likes sweet contracts, but now making them even more juicy with this trick. it represents a huge amount of money that again will go into the pockets of an elite few.

[BigSugar]

that's a completely valid argument, but there is no guarantee that the money would have come back into the states to begin with.....or even still will.....but it's not like the govt. contracts that we being awarded are going to be paid outside the country...they are going to be paid in the good old USA to the US companies that get them.....that money will be taxable at the regular rates, right?! i just don't see this as a sleazy boon to the companies that will be contracting to provide services in Iraq/etc....i see it as incentive for US companies with international business to bring working capital back into the US at a lower "one time" tax rate....i think it will be a spur to the economy and create jobs/industry. i could be completely wrong. but i could be completely right too......i'll leave all that to the economists....

[Docta]

yup, twas the US vice president who presided over this enron like bullshit

---------------------------

Halliburton agrees to settle accounting suits

May 30, 2003 *|* HOUSTON (AP) --

Halliburton Co. said Friday it has agreed to pay $6 million to settle 20 shareholder lawsuits that accused it of using deceptive accounting practices while Vice President Dick Cheney led the company.

The lawsuits challenged the way that the oilfield-services company counted revenue from cost overruns and change orders on long-term fixed-price construction projects.

Halliburton began booking some of the unapproved amounts as revenue in 1998 and later disclosed the change in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The company said three of the four lead plaintiffs have agreed to the settlement and a fourth is evaluating the offer. The plaintiffs had bought Halliburton stock between 1998 and 2002, and the cases had been combined into one class-action lawsuit filed in a Dallas federal court.

In midday trading Friday on the New York Stock Exchange, Halliburton shares rose 45 cents to $23.60.

The investors alleged that Halliburton overstated revenue from 1999 through 2001 by $445 million, which pumped up the company's share price and cost investors millions when the stock declined last year.

Halliburton said it would not admit wrongdoing. The proposed settlement requires the release of all present and former Halliburton officers and directors named in the lawsuits, the company said.

Cheney was chief executive of the Houston-based company from 1995 until August 2000, when he resigned to become then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush's running mate.

Cheney's private attorney, Terrence O'Donnell of the Washington law firm Williams & Connally, declined to comment Friday.

Halliburton spokeswoman Wendy Hall said the settlement is subject to court review and approval. The company said the costs of the settlement would not affect second-quarter results.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the accounting change and the way it was disclosed.

A similar lawsuit filed in Houston has been dismissed, the company said.

Halliburton is one of the world's largest providers of equipment and services to the oil and gas industry and also has a large engineering and construction business.