- Days left

The debate is on over loss of Boeing contract

boeing logoOn February 29, the loss of a $40 billion contract by Boeing Co. was reported by Peter Cohan on BloggingStocks. Since that time, debate has been quietly rumbling in various spots around the Internet regarding the placement of that contract. Initially, it was expected that Boeing Co. would receive the order but it has instead been awarded to Northrup Grumman and EADS, parent of Airbus, which detractors say puts an unacceptable amount of control and revenue of an American military contract into the hands of a European corporation.

The contact is for the building of refueling tankers which refuel fighter jets while in flight. I have found estimates which claim that the contract value could reach as high as $100 billion dollars, but $40 billion is the media reported estimate. It appears that even though corporate administration of the contract would be taken overseas, at least some of the work would still be performed in America. Additionally, we should consider that major components of these and other military aircraft already originate from foreign manufacturers.

Hard-line protectionists and the union ilk are clamoring for congressional reversal and investigation of the contract assignment, while straight line capitalists and globalists claim that business is business and that all is fair in contract negotiation. So far, I have found no indication that the matter shall be treated by our government as anything other than an ordinary manufacturing contract.

My personal opinion is that it's just a contract, and the United States Air Force has the right to purchase aircraft from whomever they deem fit to provide them in a timely and cost effective manner. Perhaps the matter could be given a cursory review by Congress just to make sure that everything is square, but basically, if there's not an overt reason to suspect some manner of undue manipulation, let's just drop it and let them build some tankers.

What say you?

Increase your money and finance knowledge from home

Advice for Recent College Grads

Prepare yourself for the "real world".

View Course »

How to Avoid Financial Scams

Avoid getting duped by financial scams.

View Course »

TurboTax Articles

Employer Sponsored Health Coverage Explained

The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is simpler than some people may give it credit for. The basic rule to remember is that everyone must carry Minimum Essential Coverage (MEC) or pay a penalty. Employers with 50 full-time employees or more are obligated to sponsor plans for their workers to help them meet this requirement.

How to Report RSUs or Stock Grants on Your Tax Return

Restricted stock units (RSUs) and stock grants are often used by companies to reward their employees with an investment in the company rather than with cash. As the name implies, RSUs have rules as to when they can be sold. Stock grants often carry restrictions as well. How your stock grant is delivered to you, and whether or not it is vested, are the key factors when determining tax treatment.

What is a Schedule Q Form?

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has two very different forms that go by the name Schedule Q. One of them is for people who participate in certain real estate investments; this is known as a Form 1066 Schedule Q. The other Schedule Q deals with employer benefit plans. It?s not something an individual taxpayer would normally have to deal with, though a small business owner might need it.

Incentive Stock Options

Some employers use Incentive Stock Options (ISOs) as a way to attract and retain employees. While ISOs can offer a valuable opportunity to participate in your company's growth and profits, there are tax implications you should be aware of. We'll help you understand ISOs and fill you in on important timetables that affect your tax liability, so you can optimize the value of your ISOs.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum