The Journal, slogging through disclosure filings, writes today that AIG lobbied Congress nearly twice as much on taxes as it did on the insurance business over the last three years.
This is the kind of boring story that most readers skip over, but whose real importance may only become apparent down the road—part of the nitty-gritty public-service function of the press. This kind of stuff gives us a peek at what companies are really interested in.
Among the issues Angus & Nickerson handled for AIG, according to 2007 and 2008 Senate records, was legislation affecting the “economic substance doctrine,” which prohibits taxpayers from entering into transactions that have little or no economic purpose beyond reducing their taxes.
And, of course, AIG has only the best lobbyists fresh from the revolving door:
From 2006 to 2008, AIG paid tax-lobbying specialists at consulting firm Angus & Nickerson LLC a total of $420,000, according to Senate records. The Washington firm is headed by Barbara Angus, international tax counsel for the U.S. Department of Treasury’s tax-policy office from 2001 until 2005, and Gregory Nickerson, who was the tax counsel for the House Ways and Means Committee during the same period.
These folks have chits they can call on with their old pals. That’s how the sausage gets made, folks.
Good job by the Journal and reporter Tom McGinty.
Yeah, where was this kind of reporting when it was needed?
#1 Posted by Stephen Downes, CJR on Mon 23 Mar 2009 at 10:10 AM
Menh. $420,000 is (breathtakingly) what you would pay any old consultant for a year's work.
This type of legislation is also directly tied to their business. Products like variable life insurance have gained their popularity largely from their favorable tax treatment.
#2 Posted by Chris Corliss, CJR on Mon 23 Mar 2009 at 04:30 PM
We would have a chance out here in the trenches if the congress and senate would vote in term limits. The lobyists are out of control and the career politicians with the, "whats in it for me" voting motive are no longer doing the people's business. The danger in the experience argument is where the scoundrels channel their interests and with whom and for what purpose. We can win if we vote the incumbents out and get the representation we deserve.
#3 Posted by paul, CJR on Mon 23 Mar 2009 at 06:11 PM