The NY Times' slant on taxes following a furiously biased

editorial against Johnson Controls in January of this year. It is relevant because of the  "illegal posting" of Trump's tax returns for 1995.  Anyway, companies who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.  I have cut a lot out but it's still a lengthy article.

The Times explained that Trump declared a $916 million loss in 1995 that may have led to him paying no federal taxes for up to 18 years, but it turns out that IF Trump did avoid paying taxes, he could have some company — as in The New York Times.

From Forbes commentary by Jeffrey Dorfman after the above article was posted:

“The Times should be the last organization to criticize others for benefiting from the tax code,” Forbes contributor Jeffrey Dorfman wrote in January.

In addition to noting that The Times sits on land seized by the government under the power of eminent domain from ten different owners, some of whom did not want to sell, implying that the government exercise of power saved the developer money. In addition to that benefit, The New York Times also received $26 million in tax breaks in exchange for keeping jobs in New York City, and that the newspaper is not opposed to taking advantage of tax breaks to the tune of millions of dollars, Dorfman informs us that the hypocrisy doesn't stop there. 
 

For tax year 2014, The New York Times PAID NO TAXES AND GOT A REFUND OF $3.5 MILLION even though they had a pre-tax profit of $29.9 million [my emphasis] 

The New York Times apparently feels no compulsion itself to pay taxes to reimburse the taxpayers who subsidize their headquarters building. One hesitates to call this the height of hypocrisy because others have set a high standard, but it is an impressive example.

If it is unpatriotic to minimize your corporate taxes by moving your headquarters out of the country, then it should be just as wrong to collect a tax break in exchange for not moving your headquarters out of a city (or state). Before the editorial board of The New York Times criticizes corporate inversions, they should probably check whether their employer has also benefited from tax-minimizing strategies.