Providing for Consideration of HR 4567, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2005

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4567, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005 -- (House of Representatives - June 16, 2004)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, another issue that greatly bothers me, and is an insult to every taxpayer in this country, are the corporate expatriates, American companies that incorporate abroad in order to skip out on their tax obligations to this country. These corporations earn millions of dollars from the Federal Government. According to the General Accounting Office, corporate expatriates cost this country an estimated $5 billion in lost tax dollars, and yet they continue to receive $2.7 billion in government contracts. That is a disgrace.

Accenture, the scion of Arthur Andersen of infamous Enron fame, recently received a $10 billion contract to build a foreign traveler tracking system known as US-VISIT. During committee consideration of the homeland security appropriations, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) and the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry) offered an amendment to ensure that companies incorporated outside the United States for tax purposes could not enter into contracts with the Department of Homeland Security. It makes sense. The DeLauro-Berry amendment would void the Accenture contract by barring any contracts with corporate expatriates before, on or after the date of enactment.
H. Res. 675 protects the first part of the DeLauro-Berry amendment, which will probably disappear in conference, but it specifically refuses to protect the second provision in the amendment that would invalidate the $10 billion contract with Accenture.

Bloomberg News reported that Accenture posted increases in American earnings from $247.3 billion in 2002 to $566.9 billion in 2003, doubled in one year, while the company reduced its tax liability to $143 million from $382 million.
During that same time period, Federal procurement records show that in 2002 Accenture benefited from Federal contracts worth $450 million, of which $250 million were related to military or homeland security functions, another disgrace.

At this time, when unemployment levels have remained consistent since December 2003, it is important that we as public servants and as agents of the Federal Government do everything we can to keep jobs in this country. We should not reward companies that incorporate outside the United States in order to avoid Federal taxes.

Think of the advantage it gives them in bidding against American companies. Expatriate corporations like Accenture have a huge structural advantage over companies that stay in America, employ Americans and pay their fair share of taxes. It is our duty to support the American companies. Giving the largest contract yet awarded by the Department of Homeland Security to an expatriate company contradicts the principles and ideals that I was sent here to uphold.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 ½ minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule. Last night the Committee on Rules issued a rule that even experts in this House on House rules could not initially decipher. On the one hand, they finally acted to close loopholes in the Homeland Security Act which allowed corporate expatriates to continue to receive government contracts, after the House voted 318 to 100 in July 2002 to prohibit those contracts. But, on the other hand, and it seems there is always another hand these days, they specifically left open a provision that would have prevented just such a contract from going through.

Under this rule, it is almost certain that Accenture will be able to retain a massive $10 billion contract with the Homeland Security Department. This runs directly counter to the will of the Committee on Appropriations. Last week, on a strong bipartisan vote of 35 to 17, the Committee on Appropriations voted in favor of an amendment which I offered along with the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry) to close loopholes in the Homeland Security Corporate Expatriate Contracting Ban and to stop the department from moving forward on this $10 billion contract to Accenture.
This is a company which reported that its American earnings increased by over $319 million in 2003 while, at the same time, its U.S. tax liability decreased by $239 million. Yet, today, the Republican leadership is hiding behind technicalities to reward a company which has shunned its American citizenship in order to reduce their tax liability. It is wrong. It is shameful. You ask any American worker or a responsible corporation that pays their taxes, and yet they go overseas so that they will not have to pay their taxes, and whether they are a Democrat or a Republican, they will tell you that going offshore, not to pay your taxes and coming back for a $10 billion contract from the Federal Government, it is an outrage.

This company set up a shell corporation overseas and put two tax-paying American companies, companies which employ thousands of Americans in many of our districts, at a competitive disadvantage. This sends a terrible message to every good corporate citizen in America. We cannot afford to reward companies who shun American citizenship at the expense of loyal American businesses and contractors. It offends our values as Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT