Let's see...Denver? Bakersfield? Denver? Bakersfie...

Oh, hell yes, Denver. I note only very top management will get to move.

 It's called business

if there is a profit bo be made it will happen  (Bako production)

unless of course the Dems take over

Then it will all depend on Bakshish  (or Barackshis)

 Halliburton moves out of USA, for profit

WASHINGTON, March 14 (HalliburtonWatch.org) -- Dubai's business community is ecstatic about Halliburton's announcement that it will move its headquarters to the city known for its lax or non-existent restrictions on corporations. "I'm sure everyone in Dubai, especially the government of Dubai, is ecstatic," Yusef Ibrahim, managing director for the Strategic Energy Investment Group (SEIG), told WBUR Radio's On Point program. SEIG's clients include some of the best-known Western corporations with business in Dubai, including Exxon Mobil, British Petroleum, Norway's Statoil, France's Totalfinaelf and JP Morgan.

Referring to Halliburton's move, Ibrahim made the following observations on the On Point program:

"I think they are rushing toward what I would call a 'comfort zone.' Dubai is a 'comfort zone' because what many people here, for example, in the United States would consider 'corruption' is not necessarily considered a vice in a place like Dubai. It's a very free-wheeling atmosphere where all kinds of businessmen come and they don't expect too many questions to be asked. Don't forget that Dubai from its inception was conceived as a place where you can -- how shall we say -- go around the rules. Dubai started out as a place from which you smuggled gold to India and the subcontinent. And then it evolved. And today it's still considered the largest spot on the earth where you launder money. All the Russian moguls came there. I don't mean that it's a place that spends all its time doing things that are irregular, but basically it prefers to let people work under soft light rather than under spotlights."

"Halliburton is a known quantity. ... It works in areas and with countries that deal in oil and weapons. Halliburton has worked with Iran in the past -- directly and indirectly. The Middle East is an area where you need some ambiguity when it comes to things like paying commissions. Other people would call it "bribes."But this is the way business is done out there. You can't be constantly scrutinized. You can't forget that Halliburton is now under tremendous scrutiny and a number of investigations. Especially KBR. It has had a history that has disturbed some people in Congress...they would feel a lot more comfortable in a place like Dubai."

http://www.halliburtonwatch...

 So they are moving to Denver.....their field will still be here....I remember Berry when they worked out of two offices just past Taft.....I'm glad to see that ' local boys ' still can do good....if I was Berry, I would be 'eye-ing' the new field that may spring up in Wyoming.......

www.maggiesezitsso.com

 What's the dif? I'll still be paying $4 per gallon before the year is out.

 Halliburtonomics

Is this about tax breaks? Getting beyond the reach of congressional subpoenas? And what about all that sensitive information that Halliburton has had access to? At a minimum, reincorporating in Dubai would mean that Halliburton will be paying less taxes to the U.S. Treasury, even as it collects billions from government contracts.

The last paragraph of the FT story begins to answer the questions about Halliburton's, uh, interestingly timed decision to move its corporate headquarters:

Dubai has long positioned itself as a regional business hub, with a laisser faire attitude to business regulations. The government has launched several free zones allowing foreign firms to circumvent laws barring foreigners owning businesses.

 

 

Yesterday, Halliburton announced that it would be moving its corporate headquarters from Houston to Dubai. Reincorporating in Dubai would mean that Halliburton — which earned $2.3 billion in profits last year — “will be paying less taxes to the U.S. Treasury, even as it collects billions from government contracts.”

House Government Oversight Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) said he will soon hold a hearing on the matter to “understand the ramifications for the U.S. taxpayer and national security.” One lobbyist said, “If there’s a huge tax shift, then it’s taking money from U.S. taxpayers while they’re taking no-bid contracts.”

Reacting to Halliburton’s announcement, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) told ABC News it was “an insult to the U.S. soldiers and taxpayers.” Watch ABC’s segment:

Transcript:

ABC: A swift and angry reaction from Democrats in Washington to the announcement that Halliburton is moving its corporate headquarters overseas to Dubai. Critics say Halliburton, which has received billions of American taxpayer dollars for its work on the war in Iraq, is now looking for a tax break. ABC’s Sonya Crawford, is on the story.

CRAWFORD: Without much fanfare, Halliburton announced it’s moving its corporate headquarters from Houston to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. CEO David Lesar, said, “Growing our business here will bring more balance to Halliburton’s portfolio.” More balance, and thanks to a friendly tax environment, hopefully more profits. Last year, Halliburton earned $2.3 billion in profits. Senator Patrick Leahy called the company’s move corporate greed at its worst. “This is an insult to the U.S. soldiers and taxpayers. At the same time they’ll be avoiding U.S. taxes, I’m sure they won’t stop insisting on taking their profits in cold, hard, U.S. cash.”

WAXMAN: Our job is to provide oversight to make sure government is working effectively.

CRAWFORD: Democrats have been extremely critical of Halliburton, once headed by Vice President Cheney. The company has received contracts valued at an estimated $25.7 billion for its work in Iraq. Among the company’s low points, serving troops spoiled food. Exposing troops to contaminated water from the Euphrates river. And failing to adequately protect its contractors. And last month, the Inspector General for Iraq found Halliburton overcharged the government, $2.7 billion. Which Halliburton is still contesting.

 UPDATE 1-Calif. Q4 gasoline demand fell 1.4 pct yr/yr-state

HOUSTON, March 28 (Reuters) - California gasoline consumption in the fourth quarter of 2007 fell 1.4 percent year-on-year, in spite of a 1.2 percent increase in December gasoline use, the California state sales tax board said on Friday.

For all of 2007, drivers in California used nearly 1 percent less gasoline compared to the previous year, according to the California State Board of Equalization. On Wednesday. the Federal Highway Administration said Americans cut back on driving in 2007, the first such annual decrease in 20 years.

The drop in demand was bad news to West Coast refiners, said an energy analyst.

"If you're a refiner right now, you can't be all that happy," said David Hackett, president of Stillwater Associates. "Crude prices are high, gasoline demand is off, crack spreads are crummy. Yeah, interesting times."

Refiners with West Coast operations like Valero Energy Corp (VLO.N: Quote, Profile, Research) and Tesoro Corp (TSO.N: Quote, Profile, Research) have said they were cutting back production because of poor refining margins.

http://www.reuters.com/arti...

 I'm glad the report stated that it wouldn't effect local presence and production. I just hired on with a company that builds control panels for Berry.

  Thanks for the post.

 Are you all kidding me? Does anyone remember Freymiller Trucking? Sam Tanksley? Oxy? No?..Reading the responses I thought not. Their local offices(Freymiller and Tanksley were actually HQ'd in Bako) all picked up their sticks and went to play elsewhere..Arizona, Nevada, and Texas, respectively, and these are just the ones off the top of my head. They all left for the same reason. California is simply hostile in its tax laws to large corporations. It is MUCH cheaper to staff and operate offices outside of California, even when the base of your business is here

Here is a list of companies we've confirmed are "Exporting America." These are U.S. companies either sending American jobs overseas, or choosing to employ cheap overseas labor, instead of American workers. Long list !!

http://edition.cnn.com/CNN/...

 Companies Leaving California Have Little Impact

One-Tenth Of One Percent Of Jobs

Oct. 26 (KGO) -- There's interesting new information out about California's economy. We've heard a lot the last few years about how businesses are fleeing our state for less costly places to do business. It turns out, that may not have hurt us as much as we thought.

Yes, companies have been leaving California over the decade. As many as 1,300 in a single year. It made it seem like a stampede or mass exodus.

But a new study by the Public Policy Institute of California says the impact was negligible - at worst, just one-tenth of one percent of all jobs in the state.

David Neumark, Ph.D., Public Policy Institute of California: "People, including the media, latch onto these stories. They use the anecdote not just to make an illustrative point, which is how anecdotes should be used, but they used the anecdote as an argument this really is the state of the world."