# Wal-Mart: Dead Peasant insurance is pretty fucking low. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 6, 2002, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wal-mart-dead-peasant-insurance-is-pretty-fucking-low/140845 "2002-12-06T03:31:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Rhum\_Runner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rhum\_Runner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhum_Runner)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2002, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wal-mart-dead-peasant-insurance-is-pretty-fucking-low/140845/41 "2002-12-07T19:42:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dangerosa \* > \*\*The wronged party is me, who doesn’t use the insurance company in question and doesn’t shop at Wal-Mart, but does pay taxes. > > The federal goverment costs X to run every year. If Wal-Mart manages to scam (legally, except in Texas, but its still kind of a scam) $20,000 out of the federal government, someone (i.e. other taxpayers) make up the difference. Or we see additional deficit spending. > \*\* Bullshit. If the loop is there, it is not wronging you that Wal-Mart is using it. In what fucking universe is compying with the law a scam? Is it a scam to take a deduction on your taxes? Do you consider your 401k plan a ‘scam’? If you don’t like the law, try to change it, but don’t get all worked up about someone studying the law and making good use of it. I don’t see what Wal-Mart has done wrong here, and the families are entitled to a big fat $0. IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![SpoilerVirgin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@SpoilerVirgin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SpoilerVirgin)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2002, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wal-mart-dead-peasant-insurance-is-pretty-fucking-low/140845/42 "2002-12-07T20:49:25Z")
Walmart is not the only company insuring its employees. There was a front page article in the Wall Street Journal earlier this year discussing this practice, and listing numerous companies who do it. No cite, unfortunately, because I read it in hard copy, but I do remember that the practice was not illegal. ---
**Author:** ![jesuslynch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e99b99/32.png) [@jesuslynch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jesuslynch)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wal-mart-dead-peasant-insurance-is-pretty-fucking-low/140845/43 "2002-12-09T14:24:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kimstu \* > \*\ ***jl** replied to **Desmostylus:** \*“If it’s tax-free, and I suspect that’s the case, then they’ve paid a tax-deductible premium …” > > Not True.\* > > From the article: “Wal-Mart borrowed money from the insurers to pay the premiums, which the company was able to write off as a business expense on its federal taxes. […] A Houston lawyer representing the workers said those policies are used as an ‘elaborate tax dodge.’” > > So it looks like the premium **was** , effectively, tax-deductible and **Desmostylus** ’s math is valid. After all, they had to be making money on the deal **somehow** or they wouldn’t have taken out the policies in the first place.\*\* That’s not the way it’s suppose to work. The tax code is pretty clear. If Wal-Mart is borrowing money to pay the premiums, the only thing they **may** be able to **legally** write-off is the interest on the loan. I don’t know if this is a case of a business reporter accepting the bluster from the plaintiff’s attorney as fact or a case of a non-business reporter doing a business story. Either way, I wouldn’t bet the farm on the article’s accuracy. ---
**Author:** ![Dumbguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/2bfe46/32.png) [@Dumbguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dumbguy)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wal-mart-dead-peasant-insurance-is-pretty-fucking-low/140845/44 "2002-12-09T19:17:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Rhum Runner \* > \*\*If the loop is there, it is not wronging you that Wal-Mart is using it. In what fucking universe is compying with the law a scam? … If you don’t like the law, try to change it, but don’t get all worked up about someone studying the law and making good use of it. I don’t see what Wal-Mart has done wrong here, and the families are entitled to a big fat $0. IMHO. \*\* If it’s legal for the families to bring a suit, it is not wronging you that they are doing so. In what fucking universe is complying with the law a scam? If you don’t like the law, try to change it, but don’t get all worked up about someone studying the law and making good use of it. ---
**Author:** ![Rhum\_Runner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rhum\_Runner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhum_Runner)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2002, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wal-mart-dead-peasant-insurance-is-pretty-fucking-low/140845/45 "2002-12-09T21:30:31Z")
**Dumbguy** You will note that my original post was in response to the assertion that Wal-Mart was cheating the US tax payer out of money, at no point did I say the family ought not be able to bring a suit. I expressed my opinion that they will not recover, but never said they shouldn’t be able to try. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wal-mart-dead-peasant-insurance-is-pretty-fucking-low/140845.md?page=2)