While readily accepting taxpayer dollars and protecting the lifestyles of its executives, Goldman Sachs, as members of Burger King's board of directors and executive committee, has overseen the low road at Burger King -- apparently looking the other way as Burger King has asked taxpayers to pick up the tab for its lack of employee health care and living wages. Goldman Sachs has also sat idly by as Burger King has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars opposing common-sense measures that would benefit workers, consumers, and ultimately the well-being of the American economy. Americans may begin to wonder: is this what we should expect from bailout recipients?

Taking from Taxpayers

Abusing Public Assistance Programs: Burger King provides limited or no health benefits to hourly workers, which not only jeopardizes workers' health but also pushes costs onto government programs. Burger King employees are heavy users of publicly-funded health insurance programs such as Medicaid and SCHIP in several states including Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Ohio, Oregon, and Utah.

The Tab for Taxpayers: Over a Quarter Billion

In Ohio alone, Burger King cost state and federal taxpayers $13.3 million in 2007 in the form of Medicaid, food stamps, and cash assistance for its employees. If the per-location pattern in Ohio holds true across the nation, the total public cost of supporting the families of low-wage Burger King employees reaches a staggering $273.4 million for 2007.

Gaming Tax Credits: Burger King has been a prominent user of the controversial Work Opportunity Tax Credit, which enables companies to draw credits of up to $9,000 per worker for hiring from long-term welfare recipients, disabled veterans, and other targeted groups. Yet despite an estimated cost to taxpayers of over $2.5 billion for 2008 to 2012, the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center has concluded that "no meaningful increase in employment of the disadvantaged can be attributed to [the Work Opportunity Tax Credit]." In fact, a 2001 Department of Labor survey found that most individuals hired from the target groups would have been hired anyway, and that employers viewed the credit as a reward for hiring hard-to-employ workers - not an incentive.

More recently, the National Restaurant Association pressed for and won the expansion of the Work Opportunity Tax Credit as a way to offset the cost of the 2007 federal minimum wage increase, in essence transferring the cost of the increase to taxpayers.