but mistry has sort of come from nowhere.atan tata is a bachelor himself, he had no children himself. so this was something that many people had been speculating for a long time, ever since he announced he would be retiring in 2012, everyone in business circles has been wondering who would take over. >> ratan tata as we saw earlier really took the company beyond india, made some big acquisitions. it certainly is a household name in india as well. what, if anything, is cyrus mistry expected to do with the company? will it be more of a guardian, business as usual, or is he likely to shake things up himself? >> reporter: again, andrew, there's not that much we know about him other than the fact he has been working for his family business for a few years now which is the construction business. he's really been responsible for going outside of not just construction and into other fields as well. very similar to what ratan tata was able to do for the tatton group. this was a company around for 150 years. it was just in the last few

chance to see the president under oath talking about one might call the dark corners, the remaining mistries light on him. as carl mentioned, he doesn't, but something very important here is that the prosecutors, henry ruth and the other watergate special prosecutors did not know as much about watergate as we do now. in the last 30 years, there's been so much released that shows now the inconsistency between what the president is saying and what we know to be true. you can go to the wall in the nixon a library and see evidence of him ordering the creation of the enemies list, which as i read today in the testimony, he denies ever having done or cannot recall. >> he'll clearly talking about the -- >> part me. >> timothy, he's tacking about the i.r.s. when he said i never put together a list of people to be audited or attacked by the i.r.s.? he's clearly talking about the i.r.s., as you understand it? >> that's certainly what he was saying, in fact they were pointing to a particular millennium dumb that the prosecutors had access to. but the prosecutors did not have -- when the president order

just on repatriation, i want to say there's not much of a mistry, i don't believe, because we have done it. we can now go back and look at what happened. and it's very, very clear what happened. the 15 companies that were the biggest repatriators were pharmaceutical, tobacco, technology and soda companies. those corporations that accounted for more than half of all the earnings repatriated reduced their u.s. workforce by 21,000 jobs after the tax break that was predicated on them creating more jobs in this economy. what they did do, they didn't hire people, they laid off people. what they did do is accelerated stock buybacks. they increased executive pay 30% a year between 2004-2006. and interestingly enough, they actually related offshore funds at a faster rate than before the tax break. so, i just say to my colleagues who are kind of intrigued with this idea, corporations that use offshore tax havens get the largest benefit. after the 2004 tax break, a substantial share of the repatriated funds came from tax havens. boy, is that a surprise? i'll tell you, if we get in the habit of rep