It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's 1995 taxes...what's the big deal?

page: 2
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
He could pour a bucket of water on this dumpster fire if he would just release his tax returns and prove the NY Times wrong.

But he won't because he's a cheat and he's hiding the fact that he hasn't paid any federal taxes in almost 2 decades.

The dude is the very definition of a welfare queen




posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: derfreebie

Forget the fact that primarily this guy getting slammed made
all his money evidently legally...



Really?

He's basically using his charity for money laundering.

He stiffs companies and people who do work for him.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Hillary did the same thing...must use the same tax guys.


Clinton Campaign Admits Hillary Used Same Tax Avoidance "Scheme" As Trump

www.zerohedge.com...

DING, TAT is the goose more fireproof than the gander this
cycle? I dare say YUP. And puzzle me this-- how can a [501
C Here] use the same scheme as a for-profit corp?
She admitted it, and I'm as bumb as a rox a' docks. er bocks.
It's that time of year for some really thick beer..

EDIT: You know, if some of us made enough money to cheat,
we'd probably eventually turn evil too. Maybe it's a cosmic
favor... "and the meek shall inherit a real tax schedule" gawd
edit on 2-10-2016 by derfreebie because: Or the earth, four yards at a time. meh



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: derfreebie


And puzzle me this-- how can a [501
C Here] use the same scheme as a for-profit corp?
Perhaps if, instead of a riddle, you could clearly state your question?



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: coldkidc

The big deal is that it is illegal to publish unauthorized return information.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: derfreebie

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Hillary did the same thing...must use the same tax guys.


Clinton Campaign Admits Hillary Used Same Tax Avoidance "Scheme" As Trump

www.zerohedge.com...

DING, TAT is the goose more fireproof than the gander this
cycle? I dare say YUP. And puzzle me this-- how can a [501
C Here] use the same scheme as a for-profit corp?
She admitted it, and I'm as bumb as a rox a' docks. er bocks.
It's that time of year for some really thick beer..


SOME taxes. She has always paid taxes, though. Every year. Quite a bit.


Well this is a little awkward. With the leaked 1995 Trump tax returns 'scandal' focused on the billionaire's yuuge "net operating loss" and how it might have 'legally' enabled him to pay no taxes for years, we now discover none other than Hillary Rodham Clinton utilized a $700,000 "loss" to avoid paying some taxes in 2015.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: coldkidc

The big deal is that it is illegal to publish unauthorized return information.

Yes. And the journalist accepts the risk of indictment. Sort of welcomes it, since disclosure may be involved, I would think. Audit or not.


edit on 10/2/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Looks like Mark Cuban, did the same thing in 97. carrying a multimillion net operating loss.

Looks like the american people are going to have a talk about the tax code to understand how it works. Or else we are going to start calling a lot of companies and people cheats.

If legally avoiding taxes was a true negative to the american public no one would buy apple products.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra




SOME taxes...


Guess that depends on how much she made the following year -
Probably maxed out & wasn't able to write all her profits off.

Haven't looked at her 2015 taxes & really don't feel the motivation to do so...pretty much everybody does it & it's legal so I fail to see why I should care.

If the public doesn't like it then we should change the tax laws.
edit on 2-10-2016 by coldkidc because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: derfreebie


And puzzle me this-- how can a [501
C Here] use the same scheme as a for-profit corp?
Perhaps if, instead of a riddle, you could clearly state your question?


OK, I'll refrain from my pathetic attempts at knuckleballs.
If the Clinton Foundation is a not-for profit corporation--
and Trump's alleged business dealings, which were so
dismally futile and incurred that kind of loss, are not:
I need to know how a parallel write-off scheme can be
employed?
As I stated my ignorance of nuances in the tax law, I'm
not getting it. Probably the reason why those two are
making more money between them than half my state.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   
I just looked over the 2015 return. So much tax was paid in 2014 that that it showed as an overpayment in 2015. This is their personal tax return. Overpaid by over 1 million in 2014.
edit on 2-10-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: derfreebie

Those are not the foundations returns, they are Clinton's returns?



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra




I just looked over the 2015 return. So much tax was paid in 2014 that that it showed as an overpayment in 2015. This is their personal tax return. Overpaid by over 1 million in 2014.



That is bad financial management - why would you let someone hang on to a million dollars all year long interest free?
edit on 2-10-2016 by coldkidc because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Hillary did the same thing...must use the same tax guys.


Clinton Campaign Admits Hillary Used Same Tax Avoidance "Scheme" As Trump

www.zerohedge.com...


WoW

They have an ongoing $700,000 capital gains loss carryover.

And remember they write off millions in charity donations too. Most of those go to their own Foundation.



Hypocrites on steroids.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: derfreebie

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: derfreebie


And puzzle me this-- how can a [501
C Here] use the same scheme as a for-profit corp?
Perhaps if, instead of a riddle, you could clearly state your question?


OK, I'll refrain from my pathetic attempts at knuckleballs.
If the Clinton Foundation is a not-for profit corporation--
and Trump's alleged business dealings, which were so
dismally futile and incurred that kind of loss, are not:
I need to know how a parallel write-off scheme can be
employed?
As I stated my ignorance of nuances in the tax law, I'm
not getting it. Probably the reason why those two are
making more money between them than half my state.


Trump's foundation problems have been documented on ATS, you only need to search. The Clinton Foundation is a real Foundation. All has been documented on this site.

Trump's 'Foundation; is not even considered a real one by charity watch organizations.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Hillary did the same thing...must use the same tax guys.


Clinton Campaign Admits Hillary Used Same Tax Avoidance "Scheme" As Trump

www.zerohedge.com...


WoW

They have an ongoing $700,000 capital gains loss carryover.

And remember they write off millions in charity donations too. Most of those go to their own Foundation.



Hypocrites on steroids.



They pay taxes though, A LOT. They aren;t doing their own taxes. If the 700k is found to be not right, I imagine they will pay it.

As to their own foundation, if they give money to it, it can be written off, a % of it.

Trump has given 0 to his own foundation since 2008.
edit on 2-10-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



Then on top of that, he takes money from it to pay fines for himself and buy portraits of himself, a NFL helmet and a trip to Paris and a bribe. None of which were donated or auctioned later for charity.
edit on 2-10-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



You have to just give this up. Trump made a fake foundation.
edit on 2-10-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-10-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Hillary did the same thing...must use the same tax guys.


Clinton Campaign Admits Hillary Used Same Tax Avoidance "Scheme" As Trump

www.zerohedge.com...


WoW

They have an ongoing $700,000 capital gains loss carryover.

And remember they write off millions in charity donations too. Most of those go to their own Foundation.



Hypocrites on steroids.



They pay taxes though, A LOT. They aren;t doing their own taxes. If the 700k is found to be not right, I imagine they will pay it.


The $700,000 is a long term capital gains loss.

I hope you know what that is.






posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: derfreebie

Simply put, the Clintons' personal tax return is separate from that of the Clinton Foundation. That is also true of Trump's foundation. It is not, however, true of Trump Organization. Trump Organization is, for all intents and purposes, Trump. Its gains and losses are his.

But there is no "scheme" involved with a carryover of losses from one year to the next. Not for personal income taxes, not for corporate income taxes, non-profit or otherwise.

I find three things of concern in regard to Trump and taxes.
1) His tax plan clearly provides him with great tax benefits, far greater than those which would fall to the middle class with which he seems to have some appeal.

2) I wonder how, if he did so, he can carry a loss of nearly 1 billion dollars and live the lavish life which he clearly does. I have no problem with a lavish lifestyle. I have questions about how it could be maintained. The release of his tax returns may help to resolve those questions. His excuse that he is being audited is nothing but an excuse. It is not a reason.

3) I wonder how his bankruptcies, in which the debts accrued went away, affect his tax situation.
 


a reply to: xuenchen

The $700,000 is a long term capital gains loss.
That is an oxymoron.
edit on 10/2/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: coldkidc

The big deal is that it is illegal to publish unauthorized return information.

Yes. And the journalist accepts the risk of indictment. Sort of welcomes it, since disclosure may be involved, I would think. Audit or not.


That's their own problem. What was disclosed has been found to be not worth disclosing, yet the methods and motives in which they did so is a far greater crime.



posted on Oct, 2 2016 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope




What was disclosed has been found to be not worth disclosing,

You are welcome to your opinion(s).

edit on 10/2/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)







 
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join