Originally posted by Signals
The tax returns are irrelevant. If anything, more proof he is a better choice than BO.....
We need a successful businessman in charge of the US, not a "community organizer".
This is class warfare at its' finest folks.
Romney is obviously, with anybody with HALF a brain, a better choice than BO.
Do they serve the same master? Maybe. But I'll take my strong hand, any day, over my weak.
Originally posted by Crakeur
reply to post by xuenchen
because he doesn't have any foreign accounts that he has control over. He can have money invested in foreign companies and other financial vehicles but he only checks the box if he has control over the accounts, or businesses.
If you'll look at schedule E you'll see a blind trust. These are set up to avoid conflict of interest situations. Cramer, that arrogant windbag on msnbc, got busted holding investments he was promoting and bashing so now he has everything in a "blind" trust which, technically, he's not supposed to have any control over. If Willie had foreign accounts, they're probably under the auspices of the blind trust or some other vehicle that he cannot control and, perhaps, doesn't pass thru to him for tax purposes.
Originally posted by jtma508
What? You think Mittens of the Majikal Underpants makes his money on a W-2 or 1099? Get a clue. The uber-rich make their money through interest, capital gains and such. Why do you think these people (on both sides) want to eliminate capital gains and estate taxes? That's where THEY make their income. Duh!
Originally posted by jtma508
As for charity: MotMU is required by his church to tithe 10% of his gross earnings. Not a choice.
Originally posted by jtma508
And get an accountant? Easily said if you're making enough money to offset the cost of having attorneys and accountants structure the necessary trusts and then manage your money accordingly. But until/unless they start paying tax & estate attorneys and CPAs on a sliding scale based upon the client's income that is an inane statement. You think MotMU banks in Switzerland and Grand Cayman cause he likes watches and conch salad? Come on man. The system is and has been rigged BY the elite FOR the elite. Makes no difference which party is in power. THEY are the elite --- or in the very least their pimps.
Originally posted by MrWendal
I would love to get an accountant and find all the loopholes, but unfortunately I can not afford one of those high dollar accountants. If you think the schmoes at H&R Block are going out of their way to find me loopholes, your insane!
Originally posted by neOrevolutionist
The accountant Romney pays for isn't even in the same paygrade as one I could afford....the cost of the accountant alone would offset any money I would save.
Originally posted by Tw0Sides
It just Boggles me how people here think they are cracking a Huge Conspiracy, The Birther Con...
It would be a GOP Slam Dunk Victory, if this was true, NOT A PEEP from them.
You Go You Keyboard Detectives.
Originally posted by paxnatus
reply to post by Zarniwoop
He gave over 4 ,000,000 to charities in 2011! He has also released a summary of his taxes
from 1990-2010! Now, go on, find fault with that as well!!
Obama hasn't released a damn thing!!
Originally posted by skycowboy
One made lots of $$ creating jobs, that made him a whole lots more $$$ ( wish I could do that) One was a "community organizer" suking off all that every working person misses from their PAYCHECK !!! am I missing something ?!?
Originally posted by Shaiker
reply to post by randomname
Wow he paid 2 million in taxes in one year. That's more than you will pay your entire life he must be a true patriot!!
When attempting to engage in baseless speculation over what it is that's in Mitt Romney's tax statements that's so embarassing he'd rather take the heat for non-disclosure, I think it's important to remember that he was actively running for president in 2007 and 2008. That means it's relatively unlike he was doing anything during those years that he thought couldn't withstand scrutiny. So why not release a nice even five years of tax data? Perhaps because of something that happened in 2009.
Something like this:
Wealthy U.S. taxpayers, concerned about an Internal Revenue Service crackdown on the use of secret overseas bank accounts as tax havens, are rushing to meet a Thursday deadline to disclose those accounts or face possible criminal prosecution. The concern was triggered this summer when Switzerland's largest bank, caught up in an international tax evasion dispute, said it would disclose the names of more than 4,000 of its U.S. account holders.
The decision shattered a long-held belief that Swiss banks would guard the identities of its American customers as carefully as they did their money, and it raised concern that other international tax havens might be next. Under an amnesty program, the IRS is allowing taxpayers to avoid prosecution for having failed to report their overseas accounts. As a result, tax attorneys across the nation have been besieged by wealthy clients who are lining up to apply even though they will still face big financial penalties.
Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Mittens did not get convicted of a crime with his offshore accounts. So he did not break the law. And Mittens will never release his 2009 taxes, never.
Again Mittens did not get convicted of a felony for avoiding taxes.
But, ask if he was caught hiding money off shore ?
Better yet, ask Mittens if he took advantage of an amnesty program that was made available in 2009 ?
Taking advandage of an amnesty program would prevent a trail, conviction and a felony charge, but would require ammending his 2009 return and paying the taxes avoided.
No conviction, no taxreturn from 2009 , no discussion and no questions answered.
NOW PROVE MITTENS DID NOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF AMNESTY IN 2009 WITHOUT HIS TAX RETURN .
Makes you wonder why he didn't offer 3 or 4 years taxes ? 2009 , number 9, number 9, number 9..........
Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
For the most part the report seems fair to me. But I thought it's worth pointing out that he gave nearly 30% in charity in 2011, and an average of 13.45% over 20 years,
So, if you take out the increase from this year which may or may not have been a political maneuver...
13.45 x 20 = 269
269 - 30 = 239
239/19 = 12.6
So, he's really giving a tad less in charity than numbers indicate on average. It's possible that in 2007-2010 he ramped up charitable giving some in preparation for this.
If he gave 20% per year during those 4...
159/15 = 10.6%
Pure speculation, and not perfect math because of differences in income from year to year making some years weigh heavier on the average.
But, if I had to guess, Romney was closer to 10% giving to charity than 15 before entering politics.
Nitpicking a bit, obviously, but worth pointing out. I'd also like to see exactly where his donations are going. I don't value contributions to BYU and Harvard at the same level as donations that would find their way to lower income earners. Surely, there's a good amount to the Mormon church which is fair.
edit on 9/21/2012 by PatrickGarrow17 because: (no reason given)edit on 9/21/2012 by PatrickGarrow17 because: (no reason given)edit on 9/21/2012 by PatrickGarrow17 because: (no reason given)