Romney Releases Tax Returns...

page: 6
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Kharron
 


If you'll look at Mitt's returns, almost all of his income is investment income, long term gains to be specific. He doesn't have wages, ordinary income from a business etc. he's got some directors fees and whatnot but, primarily, he's sitting on income that is taxed at 15%.

Whether his accountants, or some other financial advisor (or he did it himself), structured his investments is not known but, when clients come to see me and they are starting a business or an investment vehicle, the first thing we talk about, after they give us the rundown of the investment or business, is how to structure it so that you get to keep as much of your income as possible.

I'm not saying that I can take your tax return and find you a lower tax bracket. I'm also not saying I can't. I've had clients come to me from big firms and I've found mistakes that cost the client money in the past. I'm merely pointing out that Mitt's set his little empire up so that he gets income streams from tax favorable sources.

Think of it this way. You come to see me and you just inherited one million dollars. We run through a variety of investment ideas, we look at fully taxable investments vs muni bonds and triple tax free investments, which pay less but cost nothing. Then we decide where to put your money.

Of you go see your current guy and he says he's got an investment advisor who's bringing in 20% returns. Well, that sounds great so you decide to go with better returns and you wind up paying 35% for short term gains, interest etc whereas with my investments you might have earned 5% and paid nothing.

It's all in the planning.

years ago I had a client who invested $5,000 in a small flavored water company that, perhaps you've heard of - vitamin water. The company was sold to coca cola a few years later and his 5 grand was worth about 1 million dollars. The majority of that income was 15% tax rate because it was nothing more than long term capital gains. Should he have paid a higher rate because he made so much money? No. He got lucky and stuck gold. If coca cola had purchased the company within the first year of his purchase, it would have cost him an additional 20% in federal tax.

People railing about Romney paying 14% simply don't understand the taxes and they don't understand the idea behind tax planning and tax strategies.

Personally, I'm disgusted by the concept of not reporting the charity, in full, as a means of making his tax rate higher. It's my job to save your money from the greedy government hands so it goes against everything I stand for to willingly give them more than they are entitled to.

Of course, what we don't know is who the charity was that didn't get reported. I wouldn't be surprised if the name Romney was in the name of one charity. Wealthy families, like Mitt's, usually have a charitable foundation set up so they can donate huge sums of money to the foundation, minimizing the taxes and then the foundation pays out 5% of the assets. Basically, moving money into a protected "business" that might own the homes of the family members etc.




posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Crakeur
 


Thanks for explaining that, makes more sense now. Appreciate you taking the time.



Khar



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Kharron
 





So according to that logic, if all of us hired his CPA he could find a way for all of us to pay ~14% tax rate?


Could be.. Have you tried it?
And wtf do you care what tax rate he paid anyway?



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 


Great point, that's inexcusable on Biden's part.

My earlier post on Romney's charity giving wasn't as much about dissatifcation by the amount, but about the recent boost. Regardless if his giving is 30%, 14%, or 10%, it's pretty impressive.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Kharron
 


sadly, I'm all taxes all the time these days so it's a welcomed distraction.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
The problem here is that he has only released 2 years worth of returns. That was the issue to begin with. He said he would only release 2. America deserves better. Romney said he gave McCain 23 years worth of taxes and then McCain picked Palin!

His own father released 12 years worth when he ran for office, stating that it was necessary in order to present an accurate financial history. The financial history is important because if you're going to run for president you have to prove your ability to handle finances. Much more important than old college records that the college can't release by law. As usual, irrelevant information is used as a distraction by the right in order to get attention away from the possible corruption of their own candidate. In the mean time, Romney just fed them a morsel to cling to in desperation.. just a ghost of the complete truth.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Juggernog
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


pfft i can beat that

See that? Born in KENYA

edit on 21-9-2012 by Juggernog because: (no reason given)


Is this real!?!?!!? Why has no one commented?



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by renegadeloser

Originally posted by Juggernog
reply to post by BritofTexas
 


pfft i can beat that

See that? Born in KENYA

edit on 21-9-2012 by Juggernog because: (no reason given)


Is this real!?!?!!? Why has no one commented?


Because articles, booklets, and book jackets are notoriously wrong about details. Both Breitbart and the editor of the booklet have stated that the information was in error. For some reason people still insist on clinging to the misinformation and try to pass it off as some great revelation.

Details of the mistake in the 21 year old booklet can be found HERE



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by renegadeloser
 


Its real but people just brush it aside, just like they do with everything else relating to this fraud.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 03:18 AM
link   
LOL @ left wingers

Time and time again, proving that they're the most biased, brainwashed, propaganda spewing idiots since the NAZI party and their supporters.

And based on the number of these "people".......America.....or should I say Amerika, is royally screwed.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
Source -Yahoo


Romney aides on Friday said the Republican presidential nominee would give the public a look at his finished tax forms. Ahead of their release, expected at 3 p.m., aides said Romney earned almost $13.7 million last year and paid more than $1.9 million in taxes — an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent.


Okay, so he's releasing them. Now, it's time for Obama to release his school admission records...unless, of course, he has something to hide.


How come he still has not released them then?
He released what he claims is his effective rate. He did not release any more returns.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3

Originally posted by randomname
wow, he gets to keep 85.1% percent of his pay.

what a lucky, privileged guy.


Yep, as he should, considering that as that dollar reached his company, it was also taxed before it even got to him.

$1.00 received
Corporate Tax @35%. Money Left: $.65
Romney's pay from that $.65 is taxed at 14.9%. That means the government took 44.7% of every dollar. personally, I think a person and business keeping 55% should be just fine. I'd like to see them keep 75% or more, to be quite honest.


Sounds like someone is only able to see things one way. Let's just say I work at 7-11 making 8 bucks an hour. The money I receive in my paycheck... comes from the same source the owner's, CEO's, CTO's, etc. money comes from (that is, the consumer's money being used on purchases in case you're not following)... Which is taxed before it reaches any of our pockets. Yet they get away with multi-million dollar paychecks and 15% taxes, while I'm making a tiny fraction of that with twice the taxes? What? Try applying your logic to the other people who work, please. You're obviously biased.
edit on 23-9-2012 by Heehaw because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 06:56 AM
link   
I don't care about Romneys tax returns. I don't care about Obama's tax returns.
I care about someone getting in office who can help fix the economy.
I see what Romney has done to Massachussets ... he dragged it down.
I see what Obama has done to the USA ... taken a difficult situation and made it worse.
Bottom line, both of these guys have proven that they can't fix economies.

Tax returns? Irrelevant. They have investment income that is taxed at a lower rate
and everyone gets all worked up about it. But it's legal and irrelevant. IMHO



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
This entire issue is crap. We all know that Romney made a lot of money. We also know that he paid a much smaller percentage in taxes than most of us did. So who cares?

Almost reminds me of the Birther issue. Maybe we should ask Romney for his BC! He may be a Mexican anti-colonialist.
edit on 21-9-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)


Who cares? I would imagine that a few million Americans care, especially the ones who pay far more and survive on far less for doing far more work, and especially since this sickening specimin of Republican hypocricy has labelled 47% of the citizens he intends to govern as not being important to him.

This is crazy, only in America can a man openly state, for all to hear, that half the country mean absolutely nothing to him, and STILL BE RUNNING!

I know a lot of people outside of the USA criticize Americans for being stupid, and I know that's a very unfair generalized statement. But things like this don't help.

In the UK, a MP has called a highly trained member of the Police guarding the government a "Pleb" (meaning a serf, a lower citizen and beneath him) and his job is deemed untenable by much of the public. In the USA, a man running for the PRESIDENCY, a leader of the free world, can openly call 47% of his own fellow citizens "not his priority" and the most the average American can do in response is just shrug?!

In any sane country that kind of statement would be deemed political suicide. In America, someone just shouts "Ooh look! Shiny!" and everyone is immediately distracted.


As for his taxes, I think it's clear that he released a fraction of what has been traditionally released by those running for president over the last thirty years. So he's chosen to only select what he's been paying since he began his bid for the WH. What about the rest?

And saying that he's "within his rights to pay less" is a nonsense statement. Only those who can afford to pay less have that option. If people want to make it morally okay to be a tax dodger, the government needs to fund a system allowing every citizen access to those same methods.

The idea that people should be able to pay less tax because they can afford to pay someone obscene amounts of money to do it for them is sickening, and trying to justify that kind of inequality and elitism is not going to wash with the majority of intelligent people.
edit on 23-9-2012 by detachedindividual because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
But it's legal and irrelevant. IMHO


It might be legal, but it's immoral, and it's certainly relevant.

A man who proclaims to be able to represent the entire USA decided to pay as little tax as he could get away with, using loop holes and schemes to profit. As a result of that, the tax burden on everyone else rises, because the military still need to be paid, the education system needs money, social systems have to be paid for. Do you think that the hole left in the nations finances by tax dodging elites like him is just filled in with pixie dust? It has to come from someone, and when these elite scum decide they are too superior to pay their adequate share that hole has to be filled by everyone else.

How can a man proclaim to be so proud of his nation, and want the best for his people, when he has deliberately acted to remove his responsibilities to pay his fair share, and placed that burden on the rest of the nation instead?



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Originally posted by FlyersFan
But it's legal and irrelevant. IMHO

It might be legal, but it's immoral, and it's certainly relevant.


It's legal to pay less on investment income than earned income. It's supposed to be an incentive for people to invest in America rather than send their money overseas. It doesn't always work that way. But it's legal and that's the reason.

It's immoral? Really?
That's subjective. And that sound a lot like you pushing your morals onto others .. something the left is continually complaining that the right does with 'pro life/pro choice' issues. Ditto with gay marriage/traditional marriage. People shouldn't push their version of morality onto others, because people disagree on what is moral and immoral. Right?

What Obama or Romney paid in income taxes is irrelevant. If what they paid was illegal, THEN it would be relevant. As it is .. they both paid the amounts they legally were supposed to pay and didn't 'tax evade'. Therefore .. it's irrelevant.

What is relevant - how they'd handle the economy. Both have been shown to not know how to handle an economy. Romney and Romneycare left Massachussets in worse shape then when he got a hold of it. Obama and all his policies have left America in worse shape then when he got a hold of it. THAT is what is relevant. Not how much money either of them made or how much they paid in taxes. Both earned an income and both paid what they legally owed. The end.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
The fact that few Americans understand the Capital Gains tax is disturbing. There are books and videos... even PBS shows that tell Americans how to wisely invest their money. Capital Gains is a different type of "income" and is taxed differently. In fact, there is great debate as to whether investment dividends and earnings should fall into the "income" category because it's investment money that fuels American businesses' operations and capital growth. Even more so, because Capital Gains tax is a tax on monies that have already been subjected to Personal Income Tax. In the bigger economic picture, capital gains tax is an unfair tax that inhibits economic growth. But that's not even the point here...

I wish I had over $4 million to give to charity, while also paying exactly what the federal income tax laws asked me to pay. That is such a great thing to do.

Is Romney's generosity something to make a scandal? That's what the MSM is doing. The Obama campaign has spun Romney's generosity as a though it were a crime and liability to be successful and charitable. Obama certainly doesn't donate his "fair share." But these two rivals have paid exactly what the government demanded of them pursuant to the current tax code.

If people hate the tax code, then change the tax code. If people hate a man for donating millions of dollars away that he could've kept in the bank, then they need to wake up and see that charitable giving has always been more effectively used than any monies ever given to the federal government.

I don't make their levels of income, but I pay more than a healthy proportion of my income toward charitable giving because non-profits tend to be the slim overhead shops run by people living meagerly just so they can accomplish real change and improvements in individuals' lives -- something the federal government has never done and will never be able to do without gross inefficiency and waste, and callous disregard for human life.

The MSM news story should be: WOW... look at how proportionally more generous Romney is than the incumbent.

Obama is lifetime community organizer and government hand-out mooch who only knows how to rile people up on distraction issues while he spends taxpayers money on his pet projects and golf. But no, Obama is still a previous media God that is above reproach.
edit on 23-9-2012 by twoandthree because: capital gains is not the same rate as regular personal income tax.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
How does Romney, issuing 1 additional year of his tax returns (for a total of 2), equate to Obama, who released 8 years back in 2008, having to release his transcripts (which has never been asked of a presidential candidate before)?

Why is there no request for Romney to disclose his transcripts?

Because it's a double standard, plain and simple. Dishonest people moving the goalpost, creating new goalposts. That only a black president has ever been required to meet. The people requesting this are not real Americans. They pledge allegiance to a political philosophy before they pledge allegiance to this country.

If anyone doesn't deserve to live here, it's them.
edit on 23-9-2012 by ClintK because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
reply to post by Flatfish
 


I've said it all along. I'd like to see them as well. I'd also like to see Obama's school records. I think it's fair to see both. Do you?


Seriously you are comparing Obama's school records with Romney's tax returns, how about we see Romney's and Bush's school records.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
reply to post by abeverage
 


Said it a hundred times now. I don't have a problem with you wanting his tax records from 2000. I do too. Now, let's change a couple things around in your statement and see how "fair and balanced" you really are.

UM...let's be straight and honest here or if you prefer Fair and Balance. Hussein released his photoshopped birth certificate...He knew more that 6 years ago he would run, yet it took him 3 years into his term to release a layered PDF file? I want to see his school admission records, because I believe he committed fraud and applied for grants as a foreign born student. That should send up RED FLAGS to anyone smart enough to see through the BS!


The birther crap has got to go, it does not fly in the mainstream, you really need to come to grips with the fact that a black man is in the White House.





top topics
 
14
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join