 |
Trump paid $750 federal income tax the year he ran for president. The year before, he also paid $750. Trump is already calling this fake news. All the details are in the Times article.
Trump the financial fraud for all the world to see.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump...b61af20e7762e7
pic.twitter.com/be15BS005Z
Banner headline from New York Times. If you can't open it without a payment, the story is all over every media in the world.
https://www.nytimes.com/
All that proves is that Trump is a full time loser, he runs his businesses at a loss and pockets the money of those who finance him. You can expect some fancy accounting behind his tax returns
Good summary - works for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
All of this proved nothing. The story will likely turn out to be yet another in a string of fake news articles such as the recent one in the Atlantic. It's all designed to prop up the hapless campaign of the Harris/Biden ticket.
And right on cue, this is the "fair and balanced" CNN headline for the "story". "Tax bombshell reveals Trump's image is a sham." Nothing like seeing an article written by an unbiased source.
What a crazy statement. Yeah. It's the key to financial success. "How to become rich by running your businesses at a loss!"Quote:
he runs his businesses at a loss
What crime do they say he committed? How is it that the Slimes figured this out but the Feds who have audited his businesses for years could not ? I am not a tax expert ,but I have heard that losses can be written off for many years . The Real Estate market did take a hit early in last decade .
Anyway Trump did not make tax law. But Quid did for 40 years . I do not fault anyone who legally uses the tax laws to pay less taxes . I take every credit ,and deduction I can. No one complains that Warren Buffett takes the minimum salary permitted .(then the hypocrite complains that he pays less taxes than his secretary ) . None of the Quid supporters are complaining that his income gets filtered through S Corps he created for the purpose of paying less taxes.
Don't you think that this is a fine example of why there should be a flat tax ?
Absolutely it is. Better yet, have a flat tax that is keyed to spending. If we spend more, we automatically tax more. Guess what would happen to spending if we did that?Quote:
Don't you think that this is a fine example of why there should be a flat tax ?
I expect you are saying there should be a flat tax on gross revenue, no deductions, so what should it be 5%, 10% some industries have very thin margins and rely on volume, some industries have big margins, Should individuals be subject to the same rate meaning the poor pay proportionally more. The reason it hasn't been done Tom is it is impracticable and favours the richQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
That is for the elected officials to determine . Do I think individual and business taxes should be the same ? NO .Business income taxes should be much less or not taxed at all .Quote:
so what should it be 5%, 10% some industries have very thin margins and rely on volume, some industries have big margins, Should individuals be subject to the same rate meaning the poor pay proportionally more. The reason it hasn't been done Tom is it is impracticable and favours the rich
When government taxes businesses they pretend that the business pays the taxes .Business taxes are passed on to the customer ,or the shareholders ,or the employees of a company . It depresses wages ;impedes innovation ,and has companies looking to relocate (ex American companies operating in Ireland ) .jlisenbe is also right that a consumption tax is far better than an income tax
Missed the point. It's about Trump's claims since day one about what a financial genius he is. Proof positive he's a financial dolt. Every business he touched, except for his TV show, failed, leaving others to pay the bill. His losses have been gigantic - over $1BILLION.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Huh? He passed the infamous tax "cut" that failed to do what he claimed it would do. He lied through his teeth with that one.Quote:
Anyway Trump did not make tax law.
Shades of Steve Forbes who stood to gain hundreds of millions with his flat tax. Even the Wall Street Journal agreed the flat tax was a huge giveaway for the rich. True, Tom, you're not a tax expert.Quote:
Don't you think that this is a fine example of why there should be a flat tax ?
and ? Evita brought up the same issue in 2016 debates . He did not deny the fact that his tax accountants use the tools they have . When she said he paid little or no taxes he replied "that makes me smart " .Quote:
Missed the point. It's about Trump's claims since day one about what a financial genius he is.
The effect of the corporate tax cuts is not relevant to the issue of his income taxes .He has admitted repeatedly he uses the tax code to his advantage. Need I remind you that most of the years in question were during the emperor's tax laws .It was the emperor's IRS that cut Trump a huge check.Quote:
Anyway Trump did not make tax law.
Huh? He passed the infamous tax "cut" that failed to do what he claimed it would do. He lied through his teeth with that one.
I have seen plenty of Op-Ed pieces at WSJ that argue both sides of that issue . I admit I am not a tax expert . I give my docs to a tax accountant to make sure my returns are legal ,and that I get every deduction ,credit I am entitled to get. Are YOU a tax expert ?Quote:
Don't you think that this is a fine example of why there should be a flat tax ?
Shades of Steve Forbes who stood to gain hundreds of millions with his flat tax. Even the Wall Street Journal agreed the flat tax was a huge giveaway for the rich. True, Tom, you're not a tax expert.
from a Facebook thread: "The bigger problem and most immediate problem is not his taxes it's the half a billion dollars in unsecured debt that makes him ripe to be compromised and make decisions based on self interest rather than the American people. This conman is a national security threat and should resign from office effective immediately."
What did we expect from a guy who used and abused charities, banks and vendors before he got in office? The conservatives/rightwingers/repubs got their judges and tax cuts, and the dufus got paid. The revelation of the dufus finances are no surprise, nor that they be scrutinized for fraud should be no surprise.
I did several hundred individual tax returns in the early '90s and I had an excellent grasp of the tax code then, but I don't consider myself an "expert". I never practiced in tax court. The experts are tax lawyers, enrolled agents, and CPAs who do taxes as their main business.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
It's a Facebook thread, so it just has to be true? Is that how it goes now?Quote:
from a Facebook thread: "The bigger problem and most immediate problem is not his taxes it's the half a billion dollars in unsecured debt that makes him ripe to be compromised and make decisions based on self interest rather than the American people. This conman is a national security threat and should resign from office effective immediately."
Let's go way out on a limb here.Quote:
Are YOU (Athos) a tax expert ?
Oops, I forgot. Only what YOU say is truthful and reliable....Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Be careful! Tal will get on to you for being mean-spirited if you keep that up. In the meantime, we will look with justifiable skepticism at so-called "facts" coming from Facebook.Quote:
Oops, I forgot. Only what YOU say is truthful and reliable....
Fire the bum! Facebook is late on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I learned how at the feet of a master.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
First it was the Atlantic, and now it's Facebook.
The never ending, wearisome, incessant plea of left wingers. "I bear no responsibility since my problems are someone else's fault! Don't blame me."Quote:
I learned how at the feet of a master.
At least we haven't descended into constant tweeting like the dufus does.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Oooooh, blame-shifting. My new thread on the Religious Discussions board! Stay tuned! (You must be psychotic and read my mind!)Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Constant tweeting? Is that kind of like communication coming directly from the source? In what way would that be beneath the gossip board known as Facebook?
By the head of our country? Doesn't he have more important things to do?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I would say that staying in touch with America is really, really important. Come on. The truth is that if this was Obama, you would be fine with it. It's not the tweeting. That's completely neutral. It's what he says that sometimes gives me indigestion. It's the content of some of the tweets, and not the tweeting itself. You and others on this board are just dead set on being critical of Trump in whatever way you can, so today it's that he uses a twitter account.
Untrue. If Obama constantly lied and cheated and pandered to exclusively left wing loonies, I would blast his a$$ too!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You must pay attention. Her criticism was not of WHAT he tweeted, but simply of the fact that he was tweeting.
But besides that, you just glided right along when Obama lied about Benghazi and when he lied about Obama Care, and to say that he did not pander to the loony left is just nonsense. So what do you say after being caught in a blatant untruth. BOOM!!
You are either mistaken or misinformed or both...as usual.
My developmentally differently-abled son had a terrific healthcare policy under the ACA. Once Trump messed with the ACA, my son is now paying three times as much for his monthly premium and has a much higher deductible.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
and how many of them the size of a corporation the size of Trump's hire ? I know his business interests hire about 22,000 people . Not bad for a failed "conman " business man.Quote:
The experts are tax lawyers, enrolled agents, and CPAs who do taxes as their main business.
that and the Slimes which writes a major expose and offers not a shred of evidence.Quote:
meantime, we will look with justifiable skepticism at so-called "facts" coming from Facebook.
The Atlantic is on a roll . One hit piece after anotherQuote:
First it was the Atlantic, and now it's Facebook.
"the election that could break America " .https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...oncede/616424/
Scary but excellent article, Tomder. Thanks for posting it. Every American should read it. We should never underestimate the penchant for evil that Trump possesses.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The Atlantic has already given us the terrific article by Jeffery Goldberg describing how Trump REALLY thinks about the men and women defending our nation. "Suckers" and "losers", Trump called them. Trump's own FOX network confirmed the facts presented in the article. You can't do better than that!
If you can find one other person who really believes that, then that would be two people on the earth who do.Quote:
You are either mistaken or misinformed or both...as usual.
A "terrific article" that has been completely shown to be untrue. Nice try, but no prize for that one.Quote:
The Atlantic has already given us the terrific article by Jeffery Goldberg describing how Trump REALLY thinks about the men and women defending our nation. "Suckers" and "losers", Trump called them.
The closer we get to the election, the more we will see of these undocumented, fake stories as the left wing media, which is to say nearly all of the media, gets more and more desperate to see the Harris/Biden ticket elected.
You have "failed conman" right, but not "business" man.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Successful businessmen are generally rated on how profitable their companies are. An organization that loses over $1 billion is not the definition of success. Especially when the losses are directly attributable to incompetent management.
To repeat, Trump has failed in EVERY business enterprise he started. His money came from his father, both as inheritance and a bail-out loan. His TV show used his freakish personality to get ratings. Others produced the show.
I hope you noticed how weakly Trump's spokesman replied to the Times article. Practically a proof of its accuracy.
I seriously doubt that you or anyone else outside of a relatively few people have any idea how much Trump's businesses lost or made, unless you are referring to the period from 85 to 94, and that's a long time to go back. For the present, it's pure conjecture.Quote:
An organization that loses over $1 billion is not the definition of success.
Slimes identified no law he broke. However what they did was illegal
26 U.S. Code § 7213 (3) makes it illegal to disclose unauthorized information, including tax returns
Quote:
It shall be unlawful for any person to whom any return or return information (as defined in section 6103(b) is disclosed in a manner unauthorized by this title thereafter willfully to print or publish in any manner not provided by law any such return or return information. Any violation of this paragraph shall be a felony punishable by a fine in any amount not exceeding $5,000, or imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.
"Some will raise questions about publishing the president’s personal tax information. But the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the First Amendment allows the press to publish newsworthy information that was legally obtained by reporters even when those in power fight to keep it hidden. That powerful principle of the First Amendment applies here."Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
NYTimes
another defense of the indefensibleQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
It's indefensible to say that Trump's present business losses or gains is not public knowledge? Huh? I think you need a second cup of coffee.Quote:
another defense of the indefensible
So where does he get his financing from? There is a lot we don't know about his finances and who he owes money to, and he is being investigated for possible tax fraud and money laundering. Then there is this
https://www.forbes.com/sites/elanagr.../#4d81700330aa
Now you're catching on. There is a lot we don't know about his finances just like there is a lot we don't know about your finances. That is how it should be. It's none of our business.Quote:
So where does he get his financing from? There is a lot we don't know about his finances and who he owes money to,
By who? Do you mean this silliness? "New York prosecutors suggested President Trump and his businesses could be investigated for tax fraud and insurance fraud, according to a court filing submitted Monday." So it is "suggested" that he "could be" investigated? Oh yeah. Nothing like a really definite statement where a "could be" is "suggested". It's just more election year nonsense by a left wing press desperate for a win.Quote:
and he is being investigated for possible tax fraud and money laundering.
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/5...ax-fraud-probe
The finances of the president is our business. Maybe you wingers don't care where he gets his money, or what he did to get it, but you should just in case he is a crook or in hock to Vlad or the Arabs, or even the Philippine's, or some other dictator or nefarious institution that needs to launder big bucks.
I would think that would be something we should know for sure about the president.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:49 PM. |