Why won't Romney release his birth cer..err...his tax return?

[Nbadan]

Here’s What Romney’s Unreleased Tax Returns Almost Certainly Hide
Brian Beutler January 5, 2012, 5:32 AM


Mitt Romney still says he’s unlikely to publicly release his tax information, even if he clinches the Republican presidential nomination, and Democrats have a pretty good idea why.

Romney is a privileged poster child for the “Buffett Rule” — President Obama’s principle that the tax code should make it impossible for a person of great wealth to pay a lower share of their income in taxes as than ordinary people. The DNC knows it, policy wonks know it, Romney certainly knows it. But the reasons why are technical and illustrate just how different Romney is from the vast majority of Americans who will cast votes for him — in either the GOP primary or the general election.

One tax expert told TPM of “fairly sophisticated tax strategies” that would be “not available to ordinary tax payers.” A technique that puts you in a position that’s “like having an unlimited 401k account” sounds very attractive. But maybe not if you’re running for office, for Pete’s sake.

When Romney jokes that he’s been unemployed for years, he’s obscuring the fact that he’s still collecting millions of dollars of investment income, which is taxed at a much lower rate than it would be if he, like most taxpayers, took home a regular paycheck. He’s also obscuring the fact a great deal of that same income is only vaguely connected to his own underlying investments, and yet benefits from a key loophole in the tax code that allows him and other wealthy finance veterans to more than halve their effective tax rate.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/reverse-engineering-romneys-low-effective-tax-rate.php

Where is Ann Richards when you need her?

[Wild Cobra]

What chapter of the CWA (Class Warfare Association) do you belong to anyway? I'm sure other here would like to join you.

[TeyshaBlue]

Here’s What Romney’s Unreleased Tax Returns Almost Certainly Hide
Brian Beutler January 5, 2012, 5:32 AM



http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/01/reverse-engineering-romneys-low-effective-tax-rate.php

Where is Ann Richards when you need her?

Shes always had my vote.

[CosmicCowboy]

All that crap just to say that most of his income is from capital gains?

Gee. What a surprise.

[boutons_deux]

He receives "fee income" from Bain which is taxed as capital gains 14% when, like fund managers, he's not making money gambling with his own capital, but is paid a fee for service for managing Other People's Money, a professional fee like a doctor or a lawyer receives on which they pay earned income rates. This fund mgr's loophole is just another way the 1% buys the privilege, obtains the policies they pay for.

[101A]

What chapter of the CWA (Class Warfare Association) do you belong to anyway? I'm sure other here would like to join you.

I actually agree that income ought to equal income. I thought you supported a flat tax, after all? It is B.S. that my EARNED income is taxed at such a higher rate that Romney's UNEARNED.

[CosmicCowboy]

Sounds like he was just following the law. Nobody is obligated to pay more in taxes than they are legally required to pay.

[101A]

Sounds like he was just following the law. Nobody is obligated to pay more in taxes than they are legally required to pay.

Can't disagree, however, it is right to assume, legality notwithstanding, that disclosure of those strategies could be problematic.

In a democracy, practices that SO MANY citizens might take issue with, ought to be examined as to their merit. Vast loopholes, and reduced rates for people who derive their income through investment, certainly should be included in that.

[Winehole23]

@CC: like 101A just said, the law is inequitable. but hey, defend an unfair status quo since it suits you so well.

[CosmicCowboy]

@CC: like 101A just said, the law is inequitable. but hey, defend an unfair status quo since it suits you so well.

I'm not necessarily defending it, but if he was paying more taxes than he was legally obligated to pay I would think he was stupid.

As for doing away with capital gains, do you own a house? If so, you bought it with the money you had left over after you paid the taxes on your income. When you finally sell it, do you really want your gain taxed again at 40%?

[elbamba]

I guess I do not see the point. Is Romney running on abolishing capital gains tax? Last I read, he wants to keep the capital gains tax the same for the wealthy and lower it for middle income earners.

I wish capital gains was taxed at the same rate earned income is taxed. But its not like Romney is going Warren Buffet on us. He isn't making stupid comments about how taxation is unfair and he should be paying more than his secretary.

Romney is a rich man who makes more than I probably ever will. Romney no longer has a job but makes millions off of previous investments. Where is the story here?

[Winehole23]

As for doing away with capital gains, do you own a house? If so, you bought it with the money you had left over after you paid the taxes on your income. When you finally sell it, do you really want your gain taxed again at 40%?not really, but income is income.

[Winehole23]

Where is the story here?it's customary for presidential candidates to release their tax returns. Romney is breaking custom. It makes it look like he's got something to hide.

[CosmicCowboy]

not really, but income is income.

Is it? Typically houses just appreciate at about the same rate as inflation. You may sell the house for more dollars than you paid for it but those dollars are worth less. Is it really fair to have to pay 40% tax on it again?

[Winehole23]

you have a point there. perhaps real estate gains ought not to be treated the same as windfalls from other types of investment.

[CosmicCowboy]

you have a point there. perhaps real estate gains ought not to be treated the same as windfalls from other types of investment.

Why is it different from any other investment held long term?

[Winehole23]

good question. not sure.

now we're back to income is income.

[Blake]

Why is it different from any other investment held long term?

Intentions are different.

[Winehole23]

one can lives on land or in a house; that is different. the land itself may be naturally productive, that is another.

[boutons_deux]

Is it? Typically houses just appreciate at about the same rate as inflation. You may sell the house for more dollars than you paid for it but those dollars are worth less. Is it really fair to have to pay 40% tax on it again?

profit form selling primary residence is still tax free, right?

[CosmicCowboy]

Intentions are different.

What do you mean by this?

Lets say I take the money I have left after paying my ordinary income taxes in 1970 and buy stock in company X.

Company X pays federal taxes from 1970 to 2012.

Lets say that in dollars my stock price has doubled in 42 years, but in inflation adjusted dollars the stock is worth the same or less.

Now when I sell this stock in 2012 I have a profit of 100% in dollars but 0% in inflation adjusted dollars.

Are you saying I should owe 40% of this non-profit in additional tax?

[DMX7]

I applaud the wise-ass remark, "for Pete's sake". I laughed.

[Winehole23]

hey CC, is boutons right?

[TeyshaBlue]

profit form selling primary residence is still tax free, right?

Sometimes.

http://ph.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071215063046AAQYzS4

[CosmicCowboy]

profit form selling primary residence is still tax free, right?

Up to a certain point the income can be excluded.

[Winehole23]

pokes a big hole in your analogy

[CosmicCowboy]

pokes a big hole in your analogy

Does it?

How about this one...inflation is a tax too...


What do you mean by this?

Lets say I take the money I have left after paying my ordinary income taxes in 1970 and buy stock in company X.

Company X pays federal taxes from 1970 to 2012.

Lets say that in dollars my stock price has doubled in 42 years, but in inflation adjusted dollars the stock is worth the same or less.

Now when I sell this stock in 2012 I have a profit of 100% in dollars but 0% in inflation adjusted dollars.

Are you saying I should owe 40% of this non-profit in additional tax?

[Winehole23]

homesteads are treated differently

[Winehole23]

you glossed over that

[Winehole23]

Does it?

How about this one...inflation is a tax too...why should you get a tax break for making unprofitable investments?

[CosmicCowboy]

Why don't you address the other example?

[Winehole23]

or for not taking profits when they were there?

[Winehole23]

Why don't you address the other example?just did

[Blake]

What do you mean by this?

Generally speaking, home buyers don't normally buy a home with the intent to flip for a tangible profit.

[CosmicCowboy]

why should you get a tax break for making unprofitable investments?

How is that a tax break? The stock had the same inflation adjusted value as it did 42 years ago when purchased. It made no profit but you want to disregard inflation and treat the dollar face value difference as profit and tax it at ordinary income rates...

[Winehole23]

if your investments can't beat inflation that's your misfortune

[Winehole23]

plus, inflation isn't a tax

[CosmicCowboy]

if your investments can't beat inflation that's your misfortune

I defy you to consistently make investments that beat inflation AND a 40% tax rate.

[CosmicCowboy]

plus, inflation isn't a tax

:lmao

[Winehole23]

investment entails risk. if you can't stand the heat...

[Winehole23]

:lmaoexplain how it is then, if it's so obvious

[Winehole23]

then explain how your analogy relates to Romney, if you can

[CosmicCowboy]

explain how it is then, if it's so obvious

Inflation tax
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Inflation tax is a term which refers to the financial loss of value suffered by holders of cash and fixed-rate bonds, as well those on fixed income (not indexed to inflation), due to the effects of inflation. This financial loss of value is often expressed as a loss of purchasing power. It may be better characterized as a wealth transfer than a tax - since many people including debtors, holders of hard assets and some equities may simultaneously gain. Many economists hold that inflation affects the lower and middle classes more than the rich, as they hold a larger fraction of their income in cash, they are much less likely to receive the newly created monies before the market has adjusted with inflated prices, more often have fixed incomes, wages or pensions, and lack the means to avoid domestic inflation by reallocating assets overseas. Some argue that inflation is a regressive non-linear consumption tax. [1] Nevertheless, inflation improves the economic position of people with outstanding fixed interest debt like student loans and mortgages. It can improve the nation's balance of trade - stimulating exports with a less expensive currency - and decreasing imports. A large portion of the "tax" also falls on foreign holders of fixed income debt in the inflated currency. It is important to note that this "tax" on creditors is coupled with a simultaneous transfer to debtors - reducing their debt burden. By transfering wealth to people who are more likely to spend it, an inflation "tax" can further increase real (inflation adjusted) economic growth (beyond its beneficial impact on trade). It may also hasten new purchases since inflation makes it costly to keep cash. Inflation can increase liquidity in depressed real estate markets since it would increase nominal asset values back above the loan values. This improved LTV allows for people to sell their homes, and move to pursue better economic opportunities and as such can improve efficiency of the labor markets. In this way, an "inflation tax" can improve real (inflation adjusted) economic growth and improve employment.

[CosmicCowboy]

Although not meant by the term "inflation tax", a related effect is the tax on interest and investment "income" when the tax is levied against the nominal interest rate or nominal gains.

For instance, if someone buys a bond with a nominal interest rate of 6% and the rate of inflation is 4%, their "real" interest is 1.92%.

If, however, they are taxed 25% of the 6% interest "income", or 1.5%, this can be thought of as composed of a tax on real income (0.5%) and a tax on inflation (1.0%). The same principle applies to capital "gains" taxes not adjusted for inflation. In any case, this "tax on the inflation tax" is essentially equivalent to a tax on holdings ("wealth tax") equal to the nominal tax rate times the inflation rate (in example above, 25% of 4% inflation equals 1.0%.) This "property tax" can even apply to non-monetary assets as well as money earning interest. Thus, money itself is subject to both the inflation tax and the tax on the inflation tax, while other assets, on which nominal profit or gains taxes are imposed, are subject only to the tax on inflation.

[Winehole23]

still seems more semantic than technically true. why the scare quotes around tax in the blurb?

[Winehole23]

lol "can be thought of"

[CosmicCowboy]

lol "can be thought of"

Who benefits from inflation?

[Winehole23]

dunno. who?

[Winehole23]

still waiting for how this all relates to Romney...

[CosmicCowboy]

Well, governments that have 14 trillion of debt for one...

Big losers are people on fixed incomes and salaries.

[CosmicCowboy]

still waiting for how this all relates to Romney...

This conversation was a digression. I simply said that Romney was following the law and I would consider him to be stupid if he voluntarily paid more taxes than he was legally obligated to pay.

[Winehole23]

http://i.usatoday.net/sports/_photos/2010/08/09/bengals-muckelroypg-vertical.jpg

no one suggested he should

[Winehole23]

Well, governments that have 14 trillion of debt for one...

Big losers are people on fixed incomes and salaries.we had inflation way before runaway national debt. who benefited then?

[CosmicCowboy]

we had inflation way before runaway national debt. who benefited then?

same winners and losers

[Th'Pusher]

He does not want to release his tax return, because it will provide Obama a nice narrative. The perfect example of a fat cat paying less income taxes as a percentage of his salary than his secretary - in black and white, for all the world to see.

[Winehole23]

still doesn't make infaltion a tax. it's a financial loss to be sure, but calling it a tax is just semantics.

[CosmicCowboy]

still doesn't make infaltion a tax. it's a financial loss to be sure, but calling it a tax is just semantics.

As is NOT calling it a tax...:toast

[Winehole23]

what bull

[Winehole23]

admittedly, that's an area of relative mastery for you

[Th'Pusher]

This conversation was a digression. I simply said that Romney was following the law and I would consider him to be stupid if he voluntarily paid more taxes than he was legally obligated to pay.

Agreed. He shouldn't pay more than he is required. But that is not the root of the issue. the root of the issue is the loophole that allows him to pay capital gains tax rates on what is essentially earned income. Releasing his tax returns provides Obama perfect opportunity to drive home this narrative during the campaign. And the American people will side with Obama.

[elbamba]

it's customary for presidential candidates to release their tax returns. Romney is breaking custom. It makes it look like he's got something to hide.

Our Ruling

Of 34 presidential and vice presidential candidates reviewed above, only seven -- Brown, Buchanan, Huckabee, Forbes, Giuliani, Lugar, Nader -- declined to release personal tax returns. So while most follow the practice, not all do. We rate the DNC’s claim Mostly True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/dec/16/democratic-national-committee/dnc-says-presidential-candidates-usually-release-t/

I still don't care. Romney is a rich man. If he wins the nomination, maybe it matters more. At this point, I will let the IRS audit him if they suspect something is foul.

[Winehole23]

it's not been suggested there's anything foul, just that disclosure might prove embarrassing for Romney

[CosmicCowboy]

admittedly, that's an area of relative mastery for you

tch, tch,tch...just a little intellectual sparring...don't take it so personally...:p:

[elbamba]

Agreed. He shouldn't pay more than he is required. But that is not the root of the issue. the root of the issue is the loophole that allows him to pay capital gains tax rates on what is essentially earned income. Releasing his tax returns provides Obama perfect opportunity to drive home this narrative during the campaign. And the American people will side with Obama.

Its not really a loophole. But it is a tax rate that both parties seem to want to keep about the same.

[elbamba]

it's not been suggested there's anything foul, just that disclosure might prove embarrassing for Romney

Fair enough. Perhaps he is richer than 250 million. Or poorer.

[Winehole23]

Of 34 presidential and vice presidential candidates reviewed above, only seven -- Brown, Buchanan, Huckabee, Forbes, Giuliani, Lugar, Nader -- declined to release personal tax returns. So while most follow the practice, not all do. so then, all the winners disclosed

[Winehole23]

tch, tch,tch...just a little intellectual sparring...don't take it so personally...:p:I don't. Pointing out that you're full of it is sparring too.

[elbamba]

so then, all the winners disclosed

Yes. I don't usually like to rely on quick google searches but it looks like most candidates release but anyone who actually wins the nominee actually releases. Ralph Nader being the exception, though I don't think he needed to win a primary. I could be wrong.

[CosmicCowboy]

I don't. Pointing out that you're full of it is sparring too.

You know you like me...:toast

[Th'Pusher]

Its not really a loophole. But it is a tax rate that both parties seem to want to keep about the same.

It is a loophole. It's the carried interest tax loophole and Obama would like to eliminate it:


Raise taxes on investment fund manager profits: Obama would like to tax the portion of profits paid to managers of hedge funds and private equity funds as ordinary income rather than as a capital gain. That would subject it to much higher tax rates than the 15% capital gains rate currently imposed. The White House estimates the measure would raise $24 billion over 10 years.

This is a carryover proposal from last year. While Congress hasn't acted on it yet, there's a fair chance they may move on it in the next year, since lawmakers will be looking for ways to pay for other costly legislation they'd like to pass.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/01/pf/taxes/obama_budget_tax_changes/index.htm

[Wild Cobra]

I actually agree that income ought to equal income. I thought you supported a flat tax, after all? It is B.S. that my EARNED income is taxed at such a higher rate that Romney's UNEARNED.
I agree. We should all pay the same tax rate. I have advocated reducing tax rates and eliminating loop holes. If you remember, I have floated the idea that if we maintain our tax system as it is now, that people pay a minimum 15%, and maximum 25%.

[Th'Pusher]

He does not want to release his tax return, because it will provide Obama a nice narrative. The perfect example of a fat cat paying less income taxes as a percentage of his salary than his secretary - in black and white, for all the world to see.

And Romney reveals he pays an effective 15% tax rate.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/politics/campaign-wrap/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Who here pays a higher effective tax rate than Romney? I know I do.

Let the sin of envy continue.

[ChumpDumper]

And Romney reveals he pays an effective 15% tax rate.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/politics/campaign-wrap/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Who here pays a higher effective tax rate than Romney? I know I do.

Let the sin of envy continue.Has he or his people tried to spin it yet?

That could be fun to hear.

[Th'Pusher]

Has he or his people tried to spin it yet?

That could be fun to hear.

He has not released any tax returns. Just a statement indicating most of his income is investment income and he pays closer to 15%.

[spursncowboys]

Since the constitution clearly states that a candidate running four president should release his/her tax returns,I think we should demand it of him. But not Barry or Michelle . They can keep withheld all their earnings. We don't need to know how many millions Michelle made as being a...
Well whatever job she did that earned her millions, which was so important of a job that the hospital couldn't find a suitable replacement so they just didn't even look to fill that position.actually before Michelle, that position want even in existence.

[clambake]

what a pussy

[AFBlue]

He just needs to release his tax records already. By not doing so, he's creating a story that should be a non-story.

[ChumpDumper]

Since the constitution clearly states that a candidate running four president should release his/her tax returns,I think we should demand it of him. But not Barry or Michelle . They can keep withheld all their earnings. We don't need to know how many millions Michelle made as being a...
Well whatever job she did that earned her millions, which was so important of a job that the hospital couldn't find a suitable replacement so they just didn't even look to fill that position.actually before Michelle, that position want even in existence.Too bad he's been releasing his financial records since 2004. Any idiot could find them on the internets.

Well, almost any idiot.

[Wild Cobra]

And Romney reveals he pays an effective 15% tax rate.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/politics/campaign-wrap/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Who here pays a higher effective tax rate than Romney? I know I do.

Let the sin of envy continue.
You made more than $123,100 in 2010? Good for you! That's how much a married couple filing joint return would have to earn with no other deductions for 2010, to pay a 15% federal rate.

Now if you are single, you only had to make $61,550 in 2010 before paying a 15% rate.

Remember, Romney has a spouse.

[Wild Cobra]

I'm appalled by the desire to see other peoples personal records.

Why don't you just say to him "I demand to enter your house?"

Why... I mean how... do you guys find principle in demanding others give up their constitutional rights, and if they stand on principle to retain their rights, you cry foul?

[boutons_deux]

How much money a person makes defines the value and respect given. "Christian" America is profoundly materialistic, superficial, voyeuristic, "TV-deep", which is off course completely ersatz.

So peeping-Tom America loves to know how much money you make and how and who you fuck, tendencies fanned by the media seeking ad $$.

[Th'Pusher]

The DNC pouncing: http://www.whatmittpays.com/

[Th'Pusher]

You made more than $123,100 in 2010? Good for you! That's how much a married couple filing joint return would have to earn with no other deductions for 2010, to pay a 15% federal rate.

Now if you are single, you only had to make $61,550 in 2010 before paying a 15% rate.

Remember, Romney has a spouse.

You think a married couple filing jointly making $123,100, federal income tax rate is 15%? You might want to check your facts.

[101A]

Why is it different from any other investment held long term?

I get to write off my mortgage interest, right? That loan is treated differently in the tax code from all others; why can't a similar structure exists for the sale/repurchase of a primary residence.

It is very convenient that the bazillionaires can count as allies ALL homeowners who netted (or hope to one day net) a $30,000 appreciation in home value over twenty years; while they buy and sell ad nauseum - getting millions in INCOME each year, taxed at a rate 60% lower than many of their (useful idiot) allies.

[101A]

You think a married couple filing jointly making $123,100, federal income tax rate is 15%? You might want to check your facts.

At that income level, their marginal rate would indeed be over 15%, but the actual amount of income tax paid? 15% sounds about right.

[Spurminator]

Class warfare. Mitt Romney has been a productive and job-creating member of society in his professional career. You shouldn't be criticizing him, you should be thanking him. Instead you want to take more of the money he rightfully earned by having a lot of money.

[Th'Pusher]

At that income level, their marginal rate would indeed be over 15%, but the actual amount of income tax paid? 15% sounds about right.

Ya. It depends on what deductions they have but WC said "That's how much a married couple filing joint return would have to earn with no other deductions for 2010, to pay a 15% federal rate"

[Th'Pusher]

Class warfare. Mitt Romney has been a productive and job-creating member of society in his professional career. You shouldn't be criticizing him, you should be thanking him. Instead you want to take more of the money he rightfully earned by having a lot of money.

Is this supposed to be in blue text?

[boutons_deux]

"Mitt Romney has been a productive and job-creating member of society in his professional career"

bullshit, Bain employees said job creation or destruction were side-effects of increasing shareholder wealth, which was the overwhelming priority, no matter what other consequences.

The Romney Tax Loophole

After refusing for weeks to release his taxes, Mitt Romney now says he'll do so - by tax day, April 15. But the real news is what Romney has now admitted about his taxes.

It's not how much Romney earns. Everyone knows he's comfortably in the top one-tenth of one percent.

It's how much he pays of it in taxes. Romney says he pays a tax rate of "about 15 percent."

That's lower than the tax rate most of America's middle class face and far lower than the 35 percent top rate after the Bush tax cut. (To put this in perspective, recall that the top income tax rate under Dwight Eisenhower was 91 percent.)

Newt Gingrich immediately pounced on Mitt's admission as evidence that Newt's proposed flat 15 percent tax is ideal, and wants to call it the "Romney tax." Newt's flat tax is a fraud. It would dramatically lower the taxes of most of the top 1 percenters and increase the taxes of most of the rest of us.

The real smoking gun is how Romney manages to pay only 15 percent on what's been his money-gusher of compensation from Bain Capital. Romney hasn't released his tax returns yet, but the most obvious answer is he treats his Bain income as capital gains - subject to the current capital gains rate of only 15 percent.

A loophole in the tax laws allows private-equity managers like Romney to treat their compensation as capital gains. It's legal but it's a scandal. Income from employment is employment income, period.

Private-equity managers cling to the technicality that the money they take out of their companies comes from the appreciation of assets they own and sell. That may be true, but it's still income they get from their jobs. Common sense would dictate it be treated as ordinary income.

Congress has vowed for years to close this loophole. But somehow it persists. Even when Democrats have been in charge, they haven't been able to close it.

Guess why. The managers and executives of private-equity funds are big donors to Republicans and Democrats alike.

Don't call it the Romney tax, as Newt wants to do. Call it the Romney tax loophole. And let him explain why he thinks it's justified.

http://www.readersupportednews.org/opinion2/279-82/9500-the-romney-tax-loophole

[Winehole23]

Is this supposed to be in blue text?knowable without any reply from Spurminator.

find all threads started on his statistics page, or, the search function is your friend. :toast

[Th'Pusher]

knowable without any reply from Spurminator.

find all threads started on his statistics page, or, the search function is your friend. :toast

After a quick view of his post, it looks as though spurminator was indeed being sarcastic/ironic.

[Winehole23]

it can be tricky telling the difference. AFBlue got me yesterday.

[Spurminator]

:lol I try to be pretty obvious in my sarcasm but I guess when you consider some of the very serious opinions expressed in here, you can never really tell.

[cheguevara]

Romney = Wall Street's Candidate #1

Obama = Wall Street's Candidate #2

Wall Street has it locked up like Lindsey Lohan

[spursncowboys]

I agree with spurminator. Even though it was meant as a joke. How that is funny or comical I don't know. Sad maybe.

[boutons_deux]

financial sector (wall st, insurance, private equity) ALWAYS has it locked up, is why Paul is dead in the water

[cheguevara]

financial sector (wall st, insurance, private equity) ALWAYS has it locked up, is why we are dead in the water

fixed

[Th'Pusher]

I agree with spurminator. Even though it was meant as a joke. How that is funny or comical I don't know. Sad maybe.



Class warfare. Mitt Romney has been a productive and job-creating member of society in his professional career. You shouldn't be criticizing him, you should be thanking him. Instead you want to take more of the money he rightfully earned by having a lot of money.

Well I found the bold text particularly comical.

[Wild Cobra]

You think a married couple filing jointly making $123,100, federal income tax rate is 15%? You might want to check your facts.
There's a major problem with our voting populous. They take the spoon fed material by the media and don't verify.

Married filed joint has a Standard deduction of $11,400 and personal exceptions are $3,650 each. This gives you $18,700 off the top. An income of 123,100 would have a taxable of $104,400.

Find a schedule Y-1 (page 98 of the 2010 1040 instructions) and you will see that it says $9,362.50 plus 25% of the amount over $68,000.

104400 - 68000 = 36400

25% of 36400 = 9100

9362.5 + 9100 = 18462.5 (tax)

18462.5/0.15 = $123,083.33

-or-

$14,662.5/$123,100 =14.998%

[boutons_deux]

George Romney, Mitt’s Father, Paid A 37 Percent Effective Tax Rate

Romney became a millionaire on company stock options after he introduced a compact car as president of American Motors Corp. The figures show his adjusted gross income ranged from $661,427.68 when he was president of American Motors Corp. to a low of $78,483.85 last year. The figures indicate he paid $1,099,555.18 in taxes on an income of $2,972,923.58.

These numbers show Romney paying a 36.9 percent effective tax rate (but this was also a time when the top income tax rate was 70 percent). Lee Fang noted that the returns also “showed that George Romney donated 19 percent of his income to church, 4 percent directly to charity, and most surprisingly…that the Michigan governor ‘seldom took advantage of tax loopholes to escape his tax obligations.’”

Romney, meanwhile, is the beneficiary of a huge tax loophole that lets private equity managers like himself pay a lower tax rate on their earnings than millions of middle class families. He has also advocated a tax plan that would cut his own taxes nearly in half, while raising taxes on half of middle class families with children.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01/18/406111/george-romney-tax-rate/

[Borat Sagyidev]

There's a major problem with our voting populous. They take the spoon fed material by the media and don't verify.

Married filed joint has a Standard deduction of $11,400 and personal exceptions are $3,650 each. This gives you $18,700 off the top. An income of 123,100 would have a taxable of $104,400.

Find a schedule Y-1 (page 98 of the 2010 1040 instructions) and you will see that it says $9,362.50 plus 25% of the amount over $68,000.

104400 - 68000 = 36400

25% of 36400 = 9100

9362.5 + 9100 = 18462.5 (tax)

18462.5/0.15 = $123,083.33

-or-

$14,662.5/$123,100 =14.998%
:blah

Mitt Romney's 15% tax rate is based largely on unearned income (capital gains). Do you know what unearned means? He made that money sitting on his ass, largely from his Daddy's hand me down cash.

As such, he (perfectly legally) was able to take advantage of the current tax code that taxes such income at the capital gains tax rate.

Comparing that in equal terms to general earned income tax rates, is not only incomparable for most working people, it's pretty despicable.

This is the part where all the conservatives on the board say "That's his money" (also known as the baby-boomer motto)

Well, if that's the case, he sure liked to get bailed out with his use of bankruptcy at the cost of everyone else.

[TDMVPDPOY]

all his income now is passive income

wages and shit all deferred to stock options

rich ppl have access to smart accountants and investors to launder their money into dodgey tax schemes to minimise tax...too bad the avg joe does not have access to such schemes cause they cant afford the fees....

[ElNono]

I'm appalled by the desire to see other peoples personal records.

Why don't you just say to him "I demand to enter your house?"

Really? They're running for POTUS. Public scrutiny is part of the process. They don't have to provide more than whatever the law indicates, but the requests are certainly going to be there.

[AFBlue]

it can be tricky telling the difference. AFBlue got me yesterday.

:lol

I said I would pray for God to smite you. You really thought ha was serious?

[ElNono]

You made more than $123,100 in 2010? Good for you! That's how much a married couple filing joint return would have to earn with no other deductions for 2010, to pay a 15% federal rate.

Now if you are single, you only had to make $61,550 in 2010 before paying a 15% rate.

Remember, Romney has a spouse.

So you think Romney made around $123,100 in 2010?

[Wild Cobra]

So you think Romney made around $123,100 in 2010?
Are you just playing dumb? I sure hope so. Of course I don't think he only made that much. As pointed out by others, his earnings weren't normal income. Most of it falls under capital gains rather than the normal income tax tables.

[boutons_deux]

Romney Invests In Several Bain Funds That Use Offshore Tax Havens To Boost Profits

As Reuters noted, those returns “could shed light on how Romney and Bain use offshore strategies to avoid taxes.” In fact, ABC News reported today that Romney has millions of dollars parked in several Bain funds that are set up in tax shelters in order to help their investors avoid U.S. taxes:

Although it is not apparent on his financial disclosure form, Mitt Romney has millions of dollars of his personal wealth in investment funds set up in the Cayman Islands, a notorious Caribbean tax haven…As one of the wealthiest candidates to run for president in recent times, Romney has used a variety of techniques to help minimize the taxes on his estimated $250 million fortune. In addition to paying the lower tax rate on his investment income, Romney has as much as $8 million invested in at least 12 funds listed on a Cayman Islands registry. Another investment, which Romney reports as being worth between $5 million and $25 million, shows up on securities records as having been domiciled in the Caymans.

they convey a host of advantages to Bain and Romney, including “higher management fees and greater foreign interest” from investors looking to avoid U.S. taxes. As the Washington Post’s Suzy Khimm noted, “just one of these offshore-linked funds — Bain Capital Fund VIII, based in the Cayman Islands — generated $1 million for the Romneys in 2010.”

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01/18/406580/romney-offshore-tax-havens/

======

Not quite the "patriot" his father was, who actually built stuff and paid his taxes.

Just another 1%er scumbag.

[JoeChalupa]

This will all be over soon and Obama has some serious work cut out for him.

[boutons_deux]

Romney Riches Are Being Seen as New Hurdle

With a fortune estimated to be as large as a quarter of a billion dollars, Mitt Romney is among the wealthiest men ever to run for president.

But attacks from Democrats and Republicans over his career in the leveraged buyout business and his reluctance to release his tax returns have underscored another central fact about Mr. Romney: The wealth that has helped underwrite his career in politics remains shrouded in considerable secrecy, which now poses a major political risk on the campaign trail.

Mr. Romney’s finances are complex and far-flung. He and his wife, Ann, have reported holdings in dozens of publicly traded companies, mutual funds and high-end investment partnerships, with much of their family wealth held in blind trusts that conceal their full size from public view. And Mr. Romney’s disclosure on Tuesday that he pays an effective tax rate of about 15 percent on his income focused new attention on some aspects of his finances, including his millions of dollars in donations to the Mormon Church and his continuing compensation from Bain Capital, the private equity firm he left more than a decade ago.

Just three days ahead of the South Carolina primary, Mr. Romney’s opponents on Wednesday vigorously exploited uncertainty about his finances by demanding that he release his tax returns before their party picks a nominee, while Democrats, previewing likely attacks in a general election campaign, accused Mr. Romney of having something to hide. The matter is also leading to more scrutiny of his tax proposals.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/us/politics/romney-riches-are-being-seen-as-new-hurdle.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

[boutons_deux]

A Letter from Mitt Romney

SOUTH CAROLINA – Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney has released the following letter to the American people:

http://www.borowitzreport.com/wp-content/uploads/mitt.jpg

Dear American People:

Over the past several days, my personal finances have been distorted into a grotesque caricature by the mainstream media, pundits, and other people who can count. I am writing to you to set the record straight by explaining my finances in terms the American people can relate to.

Let’s say you bought a bottle of Chateau Lafite Rothschild 1982 for $5,000. A couple of years later, what do you know, you sell that same bottle for $10,000. So you just made a profit of $5,000 through your own hard work. How much of that should you pay to the government? I’d say fifteen percent.

Now let’s say you have a fellow mowing the lawn at your 7,000 square foot home in La Jolla, and he turns out to be an illegal. You say, “No way, Jose” (Jose is actually his real name) and send him packing. He doesn’t deserve his full paycheck, since he lied to you in Spanish, but it wouldn’t be fair to give him nothing, either. So you pay him fifteen percent.

Now let’s pretend the United States of America is like one big restaurant. Not a fancy restaurant, mind you, but one that only gets two Michelin stars. And let’s say that you order a meal of Beluga caviar, white truffles and gold shavings, washing it down with your favorite beverage, Chateau Lafite Rothschild 1982. The bill arrives and it’s quite a hefty one for a working stiff who only made $375,000 last year in speaking fees. (That’s right: minimum wage.) So when it comes to toting up the bill, how much should I tip the waiter, who in case you’re having trouble following this metaphor is the IRS? You got it: fifteen percent.

I think I’ve now shown, using these real-life examples that everyone can relate to, that no one should ever pay more than fifteen percent on their taxes. If you have been paying more than that, you should get rid of your loser accountant pronto. That’s another thing I have in common with regular Americans: we like firing people.

So – now that I’ve laid it out in simple terms that even you can understand, do you agree that you and Mitt Romney have a whale of a lot more in common than you thought? I’ll bet you ten grand you do.

Au revoir,

Mitt

http://www.borowitzreport.com/

[JoeChalupa]

This is really a non-issue and it isn't going to hurt him much. How soon before Romney makes a VP announcement?

[boutons_deux]

The FOF Theory of the GOP Primary

Steve Benen notes that by normal standards, Mitt Romney is a terrible candidate - but just not as bad as his rivals. He adds,

I often wonder what the race for the Republican nomination would look like this year if Romney had just one credible opponent.

But that wasn't going to happen! The weakness of the GOP field is not an accident.

I view the primary race through the lens of

the FOF theory - that's for “fools and frauds”.

It goes as follows:

to be a good Republican right now, you have to affirm your belief in things that any halfway intelligent politician can see are plainly false.

This leaves room for only two kinds of candidates:

those who just aren't smart and/or rational enough to understand the problem,

and those who are completely cynical, willing to say anything to get ahead.

What sort of things am I talking about?

They range from the belief that Obama is a socialist who will destroy America with his dastardly Heritage Foundation devised health care plan,

to the belief that unemployment is high because lazy people prefer their unemployment insurance checks.

On budget matters, you have to claim to believe that we can cut taxes sharply,
maintain high military spending,
and eliminate the deficit -
all without upsetting those Republican-voting Medicare recipients.

Notice that in the end, when it came to budget claims, even the supposedly hard-headed types - (cough) Paul Ryan (cough) - ended up relying on gigantic magic asterisks.

So what you have are fairly dim types like Perry :lol, on the one side, and the utterly cynical Romney, on the other. (Gingrich manages to be both a fool and a fraud).

Maybe, just maybe, the GOP could have found someone able to achieve Romney-level cynicism while coming across as sincere; but political talent on that level is quite rare.

I mean, the various non-crazy-non-Romneys who were supposed to have a shot all turned out to be duds, e.g. Pawlenty.

The weakness of the GOP field is, in short, structural. Without the still-terrible economy, they wouldn't have a chance.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/18/the-fof-theory-of-the-gop-primary/

[Oh, Gee!!]

those who are completely cynical, willing to say anything to get ahead

enter newt

[boutons_deux]

Evidence for Krugman's article, InSaneTorum being both a fraud and a fool:

Santorum’s Tax Plan Would Increase The Deficit By $1.3 Trillion

The Santorum plan would reduce federal tax revenues substantially. TPC estimates that on a static basis, the Santorum plan would lower federal tax liability by about $1.3 trillion in calendar year 2015 compared with current law, roughly a 40 percent cut in total projected revenue. Relative to a current policy baseline, the reduction in liability would be about $900 billion in calendar year 2015.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/01/19/406935/santorum-deficit/

[ChumpDumper]

I think it's telling that Romney only wants to release the most recent year's return. He's able to work things so he actually pays more taxes than he normally does and prove that he's paying something around what some folks would want a flat tax to be.

[boutons_deux]

Gingrich Tied With Romney in South Carolina Forecast

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/gingrich-tied-with-romney-in-south-carolina-forecast/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Noot's x-wife says he asked her to have "share him" (eww!) with his mistress.

Puritanical evangelicals/Repug sex-authoritarians gonna really get behind Noot

[boutons_deux]

$600B deficit in 2015 with Willard Gecko's financial plan, cutting 1%'s taxes, raising 99%'s taxes

Higher Deficits Seen in Romney’s Tax Plan, and His Rivals’, Too

Mr. Romney’s tax plan — which calls for permanently extending the Bush administration’s tax cuts, reducing the corporate income tax rate and eliminating the estate tax — would cut the taxes of people earning more than a million dollars a year by an average of $295,874,

The Romney tax plan would add to the deficit by reducing federal revenues by $600 billion in 2015, a 16 percent cut, the center found.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/us/politics/romneys-tax-bill-and-gop-deficit-problems.html?scp=5&sq=romney&st=cse

[4>0rings]

6Ba5AWsOZC8

[JoeChalupa]

So tomorrow he is releasing his 2010 and 2011 returns? He is going to have to do better than that, IMHO.

[AFBlue]

So tomorrow he is releasing his 2010 and 2011 returns? He is going to have to do better than that, IMHO.

Better than the other candidates.

[DMX7]

A Letter from Mitt Romney

SOUTH CAROLINA – Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney has released the following letter to the American people:

http://www.borowitzreport.com/wp-content/uploads/mitt.jpg

Dear American People:

Over the past several days, my personal finances have been distorted into a grotesque caricature by the mainstream media, pundits, and other people who can count. I am writing to you to set the record straight by explaining my finances in terms the American people can relate to.

Let’s say you bought a bottle of Chateau Lafite Rothschild 1982 for $5,000. A couple of years later, what do you know, you sell that same bottle for $10,000. So you just made a profit of $5,000 through your own hard work. How much of that should you pay to the government? I’d say fifteen percent.

Now let’s say you have a fellow mowing the lawn at your 7,000 square foot home in La Jolla, and he turns out to be an illegal. You say, “No way, Jose” (Jose is actually his real name) and send him packing. He doesn’t deserve his full paycheck, since he lied to you in Spanish, but it wouldn’t be fair to give him nothing, either. So you pay him fifteen percent.

Now let’s pretend the United States of America is like one big restaurant. Not a fancy restaurant, mind you, but one that only gets two Michelin stars. And let’s say that you order a meal of Beluga caviar, white truffles and gold shavings, washing it down with your favorite beverage, Chateau Lafite Rothschild 1982. The bill arrives and it’s quite a hefty one for a working stiff who only made $375,000 last year in speaking fees. (That’s right: minimum wage.) So when it comes to toting up the bill, how much should I tip the waiter, who in case you’re having trouble following this metaphor is the IRS? You got it: fifteen percent.

I think I’ve now shown, using these real-life examples that everyone can relate to, that no one should ever pay more than fifteen percent on their taxes. If you have been paying more than that, you should get rid of your loser accountant pronto. That’s another thing I have in common with regular Americans: we like firing people.

So – now that I’ve laid it out in simple terms that even you can understand, do you agree that you and Mitt Romney have a whale of a lot more in common than you thought? I’ll bet you ten grand you do.

Au revoir,

Mitt

http://www.borowitzreport.com/

LOL, that was pretty good.

[JoeChalupa]

Romney gave two decades of tax returns to Mccain the in the VP search, but now will only give the American people two years worth? WTF is up with that!?!?

[Th'Pusher]

Two decade of tax returns resulted in Palin as VP candidate. Romney learned a critical lesson.

[Winehole23]

The tax rate on carried interest must be raised to 35 percent on the profits that come to private-equity partners from their investors’ capital. The gravy train for private-equity partners has gone on for three decades. It has been a great party, but -- as the Bloomberg View editors have also made clear -- it’s time to take the punch bowl away. The private-equity moguls know it. The American people know it.



Even Mitt Romney (http://topics.bloomberg.com/mitt-romney/) knows it, despite sheepishly admitting that why, yes, his federal tax rate has been around 15 percent lately, come to think of it.



It is simply illogical, and unfair, for the IRS to give private equity two major benefits, one for their businesses and one for their wallets, while the rest of us pay much higher federal tax rates with nary any comparable subsidies at all.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-23/private-equity-s-public-subsidy-is-a-tragedy-william-d-cohan.html

[boutons_deux]

Can't find the link, but I read today where small business owners underpay their Medicare contribution by $24B/year, paying themselves with profits (no Medicare fee) rather than earned income, which ALL of it is.

[TDMVPDPOY]

htf did he made 40m in 2 years just from shares, when every fkn kent for the last 3 years made significant fkn losses on their folios...

[Spurminator]

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/pf/taxes/storysupplement/candidates-tax-returns/candidate-tax-returns3.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/pf/taxes/storysupplement/candidates-tax-returns/candidate-tax-returns3.jpg
That does it.

He was a bad Mormon.

He didn't tithe 10%.

[ElNono]

Are you just playing dumb? I sure hope so. Of course I don't think he only made that much. As pointed out by others, his earnings weren't normal income. Most of it falls under capital gains rather than the normal income tax tables.

Exactly. A couple making upwards of 123,100 will likely have a higher effective rate than Mitt despite his income being well into the millions of dollars range.

[ElNono]

double post

[TDMVPDPOY]

Exactly. A couple making upwards of 123,100 will likely pay more than what Mitt pays despite his income being well into the millions of dollars range.

well his already in the 14% flat tax rate...its how they treat his income..all deferred and stock options gives him capitals gains, so only whatever % of that is taxable, then you have his stream of incomes deriving from no taxable entities example charities and churches/ministry.....lol whatever he claim for deductions mustve all gone into his mormon church then stream back into his income accont as charity work

[ElNono]

I understand how it works... I just think that capital gains tax rate is a nice loophole if you can squeeze all your income through it...

[Wild Cobra]

Exactly. A couple making upwards of 123,100 will likely have a higher effective rate than Mitt despite his income being well into the millions of dollars range.
Yes I understand. You want to make the economy worse by discouraging people from investing in capital ventures, which employ people.

Do you understand why the rates are kept low?

Scratch that. You obviously don't.

[Wild Cobra]

I understand how it works... I just think that capital gains tax rate is a nice loophole if you can squeeze all your income through it...
Income you have in capital is at risk of loss. Are you suggesting the rates be raised when the risk of loss is still there? Who would be foolish enough to move their money then and create jobs. Why not just park it somewhere safe then? Doing no good at all for the economy.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes I understand. You want to make the economy worse by discouraging people from investing in capital ventures, which employ people.

Do you understand why the rates are kept low?

Scratch that. You obviously don't.Yeah, I also understand it's bullshit.

The last time it was lowered, it didn't lead to a huge influx of investment.

[Nbadan]

Romney is full of shit...

Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 02:00 PM PST
Now Mitt Romney claims he actually pays a 50% tax rate
by Jed Lewison Follow


...First, he's saying that he gives 40 percent of his income "to the community" in the form of taxes and charitable deductions. (I'm not sure how he gets to 40 percent, given that he says he's adding 15 percent and 15 percent, however. And given that two-thirds of his charitable donations go to the Mormon Church that bankrolled Proposition 8, you can question how much the community benefited, but I digress.)

Second, he's saying that thanks to the nominal corporate tax rate of 35 percent, he's actually paying 50 percent in taxes when you add in his 15 percent. Now, if he really believed that he was paying 50 percent in taxes, he wouldn't have said he gives back 40 percent to the community—he'd have said he gives back 75 percent. But he doesn't really believe what he's saying ... because it is patently absurd.


Paul Krugman has an excellent dismantling of the case Romney is trying to make regarding corporate taxes. First, because most of Romney's capital gains income comes by way of carried interest, it was never previously taxed at 35 percent. Second, almost no companies actually pay the nominal corporate tax rate. Third, even if it were fair to say that the income had previously been taxed at 35 percent rate, conservatives have long argued that corporate taxes come at the expense of worker's wages. Now, suddenly, they are saying it comes at the expensive of investors? Talk about double-counting!

The bottom-line: No matter how you slice it, Mitt Romney is full of baloney on this.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/25/1058470/-Now-Mitt-Romney-claims-he-actually-pays-a-50-tax-rate?via=blog_1

[Nbadan]

not exactly 'one of us'

7 reasons voters are souring on Mitt Romney
The number of Americans who have negative views of the longtime GOP presidential frontrunner skyrockets in January. What gives?


"The main reason the Republican establishment overwhelmingly favors Mitt Romney over Newt Gingrich is that Romney stands a better chance of beating Barack Obama," says Jonathan Chait at New York. So it's a problem for Romney that "as the campaign goes on, this seems to be growing less true." A new Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that negative views of Romney have "spiked" over the past two weeks, from a net +4 favorability rating (39 positive/34 negative) to a -18 rating (31 positive/49 negative) — very similar to Gingrich's -22 rating (29/51).

The shift is most notable among independents, who went from generally liking Romney (41/34) to disliking him by a 2-to-1 margin (23/51). Democrats (21/62) and Republicans (58/32) have soured on Mitt, too. What's behind Romney's newfound unpopularity? Here, seven theories:

1. Voters are turned off by his wealth Americans have long known that Romney is rich, but his just-released tax returns highlight just how much he earns from doing so little, says Peter Foster at Britain's Telegraph. Someone who rakes in $60,000 a day from personal investments is clearly "part of the elite – the '1 percent' that lives by different rules from ordinary Americans." But "the raw amount of money isn't really Romney's problem," says Chris Cillizza at The Washington Post. "It's the exoticness of his finances" — a Swiss bank account, money parked in Luxembourg and the Cayman Islands. "There is nothing more dangerous in politics than 'otherness,'" and Romney's fortune reeks of it.

[link:http://news.yahoo.com/7-reasons-voters-souring-mitt-romney-094700884.html|
8

[Wild Cobra]

Romney is full of shit...

Wed Jan 25, 2012 at 02:00 PM PST
Now Mitt Romney claims he actually pays a 50% tax rate
by Jed Lewison Follow



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/25/1058470/-Now-Mitt-Romney-claims-he-actually-pays-a-50-tax-rate?via=blog_1
But he's not necessarily full of shit. Did you run the numbers?

If he's paying a 35% corporate rate for the shares of businesses that he owns, that is likely around 20% after business deductions. then when he pays 15% from any stock dividends, that alone is 35%.

Review the context he said it in and do the numbers before you call him a liar.