Reply With Quote
Who cares. I Maybe he didn't know? Need something more substantial than alleged facts that could have a reasonable cause.
You racism is showing...
Clarence Thomas failed to report wife's income
Between 2003 and 2007, Virginia Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, earned $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation, according to a Common Cause review of the foundation's IRS records. Thomas failed to note the income in his Supreme Court financial disclosure forms for those years, instead checking a box labeled "none" where "spousal noninvestment income" would be disclosed.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,2413407.story
=======
Will he get the $35K Geithner treatment? ie, settle and pay up (not sure any money's due) with no penalty?
Will he make the Banksters' excuse that it's "just a foreclosure paperwork accident", not IRS intentional fraud.
CT and Scalia are also being investigated for attending Citizens-United-Exploiter Kock Bros VRWC high-roller enclaves.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 01-22-2011 at 01:59 PM.
Who cares. I Maybe he didn't know? Need something more substantial than alleged facts that could have a reasonable cause.
You racism is showing...
mumbling like someone who was lying.
Your guilt is showing......
If he didn't know his wife was pulling six figures a year, he should resign due to sheer stupidity.
Apparently, he thought she worked for free.
Ah Chump. If it was Ginsburg would you be worried?
"earned $686,589 from the Heritage Foundation"
earned? the oligarchy takes care of its own.
where in the Cons ution does it say Supreme Court justices have to fill out bogus bureaucratic forms and mindless paperwork?
He's supposed to pay taxes on her income?
If you file jointly, yes.
BTW...this is not about taxes, despite boutonski's typically bizarre thread le.
It was not an IRS form that Thomas was required to fill out, but rather, Supreme Court financial disclosure forms.
There are legal requirements to list her income, as was discussed rather plainly in the article. But an IRS issue it's not.
From the article bouton's failed to read:
"Federal judges are bound by law to disclose the source of spousal income, according to Stephen Gillers, a professor at NYU School of Law. Thomas' omission — which could be interpreted as a violation of that law — could lead to some form of penalty, Gillers said.
"It wasn't a miscalculation; he simply omitted his wife's source of income for six years, which is a rather dramatic omission," Gillers said. "It could not have been an oversight."
Doesn't matter about filing jointly or separately.
The filing is supposed to identify any influence such compensation from political organizations, corporations could have on the judge's judgments, esp if those employers/donations come before SCOTUS.
.....which has nothing whatsoever to do with the asinine spin you attempted with the thread le.
Extreme SCOTUS activist Repug judge filed false IRS declaration
I wasnt thinking of it from a public office POV, but yeah, that makes sense. I was thinking of it in a literal tax sense.
If you file separately, you are responsible separately.
If you file jointly, then you are responsible jointly.
Ergo, if Mr. SCJ filed jointly, then he should have known about his wife's total income.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
