NY Times gets Trump’s tax returns (2 Viewers)

Trump refused to talk about his tax returns and blasted the Times report as "totally fake news" on Sunday. But the article portrays the anti-elite crusader who rails against a corrupt system as actually using its loopholes to avoid paying any federal taxes at all in 10 of 15 years beginning in 2000 by writing off his own staggering losses.

In 2016 and 2017 each, Trump paid just $750 in federal income taxes -- far less than many Americans who are working hard amid a deep recession to stay afloat. Trump took huge deductions -- including $70,000 to take care of his hair -- and also appeared to write off hundreds of thousands of dollars paying his daughter Ivanka as a consultant to the Trump Organization, according to the Times report. The story also reveals the extent to which Trump's status as President is being used to shore up his losing ventures — for example his hotel in Washington, DC, and his golf resorts.

Click to expand...

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/28/politics/donald-trump-taxes-election-2020-joe-biden-debate/index.html

So there it is. I paid more in 2016 and 2017 in taxes than our billionaire president. Not even just all year...I paid more than he did in one lump sum with my tax return than he did all year.

$750.

brandon said:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/28/politics/donald-trump-taxes-election-2020-joe-biden-debate/index.html

So there it is. I paid more in 2016 and 2017 in taxes than our billionaire president. Not even just all year...I paid more than he did in one lump sum with my tax return than he did all year.

$750.

Click to expand...

Probably because you made more money than him. I don't think it's a surprise to anyone that he's not very good at business and is losing money hand over fist.

As much as the teeny tiny federal income tax payments seem to be taking the headlines, unsurprisingly since they punch a hole in any notion he's not an unsuccessful businessman, I can't help but think that the hundreds of millions of dollars in loans are the most devastating thing about the returns:

I'd suggest someone with that level of debt in that position is highly compromised. Being a poor businessman who doesn't pay much in personal taxes due to his massive losses makes for a poor resumé for the role of President, but being massively in hock should be outright disqualifying.

I think the inference is that he is cooking his books to reduce his taxes, not only that he is terrible at business. I think he is terrible at business and a tax cheat. Both.

The one example that stuck out to me is that Ivanka formed a shell company which was then paid staggering sums of money by the Trump organization for “consulting” even though Ivanka is also employed by the Trump organization. I don’t think that‘s legal.

MT15 said:

I think the inference is that he is cooking his books to reduce his taxes, not only that he is terrible at business. I think he is terrible at business and a tax cheat. Both.

The one example that stuck out to me is that Ivanka formed a shell company which was then paid staggering sums of money by the Trump organization for “consulting” even though Ivanka is also employed by the Trump organization. I don’t think that‘s legal.

Click to expand...

Yep paying out to your employees for consultation is certainly not allowed.

That is just hiding money to dodge taxes.

RobF said:

As much as the teeny tiny federal income tax payments seem to be taking the headlines, unsurprisingly since they punch a hole in any notion he's not an unsuccessful businessman, I can't help but think that the hundreds of millions of dollars in loans are the most devastating thing about the returns:

The Times reports that within the next four years, more than $300 million in loans -- for which Trump is personally responsible -- will come due. That opens the extraordinary possibility that the lenders could be called upon to decide whether to foreclose on businesses owned by the US President while he is in office if he is unable to pay the money back. Trump is therefore in danger of becoming deeply compromised.​

​

I'd suggest someone with that level of debt in that position is highly compromised. Being a poor businessman who doesn't pay much in personal taxes due to his massive losses makes for a poor resumé for the role of President, but being massively in hock should be outright disqualifying.

Click to expand...

Ask any successful organization that is contemplating a hire for a position where that person has the "keys to the kitty". The very FIRST thing looked at- indebtedness.

I completely agree. IF you are in hock up to your eyes, then you simply do not qualify for the Presidency.

Its just good business practice.

He couldnt even get a job as a table dealer at a casino.

And id argue that he is already "compromised" because he already knows the maturity date of those loans. Its not a matter of "maybe" they are due....they ARE due and he knows exactly when they are due.

And now we see why he was so hell bent on keeping them private. Just as suspected, his "empire" is smoke and mirrors and built on MASSIVE amounts of debt.

Had that been known during primaries, he would have been hammered on the fact that we spoke about above. Not so much on his "projection" of wealth. More about the fact that he is so in debt, to whom we really dont know, that he isnt qualified to be able to run the country efficiently.

Honestly, if I’m CNN- the headline they’re running at the bottom is not what I’d have gone with.. I think it’d be more effective if it said “Trump Proven to not be Billionaire, Millionaire, or even Thousandaire.. He is in debt by over $400 million.. The average person watching this has a higher net worth than Donald J Trump”... Which is all true.. but I guess it’d be too wordy to fit on the screen.



.

MT15 said:

I think the inference is that he is cooking his books to reduce his taxes, not only that he is terrible at business. I think he is terrible at business and a tax cheat. Both.

The one example that stuck out to me is that Ivanka formed a shell company which was then paid staggering sums of money by the Trump organization for “consulting” even though Ivanka is also employed by the Trump organization. I don’t think that‘s legal.

Click to expand...

I was just thinking about how I could pay my wife an allowance, and call it a consulting fee to save on taxes. I need to form an LLC, huh?
)

I'm curious if this will be asked about during the debate. If it isn't, then Biden definitely needs to find a way to insert it into the debate.

wardorican said:

I was just thinking about how I could pay my wife an allowance, and call it a consulting fee to save on taxes. I need to form an LLC, huh?
)

Click to expand...

I would think if you own a business, and your wife isn't an employee, you could do that and save your business some taxes. However, your wife would then have to pay taxes on that income.

Lapaz said:

I'm curious if this will be asked about during the debate. If it isn't, then Biden definitely needs to find a way to insert it into the debate.

Click to expand...

I am not a betting man, but i’d bet the entire contents of my savings account and 401k (both of which, while not a huge amount , are worth more than Trump is worth) that this’ll come up more than once in the debate tomorrow .. It’d be asinine, and political malfeasance, for Biden to not bring it up, but i think the moderators wil beat him to it.

Given Trump's slogan about "America First", I found these 2 excerpts particularly hypocritical:

"It leaves the President facing multiple questions about his morals, behavior — and patriotism since he appears to be paying more in taxes to several foreign nations than he is to Uncle Sam. The reporting also raises the possibility that Trump's deceptive accounting, already the focus of several investigations in New York, could open him up to serious legal issues when he leaves office. "

"His personal debts also underscore a long-time fear about his administration -- that he is managing US diplomacy in order to prioritize his own personal and financial goals rather than the wider national interests. Trump, for instance, derives millions of dollars in income from countries like Turkey and the Philippines that are led by autocrats whom he has praised but who infringe traditional US values like human rights. And while he has paid little federal tax to the Treasury, the President or his companies have paid more in taxes to foreign powers, including $145,400 to India and $156,824 to the Philippines in 2017. "

It seems his moto should be "America Last", since that's how he treats America.

The article notes that he owes over $300M that will be due before 2024, so how would he be protected from those debts if he were to be re-elected? Clinton was not immune from civil lawsuits, so I would assume that he wouldn't be either, but if Trump has his judges judging him, might he escape?

FullMonte said:

I would think if you own a business, and your wife isn't an employee, you could do that and save your business some taxes. However, your wife would then have to pay taxes on that income.

Click to expand...

So the next step is to identify what taxes Ivanka paid for that double dipping.

Lapaz said:

So the next step is to identify what taxes Ivanka paid for that double dipping.

Click to expand...

Well, that is part of the problem, sure. But, as I understand it, she was an employee of his company, and it's my understanding that you can't pay an employee a consulting fee.

Is there anywhere to see the returns?

FullMonte said:

Well, that is part of the problem, sure. But, as I understand it, she was an employee of his company, and it's my understanding that you can't pay an employee a consulting fee.

Click to expand...

I know that it appears to be illegal to have paid Ivanka as a consultant, since she was supposedly an employee, and that will need to be investigated, but we also need to check whether she paid taxes on that money. If Trump somehow can justify paying her, it still doesn't absolve her of paying the taxes, which is why that is the next thing that I said needs to be investigated.

So far, the only real defense I have seen offered by Trump and surrogates is “fake news”.