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

[brandon]

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.

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.

 

[coldseat]

Democrats Say Trump Tax Payments Report Shows His 'Disdain' For Working Families

A New York Times story that details how little President Trump has paid in federal income taxes has handed Democrats what they hope will be a potent campaign message.

www.npr.org

Everyone talking about how little he paid, is a good sound byte, but misses the bigger point. Glad Pelosi locked in on the massive debt.

That's certainly the most important story from a national security perspective.

But I think the nothing to little he pays in federal taxes on his income is something that is a fundamental fairness issue that hits people in a more visceral way. Just because it's something we all have to do, can relate to and we all pay more than our "billionaire" president.

From a political perspective, it's something that has the potential to move the needle just because it's known now and no longer speculation.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

I can't find anything else on this. Do you have a link to an article or anything that I can read more about this?

They've got nothing posted. I'm pretty sure they'll be a replay overnight.

 

[xpuma20x]

They've got nothing posted. I'm pretty sure they'll be a replay overnight.

Oh sorry, I was thinking you had read that somewhere. I did searches using all the keywords I could think of and couldn't come up with anything.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Oh sorry, I was thinking you had read that somewhere. I did searches using all the keywords I could think of and couldn't come up with anything.

Sorry for the confusion. It was his show on CNN.

 

[wardorican]

That's certainly the most important story from a national security perspective.

But I think the nothing to little he pays in federal taxes on his income is something that is a fundamental fairness issue that hits people in a more visceral way. Just because it's something we all have to do, can relate to and we all pay more than our "billionaire" president.

From a political perspective, it's something that has the potential to move the needle just because it's known now and no longer speculation.

But it is also the easiest to retort with "it is good business to get every deduction you can".

What is harder to argue is the massive debt he holds AND how those deductions seem fraudulent on the surface. Like having family on payroll AND paying consulting fees. Are they a W2 employee and a 1099? Vice versa? Changing property to commercial, despite only using it for family,.to get a bigger tax credit. Likely overstating property values to maximize losses and depreciation. Also minimizing values for tax purposes.

Seems like a lot of fraud in there.

 

[NoPartyMike]

But it is also the easiest to retort with "it is good business to get every deduction you can".

What is harder to argue is the massive debt he holds AND how those deductions seem fraudulent on the surface. Like having family on payroll AND paying consulting fees. Are they a W2 employee and a 1099? Vice versa? Changing property to commercial, despite only using it for family,.to get a bigger tax credit. Likely overstating property values to maximize losses and depreciation. Also minimizing values for tax purposes.

Seems like a lot of fraud in there.

Just think, this is the MO for every corporation with a competent tax advisor. Excluding the concern for the election, the real snake in the grass is our swiss cheese tax code.

 

[coldseat]

But it is also the easiest to retort with "it is good business to get every deduction you can".

What is harder to argue is the massive debt he holds AND how those deductions seem fraudulent on the surface. Like having family on payroll AND paying consulting fees. Are they a W2 employee and a 1099? Vice versa? Changing property to commercial, despite only using it for family,.to get a bigger tax credit. Likely overstating property values to maximize losses and depreciation. Also minimizing values for tax purposes.

Seems like a lot of fraud in there.

IDK, maybe you're right. But I doubt there are very few people who don't believe that Trump isn't overvaluing his liabilities, undervaluing his assets and income and illegally passing wealth to his children through manipulation of tax law. All of that has to do with why he pays so little in income tax. Things that normal people don't have the option to do to lower their tax burden. So these aren't just "normal" business practices.

Also, it gives democrats the opportunity to bring to the forefront how the only significant piece of legislation that this Republican congress and president have passed was a massive tax cut that added more loopholes for the 1% and billionaires like himself and corporations to pay less in income tax. Something that has only increased the wealth gap.

Of course, they have to argue that and convince voters of his motivations.

 

[Optimus Prime]

 

[wardorican]

Just think, this is the MO for every corporation with a competent tax advisor. Excluding the concern for the election, the real snake in the grass is our swiss cheese tax code.

To a point. Again, the fraud, shady practices, etc is what makes this different. Limiting your taxable income is perfectly fine. I'd agree that the tax code has too many loopholes.

However, he's not just using loopholes. There were specific examples mentioned in the NY times piece that I quotes small sections of earlier. That is potentially straight up illegal at the worst, to pushing the envelope, but denied, at best.

I don't think it is good for any accountant to push towards fraud. That being said, who decided that mansion retreat should be converted to commercial property, despite not having a commercial purpose or activity?

 

[efil4]

To a point. Again, the fraud, shady practices, etc is what makes this different. Limiting your taxable income is perfectly fine. I'd agree that the tax code has too many loopholes.

However, he's not just using loopholes. There were specific examples mentioned in the NY times piece that I quotes small sections of earlier. That is potentially straight up illegal at the worst, to pushing the envelope, but denied, at best.

I don't think it is good for any accountant to push towards fraud. That being said, who decided that mansion retreat should be converted to commercial property, despite not having a commercial purpose or activity?

He did. After all...he signed his returns.

I had my advisor, many years ago advise that my daughters swim club practices ( after school ) could be considered "after care" therefore, deductible. So i went with his advice.

6 months later, i get notice from IRS that i owe X amount. So i called them ( while chewing my fingernails to a nub lol ) and they said that was not allowed. I explained that my advisor had said it was. They said that he may have, but YOU signed your returns. Therefore, YOU bear the ultimate responsibility.

So i called him and told him all that happened.

That following year, i send him all my stuff to prep my taxes. He sends back for signature, but NOW has a "DISCLAIMER" for me to sign as well.

I called him and said im not paying you $550 AND signing a disclaimer waiving you from any liability and started doing my own.

 

[NoPartyMike]

I called him and said im not paying you $550 AND signing a disclaimer waiving you from any liability and started doing my own.

Yeah, that's crap. They can't offer a service and then waive all of their liability. It usually won't hold up in court, but they do it, because most people don't want to go through the hassle of a suit.

When we bought the house we live in now, we had a termite inspection included with the home inspection, signed off as clear. After winter, we found the house was infested with termites ($10k of damage). When I reported it to the inspector he sent me back the contract which basically waived his liability, limited reporting time to 3mo after the inspection, and limited the payout to the cost of the inspection, about $500.

I had to sue him and won, but the challenge was proving termites were there at the time of the inspection, 9mo past at the time, because our closing kept getting pushed back. Luckily there were termite constructs in his inspection photos, and a local termite treatment company and university bug scientist made statements that the damage was too extensive to be done in less than 9mo.

 

[FullMonte]

That following year, i send him all my stuff to prep my taxes. He sends back for signature, but NOW has a "DISCLAIMER" for me to sign as well.

I called him and said im not paying you $550 AND signing a disclaimer waiving you from any liability and started doing my own.

I wouldn't have done it either. I can understand a disclaimer saying that these tax forms were prepared to the best of my ability based on the documentation provided, and waiting him of any liability for incorrect or missing documentation...but that's about it.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

Interesting thread taking a look at the financial statements related to one of Trump's golf courses in Scotland (because the UK requires these documents to be public while the U.S. does not)



Apparently Trump transfers money into the entity operating the property without making any actual physical improvements; the value of the property for tax purposes magically rises by the exact amount of the money put into the company without any record of the money actually being expended; and then losses are claimed on the operations of the golf course. Smells of money laundering. And if these are the kinds of transactions being run through Trump entities subject to public disclosure, we can only imagine the transactions between all of the other Trump entities which are kept private.

 

[CoolBrees]

So I have been letting this marinate.

I have mentioned here before that I own a company. I have have a CFO and we use an outside accounting firm for our taxes.

There are literally hundreds of deductions that can be taken and it is true there are some huge deductions - especially depreciation -that can be taken advantage of to get your burden down to next to nothing compared to revenue.

However, haircuts don’t fly- I couldn’t use the full value of a business trip to Los Angeles because my wife and kids came and we went to Disneyland one day. Neither do properties that aren’t commercial. I own a building and a portion of two others. Part of claiming commercial depreciation I have to show lease agreements and/or listings for said property or show proof of commercial use - for me that is orders filled from that site.

The one that struck me however was his deduction when he pulled out of the Atlantic City casino as a Forfeiture of Asset. These rules are very clear. My company is struggling to survive during the pandemic. This was an option I looked at recently sadly. However, it was not possible as you can not ever profit in any way from that asset again once you forfeit. I am still owed money so I cannot claim that- I would have to let it go and I cannot square my creditors in that manner. The reason I mention this as the Times article said he used a ridiculously large write-off (I think $700 million) that he has been living off of for a while. But according to the article he received 5% of the new corp, once it sold. That is illegal and reduces that deduction, to something tiny like $3000 max. The law is very clear on this point, and for good reason. So you can’t walk away from your company and leave the bank or your partners holding the bag and then still collect any type of compensation despite the fact you walked away.

This would nullify the WHOLE refund, not just that portion. Again $700 million would be due plus interest and penalties- which could reasonably reach a billion. Which would make him the bigly-est tax cheat in history to my knowledge.

 

[efil4]

Interesting thread taking a look at the financial statements related to one of Trump's golf courses in Scotland (because the UK requires these documents to be public while the U.S. does not)



Apparently Trump transfers money into the entity operating the property without making any actual physical improvements; the value of the property for tax purposes magically rises by the exact amount of the money put into the company without any record of the money actually being expended; and then losses are claimed on the operations of the gulf course. Smells of money laundering. And if these are the kinds of transactions being run through Trump entities subject to public disclosure, we can only imagine the transactions between all of the other Trump entities which are kept private.

Whats interesting, domestically, is that then when its "assessment time" , he hires attorney to fight the tax assessors valuation, stating its too high.

This will all come to a head soon enough.

Feds dont need a treasure trove of indictments.

They only need one.

 

[MT15]

Interesting thread taking a look at the financial statements related to one of Trump's golf courses in Scotland (because the UK requires these documents to be public while the U.S. does not)



Apparently Trump transfers money into the entity operating the property without making any actual physical improvements; the value of the property for tax purposes magically rises by the exact amount of the money put into the company without any record of the money actually being expended; and then losses are claimed on the operations of the golf course. Smells of money laundering. And if these are the kinds of transactions being run through Trump entities subject to public disclosure, we can only imagine the transactions between all of the other Trump entities which are kept private.

I put the following in the other thread, I can’t find where I saw it now, though.

So I saw some interesting speculation about Trump buying all these golf courses. Supposedly this is a fairly recent interest for the Trump Organization. He met with some developers from a former Soviet state, can’t remember which one, who are famous for laundering organized crime money through golf courses. And all of a sudden Trump starts buying golf courses everywhere.

Weird, huh?

 

[MT15]

Since we are just killing time, it looks like somebody has an itchy trigger finger

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

I guess the NYT isn't quite done with the taxes yet.