• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Romney's Taxes

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Just heard on tv that Romney can later go back and amend his 201 tax return and claim the tax deductions he didn't take now.

Gotta wonder if Mitt the Twit doesn't realize that energizing his base even more doesn't mean they can vote for him more than once...



🙄
 
nehalem256 said:
Assuming their is no fraud in his returns I fail to see what his tax returns have to do with his ability to be President.

Is Romney such an awesome candidate that his tax returns are all liberals can find to complain about? 😀
Click to expand...

No there's quite a rich field of items we can choose from to complain about.
 
Last edited:
CPA said:
I just don't get the call for his actual returns. When did this become the premise in which to earn someone's vote? 20 years for Romney. Are you kidding me, who the hell saves 20 years of their tax returns. It's a stupid argument.

That said, 30% to charities. Can't wait for the first person to either 1) complain 30% isn't enough or 2) he used charitable giving to get out of paying taxes.
Click to expand...

As someone of your vocation would know, some "charities" are in fact tax shelters. I'm not making any claims about the matter, but that's the most likely one I see on the horizon.
 
Jeffg010 said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxpayer_Relief_Act_of_1997
Read up Clinton signed off on the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997
"The top capital gains rate fell from 28% to 20%. The 15% bracket was lowered to 10%."
Click to expand...
Oh, I understand the mechanisms by which both Clinton and Bush lowered capital gains, and economically it makes sense, spurring the economy by encouraging investment. From a government perspective it probably makes sense as well, as government probably takes in more tax revenue. But is it fair morally?

This is an especially important question because so much of what is taxed as capital gains is a zero sum game; one entity makes money, one entity loses money, with no actual increase in societal investment. Another chunk consists of stock options; a contractual right to buy stock at a specified discount from current market price, which is exercised simply by filing some paperwork, not only has no actual increase in societal investment but no risk as well. Then there's the Schumer exemption . . .

I have no problem with preferential rates for long term investments where one's own money is at risk, but other than that, seems to me that income is income is income and should be taxed thusly - preferably equally on every dollar above the federal poverty line, or on every dollar above the federal poverty line plus some small number of exemptions.

I also have no problem with Mitt Romney - he's following the rules and also being quite generous. But I think the current tax code is neither optimum for business nor fair.
 
MrColin said:
As someone of your vocation would know, some "charities" are in fact tax shelters. I'm not making any claims about the matter, but that's the most likely one I see on the horizon.
Click to expand...

I'm curious. How are charities tax shelters, and for whom would they be a shelter?

Fern
 
The Tom Cruise movie The Firm was on TNT recently.

Reminds me of scene where Gene Hackman and Tom Cruise are in Caymen Islands talking to potential new client. Hackman character asks him how to optimize results for client, Cruise character says something like aren't you worried about getting audited, and Hackman character says I don't give a darn about getting audited, we just better not lose to IRS.

Seems to capture Romney's thinking perfectly, I'm guessing (he admitted to Brian Williams that he has already been audited).
 
Last edited:
MrColin said:
As someone of your vocation would know, some "charities" are in fact tax shelters. I'm not making any claims about the matter, but that's the most likely one I see on the horizon.
Click to expand...
You're either unable or unwilling to think clearly. Money donated to charity comes off your taxable income, not your tax liability. Donate a dollar, save the fraction of that dollar the government would have taken. Donating to charity is always a net loss; they simply are not tax shelters.
 
Romney pays little taxes: "He's just following the tax code! Good for him!"
Anyone else pays little-to-no taxes: "Those damned lazy welfare queens! They need more skin in the game!"
 
Romney's a tool, a snake, a swindler. Also, i lulz at all the hubbub over his tax returns like they fucking matter at all.
 
berzerker60 said:
Romney pays little taxes: "He's just following the tax code! Good for him!"
Anyone else pays little-to-no taxes: "Those damned lazy welfare queens! They need more skin in the game!"
Click to expand...

Riiiiight. He paid almost $2,000,000.00 in taxes and that's "little taxes"?

Fern
 
Now the line from the left is he didn't deduct enough! Talk about the insanity in the mind of the liberal.

This is brilliant by Romney, there is no way to bash him over this issue with that much charity. He is putting his money where his mouth is.
 
Last edited:
spidey07 said:
Now the line from the left is he didn't deduct enough! Talk about the insanity in the mind of the liberal.

This is brilliant by Romney, there is no way to bash him over this issue with that much charity. He is putting his money where his mouth is.
Click to expand...

Wrong, as usual.

Romney: "I don’t pay more than are legally due and frankly if I had paid more than are legally due I don’t think I’d be qualified to become president. I’d think people would want me to follow the law and pay only what the tax code requires."

Yet, that is exactly what he did. He paid more than legally due in order to make it above 13%.

So he is disqualifying himself.

The man is going off the rails, and spidey mistakes it for brilliance.

-drunk-1317811540.jpg
 
Last edited:
a777pilot said:
Is that not giving to a charitable organization?
Click to expand...

Don't confuse the LDS church with a legit charity such as MSF. The Mormon church is not a charity, even if they may do some charitable works. Their purpose is to spread their religion, not charitable works. The LDS church is a very wealthy business-like organization.


The tithe are used to fund their missionary program, building/maintain churches, church educational system and billion dollar malls. They also funded the campaign such as support of prop 8 in California.


I would guess a tiny percentage of the tithes they receive are actually used for legit charity work. Nobody knows, since there is no transparency in their fiances. Propselyzing is not charity.
 
smullet said:
Don't confuse the LDS church with a legit charity such as MSF. The Mormon church is not a charity, even if they may do some charitable works. Their purpose is to spread their religion, not charitable works. The LDS church is a very wealthy business-like organization.


The tithe are used to fund their missionary program, building/maintain churches, church educational system and billion dollar malls. They also funded the campaign such as support of prop 8 in California.


I would guess a tiny percentage of the tithes they receive are actually used for legit charity work. Nobody knows, since there is no transparency in their fiances. Propselyzing is not charity.
Click to expand...

Or, how to make political spending tax deductible under the guise of charity, either "giving" to religious organizations or institutes/foundations.
 
HomerJS said:
So explain how Romney can go into a company close it, fire the workers take away their pensions and healthcare and make a profit?
Click to expand...

So where would the profit be? The purchase price of a company will be higher than the amount of money they would have in the bank at the time.
 
Only a loonie retuerner would be mad at someone for doing the same thing they do - follow the tax law. Oh you loonie returners, when are you going to realize how silly you are being?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top