Of course, why would you want to read about a truth that you don't like? It's much easier to stick to fantasy world, which would be fine if you didn't need to attack other people when reality and your fantasyland come into conflict.
Money earned on investments IS income. It is not taxed twice. In fact it probably is taxed less than if it was spent. Example 1: Mitt Romney pays a $500 tax on $1500 speaking fee. He then uses that residual $1000 to buy an investment. The investment increases in value, now it is worth $2000. Mitt sells the investment and pays another $150 in tax. Example 2: Mitt Romney pays a $500 tax on $1500 speaking fee. He then buys a guitar with his $1000 from PapaG. PapaG made the guitar from raw materials that cost him $150. Let's pretend Papa G pays a 1/3 income tax ($283) tax on the $850 he earns from Mitt. But why does PapaG have to pay the tax, since the IRS already collected $500 from the $1500? :MARIS61:
You're saying that Romney has NEVER paid normal tax rates. That is a total fabrication, and is almost as bad as Harry Reid's new delusion that Romney hasn't paid taxes in 10 years.
Yes, that's the tax code on investments. We've already been over this. What's your point? That Romney paid the appropriate taxes on his 2010 income? Big whoop.
Drama queen much? I'm saying that he likely has almost exclusively paid taxes at tax rates for long term capital gains. It's likely the truth and I don't think that point is at all controversial. The hedge fund tax loophole has been talked about a fair amount. This NPR link is to an old story, but it explains it pretty well: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127728787 Obviously, we can't know his effective tax rate unless he releases his tax returns, but given his line of business it's pretty much a lock. Edit: adding quote from NPR article: "Here's how it works at a hedge fund: An investment manager launches a fund and gets a lot of rich people or institutions to put up most of the money. The manager is paid, in large measure, by getting something like 20 percent of all the profits the fund makes. If it earns $100 million, the investors pay the manager $20 million. But instead of paying the top income tax rate of 35 percent on that amount, the manager pays just 15 percent. That's normally the tax rate reserved for capital gains income like the profits made on the sale of stocks or real estate."
It's clear to me you've said "almost exclusively" twice now. I would think that when Romney was manager of Bain, he was paid a nice hefty salary and paid big taxes on it. He likely paid taxes on his governor's salary, too. He may have a number of 1099 type incomes, such as speaking engagement fees. A couple of good links: http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjr...ns-would-be-as-shocking-as-gambling-at-ricks/ And http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2012/06/tobin-the-.html Ann Romney’s love of horses and Steven Colbert’s infatuation with Rafalca, one of her dressage horses, have created a buzz about horses, money, and taxes. Romney owns a one-third interest in Rafalca, and Rafalca will be competing, with her rider, Jan Ebeling, in the Olympic dressage event. In the most recent uproar, the Romneys are criticized for deducting $77,731 for the Romney’s share of Rafalca’s expenses. But here is the catch: Because of anti-abuse provisions contained in the Tax Code the Romney’s only actually deducted $49 on their return. Assuming the Romney’s are in the 35% tax bracket, the benefit to the Romneys was about $17. Not much worth working yourself into a lather about. (But jlprk and maris61, feel free to work yourselves into a lather).
So are we complaining about Romney paying less in taxes than your average work-a-day stiff because the tax code allows for it? Are we blaming him for following the rules? If we have a problem with the capital gains tax rate, why is that Romney's fault?
Yeah, I don't think that he did anything wrong (unless these tax returns show he was expensing stuff for Bain when he supposedly wasn't working there or that he wasn't paying taxes on foreign investments after the laws changed on that). Romney is in a Catch22. If he has nothing to hide, he should just produce the returns. Otherwhise it will never go away. If he is just ashamed of his wealth or the % tax he paid, it's better to produce it now and it will blow over before the election. If he has something to hide, then I guess it's better to not produce the records.
Because Romney and his ilk have rigged the tax code to benefit them. Yes, that's class warfare. And people like us are losing.
Whoops. There's provisions in the tax code to allow people like us to sell a home at a profit and use the profit to buy a new one - without being taxed on the gain. People like us are winning.
Income made in other countries is taxed in the US. Now, you can claim a credit on your US return for foreign taxes paid. But unless he paid enough foreign tax, he had to pay US taxes on his foreign income. Either way, he would have had to pay tax (or break the law).
Agreed. Kinda like the whole Obama birth certificate thing, though. It's funny that politicians spend all their time digging at each other, looking for their mistakes and opening scabs, rather than talking about how they can better serve the American Public.
Up to $500K of gain (or I think $250K if you're not married). So this part of the code definitely benefits the majority, rather than the 1%. But there's a lot in the code that benefits the wealthy.
So we're blaming Romney because of "his ilk"? Or are we saying that Romney was involved in the development of the tax code that taxes him at 15%? Otherwise, aren't you basically blaming him for being rich?
The heavy "almost exclusively" usage is because, like you said, he probably had a bunch of types of taxable income. That said, do you honestly think his speaking fees, salary, etc. were any where near his income that falls within the hedge fund bucket? If you think his salary during those years was hefty, think again. That's generally not how people make their money running those funds. Again, I'd be surprised if Romney really paid zero taxes like Reid is claiming. I'm guessing there are other things he'd rather not have disclosed. Interesting that links about the horse thing are out there. I read one article about it, but haven't heard anyone say anything about it. Guess I shouldn't be surprised because it's exactly the sort of thing politicos like to harp about.
Obviously, I can't speak for others, but I definitely don't think that low tax rate means he has done anything illegal. It's got to be at least a little politically awkward for him, but that should be pretty obvious. Heck, I guess I am a little annoyed that I'm paying a much higher tax rate than he is despite making a fraction of what he does, but isn't everyone? I don't think that loophole makes sense and I think it should be closed. Closing it won't come close to solving the debt, but every little step helps.
