[bootlegga]

Quote:

WASHINGTON – GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney paid a 14 percent effective income tax rate in 2010 after making $3 million in tax-deductible charitable donations and drawing most of his income from investments, according to a summary of Romney's 2010 tax form provided by his campaign.

Romney reported $21.7 million in income. He paid $3 million in federal taxes, slightly more than the $2.98 million he made in charitable donations. At least $1.5 million of his charitable donations went to the Mormon Church.

Of Romney's 2010 income, he noted a capital gain of $12.6 million, taxable interest of $3.3 million, ordinary dividends of $4.9 million and smaller sums of gains and losses on business income, refunds and other income.

In an estimate of his 2011 taxes, the Romney campaign said Romney would pay $3.23 million in federal tax on $20.9 million in total income. He said he would have itemized deductions of $5.7 million, including $4 million in charitable donations. About $2.6 million of the money that Romney gave to charity in 2011 went to the Mormon Church.

His 2010 return also showed that he had a financial account in Switzerland that was closed in 2010 and that he generated income from overseas investments. He also reported financial accounts in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands.

Democrats and Romney's GOP rivals have long called on the candidate to release his tax forms. During the Republican debate Monday night, after previously resisting, Romney said that he will make public two years of tax releases and no more. He said two years of forms "will satisfy the interest of the American people."

"I pay all the taxes that are legally required, not a dollar more," he said. "I'm proud of the fact that I pay a lot of taxes." His tax bill is significantly higher than the amount paid by most Americans.

The release of the tax information is unlikely to end a problem that has dogged Romney on the campaign trail. Rich Galen, a Republican strategist who used to advise Gingrich, said the Romney release puts him ahead of his rivals' disclosure, "so the number of years isn't the issue; the issue will be the sophisticated use of the existing tax code."

Romney, who would be one of the richest GOP nominees in history, has stumbled at times when he has tried to show sympathy for struggling Americans. He has joked about being unemployed and recently said he feared getting a pink slip early in his career. In his 2008 run for the nomination, the issue didn't register. Today, his rate has become a proxy for a broader debate about how to revamp the U.S. tax code.

Romney received about $500,000 in "author/speaking" fees, according to his tax filing.

The 2010 tax filing lists Romney's occupation as "executive" and his wife, Ann, is listed as a "homemaker." The address listed is in Belmont, Mass.

The former Massachusetts governor told reporters last week he pays a roughly 15 percent tax rate because most of his income results from investments, not a salary. The top rate on income from long-term capital gains and dividends is typically is 15 percent, considerably less than the top rate of 35 percent levied on regular salary income.

That preferential rate for investment income, which was instituted as part of the Bush tax cuts to spur investment, is the basic reason why Romney and his wife have an effective rate of around 15 percent.

On the stump, Romney talks frequently about providing certainty to middle-class families. He wants to eliminate taxes on dividends and capital gains for households that earn less than $200,000 a year.

The Romneys filed five forms in 2010 disclosing transactions relating to investment funds that could raise red flags with the IRS. The government requires taxpayers to report some transactions that have characteristics that might suggest the use of tax shelters, such as generation of a large loss.

A Romney spokesman said to his knowledge none of the transactions could "remotely be considered" tax shelters. The transactions were performed by third parties, not

Romney is worth between $84.8 million and $264.7 million, according to a financial disclosure form released by the Romney campaign last year when he entered the presidential campaign. Campaign aides have said the actual figure is near the higher end, between $190 million and $250 million.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01 ... -in-taxes/

[andyt]

40% of all corporate profits in the US come from the financial industry. No wonder they are in trouble. It used to be 15%. Wonder what it is for Canada? Romney is a perfect example of what's wrong. He's created nothing, just made money from money, and for that he pays a lower tax rate than working people.

[OnTheIce]

Damn I hate it when a guy runs a business, makes a bunch of money and invests it wisely, all while donating millions to charity.

What an asshole.

[xerxes]

No one has a problem that Romney is rich; it's more how about he stays rich and how he got rich.

He made most of his money by leveraging companies into debt, bankrupting them forcing them to close, and collecting the dividends. And he only pays 14%. Romney is the living embodiment of a system that favours the rich and keeps them rich at the expense of the middle class and the working poor.

[CDN_PATRIOT]

OnTheIce wrote:

Damn I hate it when a guy runs a business, makes a bunch of money and invests it wisely, all while donating millions to charity.

What an asshole.

OCCUPY ROMNEY!!





-J.

[DanSC]

Tax returns also show Joe Biden gave a whopping 1.4% of his income to charity in 2010.

http://harndenblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012 ... axman.html

[Unsound]

Why is Romney's, or Biden's, tax information anyone else's business? I would assume that if there are any irregularities with his tax payments the IRS would be on top of it, and the fact of an ongoing investigation would be newsworthy. Barring that it's nobody's freaking business! Imo

[DanSC]

Unsound wrote:

Why is Romney's, or Biden's, tax information anyone else's business? I would assume that if there are any irregularities with his tax payments the IRS would be on top of it, and the fact of an ongoing investigation would be newsworthy. Barring that it's nobody's freaking business! Imo

By law elected officials, at least on the federal level, have to release financial disclosure statements, as a measure to stop corruption. The trend for candidates and politicians to release tax returns started, oddly enough, when Mitt Romney's father George Romney ran for president in 1968.

It's not law; just tradition.

[Unsound]

I can understand them having to release statements to auditors or the IRS or whoever to cut down on corruption. That makes perfect sense.it's the part where their tax returns become part of the campaign that strikes me as... being a step too far.

I know it's become unfashionalble, especially in the states, to act like pulic figures have any right to privacy but I guess I'm just old fashioned like that.

[Mr_Canada]

"If Mitt Romney really believes 'Corporations are people, my friend', then Mitt Romney is a serial killer."
- Colbert SuperPAC

[Prof_Chomsky]

OnTheIce wrote:

Damn I hate it when a guy runs a business, makes a bunch of money and invests it wisely, all while donating millions to charity.

What an asshole.

Google how he made that money... much of it was largely the result of a loop hole introduced by Reagan in the 80's which allowed employee pension funds to be declared as a company asset during mergers and acquisitions. In one case alone Bain pocketed over 250 million in "fees" for effectively destroying a working company worth under 30 million if you left out the employee pension fund. Essentially they pocketed the entire (formerly protected) pension fund for thousands of workers that they EARNED over lifetimes of labour and left the workers with nothing.

... but I guess that's ok since he pays that exorbitant 15% tax rate and gives around the same amount to his church every year... and the country wouldn't have been better off at ALL had the workers kept their pensions, paid their standard 34% tax rates, and not had to go on social assistance paid for by every other person lucky enough to have a job...

[andyt]

Prof_Chomsky wrote:

OnTheIce wrote:

Damn I hate it when a guy runs a business, makes a bunch of money and invests it wisely, all while donating millions to charity.

What an asshole.

Google how he made that money... much of it was largely the result of a loop hole introduced by Reagan in the 80's which allowed employee pension funds to be declared as a company asset during mergers and acquisitions. In one case alone Bain pocketed over 250 million in "fees" for effectively destroying a working company worth under 30 million if you left out the employee pension fund. Essentially they pocketed the entire (formerly protected) pension fund for thousands of workers that they EARNED over lifetimes of labour and left the workers with nothing.

... but I guess that's ok since he pays that exorbitant 15% tax rate and gives around the same amount to his church every year... and the country wouldn't have been better off at ALL had the workers kept their pensions, paid their standard 34% tax rates, and not had to go on social assistance paid for by every other person lucky enough to have a job...

[OnTheIce]

Prof_Chomsky wrote:

OnTheIce wrote:

Damn I hate it when a guy runs a business, makes a bunch of money and invests it wisely, all while donating millions to charity.

What an asshole.

Google how he made that money... much of it was largely the result of a loop hole introduced by Reagan in the 80's which allowed employee pension funds to be declared as a company asset during mergers and acquisitions. In one case alone Bain pocketed over 250 million in "fees" for effectively destroying a working company worth under 30 million if you left out the employee pension fund. Essentially they pocketed the entire (formerly protected) pension fund for thousands of workers that they EARNED over lifetimes of labour and left the workers with nothing.

... but I guess that's ok since he pays that exorbitant 15% tax rate and gives around the same amount to his church every year... and the country wouldn't have been better off at ALL had the workers kept their pensions, paid their standard 34% tax rates, and not had to go on social assistance paid for by every other person lucky enough to have a job...

I'm not going to pretend I know the ins and outs of this guys life...because frankly I don't care but people all over the World take advantage of tax loopholes, but when some rich guy does it, he's the asshole.

[andyt]

You don't even know how to read. It's not a tax loop hole, it's a loophole that allows corporate raiders to drain the assets of a company, enrich themselves and put many people out of work.

Quote:

In one case alone Bain pocketed over 250 million in "fees" for effectively destroying a working company worth under 30 million if you left out the employee pension fund. Essentially they pocketed the entire (formerly protected) pension fund for thousands of workers that they EARNED over lifetimes of labour and left the workers with nothing.

How the hell does that benefit the country? How the hell does that build anything of value?

[Unsound]

OnTheIce wrote:

I'm not going to pretend I know the ins and outs of this guys life...because frankly I don't care but people all over the World take advantage of tax loopholes, but when some rich guy does it, he's the asshole.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that it's not the taking advantage of tax loopholes that has people calling him an asshole, it's the decimating of people's pension funds that seems objectionable.

I have no idea how accurate Prof. Chomsky is about how Romney made the money, but if things did go the way he says it is a pretty dickish thing.