Trump's Taxes

#51
#51
Biopsyman said:
Where is the outrage towards the govt in general on taxation imposed to its citizens...
Click to expand...

This!

As a small/medium size business we employ 1 full time CPA and have another contract firm. If we had a simple flat tax without ANY deductions we could get rid of those wastes of flesh and be happy paying our fair share.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#52
#52
Biopsyman said:
Where is the outrage towards the govt in general on taxation imposed to its citizens...
Click to expand...

Without taxes, how do we support our military? How do we pay the inflated salaries of politicians? How do we maintain political ties around the world? Taxes are a necessary evil. Do I like it? No. Do I understand it? Yes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#53
#53
Weezer said:
I don't like that he's escaping paying taxes, even if it is legal. But the difference between Trump and those he's referring to is they take money from the govt. Trump doesn't need taxpayer money to make a living.
Click to expand...

If you've ever taken a deduction for a charitable contribution, healthcare expenses, child tax credit etc etc etc.... You've "escaped" paying taxes too.

This is a ridiculous controversy built on wealth envy and class warfare that Democrats have been using for 40 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#54
#54
tumscalcium said:
Don't forget about her "foundation" and who she deals with. That's far more interesting.
Click to expand...

Yeah...Clinton Foundation quid pro quo in plutonium contracts while Secretary of State feels slightly more problematic than Trump taking legal tax deductions - among a laundry list of other things
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#55
#55
golfballs said:
Those who want to raise taxes on everyone are free to contribute more if they so wish.

And it's not hypocritical to criticize the system while also taking full advantage of it. Hate the game not the player.
Click to expand...

That would be fine ... if that is the position he had taken over the last ten years. It is not. His position has been that it is wrong for OTHERS to pay low taxes by taking advantage of the tax laws. That even if legal, it is at some level morally wrong to make money and pay no taxes. He has even said it is worse when big corporations or the very wealthy do it.

And now it certainly appears that he has engaged in the EXACT behavior that, even if legal, he says is wrong to do.

For others, anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#56
#56
lawgator1 said:
That would be fine ... if that is the position he had taken over the last ten years. It is not. His position has been that it is wrong for OTHERS to pay low taxes by taking advantage of the tax laws. That even if legal, it is at some level morally wrong to make money and pay no taxes. He has even said it is worse when big corporations or the very wealthy do it.

And now it certainly appears that he has engaged in the EXACT behavior that, even if legal, he says is wrong to do.

For others, anyway.
Click to expand...

Why do you care more about his tax returns with legal breaks than you do about our national security issues with your queen?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#57
#57
lawgator1 said:
That would be fine ... if that is the position he had taken over the last ten years. It is not. His position has been that it is wrong for OTHERS to pay low taxes by taking advantage of the tax laws. That even if legal, it is at some level morally wrong to make money and pay no taxes. He has even said it is worse when big corporations or the very wealthy do it.

And now it certainly appears that he has engaged in the EXACT behavior that, even if legal, he says is wrong to do.

For others, anyway.
Click to expand...
Finally, an unbiased opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#58
#58
I don't see how it's morally wrong to lose your ass and not pay taxes on said ass losing. If you lost your job would you expect to pay taxes on the money you should have made? If you lost $20k on a stock trade should you pay tax on the loss?
 
#59
#59
lawgator1 said:
That would be fine ... if that is the position he had taken over the last ten years. It is not. His position has been that it is wrong for OTHERS to pay low taxes by taking advantage of the tax laws. That even if legal, it is at some level morally wrong to make money and pay no taxes. He has even said it is worse when big corporations or the very wealthy do it.

And now it certainly appears that he has engaged in the EXACT behavior that, even if legal, he says is wrong to do.

For others, anyway.
Click to expand...

So the argument then is that he's a hypocrite?
 
#60
#60
The logical conclusion you have to buy into is he'd be a more qualified candidate if he paid more than he was required to.

In other words, they're saying that he'd be a better guy if he were just too stupid to follow the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#61
#61
GAVol said:
The logical conclusion you have to buy into is he'd be a more qualified candidate if he paid more than he was required to.

In other words, they're saying that he'd be a better guy if he were just too stupid to follow the law.
Click to expand...

Which I'm sure Clinton did, right? Added a little bonus to that treasury check every year. Well except when they were broke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#62
#62
lawgator1 said:
That would be fine ... if that is the position he had taken over the last ten years. It is not. His position has been that it is wrong for OTHERS to pay low taxes by taking advantage of the tax laws. That even if legal, it is at some level morally wrong to make money and pay no taxes. He has even said it is worse when big corporations or the very wealthy do it.

And now it certainly appears that he has engaged in the EXACT behavior that, even if legal, he says is wrong to do.

For others, anyway.
Click to expand...

You work in a profession where you take advantage of lawfulness vs a subjective morality all the time. It's not nearly the dilemma that you're pretending to portray it to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#64
#64
GAVol said:
The logical conclusion you have to buy into is he'd be a more qualified candidate if he paid more than he was required to.

In other words, they're saying that he'd be a better guy if he were just too stupid to follow the law.
Click to expand...
You're really bringing it today!
 
#65
#65
volinbham said:
So the argument then is that he's a hypocrite?
Click to expand...


Yes. Well, that and that it seems utterly inconsistent with the entire "I'm for the little guy and against a rigged system" candidacy.

Was watching some Fox this weekend and consensus amongst generally conservative commentators (other than true believers and total GOP mouthpieces) was that Trump's campaign is guilty of malpractice. That he should have released the returns in May, taken a few lumps for paying very low or even no rate, and be done with it.

Now it's an albatross around his neck. Clinton is going to pummel him about this in ads, for the next month. I guarantee she is going to point it out in the next two debates, and harshly. And what's he going to say? The audit excuse again? Everyone knows that is crap and just makes him look that much more like he's dodging it because he knows it will hurt him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#66
#66
GAVol said:
You work in a profession where you take advantage of lawfulness vs a subjective morality all the time. It's not nearly the dilemma that you're pretending to portray it to be.
Click to expand...


But I'm not asking anyone to vote for me for anything. I'm not complaining about a bunch of other people doing EXACTLY what I'm doing. I'm not whining that its wrong for people to take advantage of the tax laws, then hide behind them myself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#67
#67
I think one negative conclusion that you can draw is why would Trump change the tax code if it currently benefits him? He likes the way it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#68
#68
n_huffhines said:
I think one negative conclusion that you can draw is why would Trump change the tax code if it currently benefits him? He likes the way it is.
Click to expand...

Trump or any other POTUS can't/isn't going to drastically change the tax code. Congress isn't giving up that amount of power over the citizenry, and yes the tax code is more about power than revenue collection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#69
#69
n_huffhines said:
I think one negative conclusion that you can draw is why would Trump change the tax code if it currently benefits him? He likes the way it is.
Click to expand...


He can't change it anyway. Congress does that and there is no way the big money donors to those guys will ever let them tinker with those tax breaks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#70
#70
lawgator1 said:
He can't change it anyway. Congress does that and there is no way the big money donors to those guys will ever let them tinker with those tax breaks.
Click to expand...

That's not why they won't change it.
 
#71
#71
golfballs said:
Those who want to raise taxes on everyone are free to contribute more if they so wish.

And it's not hypocritical to criticize the system while also taking full advantage of it. Hate the game not the player.
Click to expand...

Is it hypocritical to criticize others for doing the same thing he's doing?
 

Attachments

  • 1.PNG
    1.PNG
    68.7 KB · Views: 3
  • 2.PNG
    2.PNG
    20 KB · Views: 1
  • 3.PNG
    3.PNG
    21.8 KB · Views: 1
  • 4.PNG
    4.PNG
    19.8 KB · Views: 1
  • 5.PNG
    5.PNG
    63.8 KB · Views: 1
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#72
#72
hog88 said:
Trump or any other POTUS can't/isn't going to drastically change the tax code. Congress isn't giving up that amount of power over the citizenry, and yes the tax code is more about power than revenue collection.
Click to expand...

Yep. Nothing changes...

He hasn't done anything illegal but it does show his hypocrisy after blasting others doing the same thing... He'd have been better off getting out ahead of this months ago.

Speculation is worse than the truth in this case - no reasonable person is going to fault him for following the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#73
#73
Septic said:
Yep. Nothing changes...

He hasn't done anything illegal but it does show his hypocrisy after blasting others doing the same thing... He'd have been better off getting out ahead of this months ago.

Speculation is worse than the truth in this case - no reasonable person is going to fault him for following the law.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go that far or qualify what is a reasonable person.

Yes, he should have put this to rest immediately after getting the nomination.
 
#74
#74
This is interesting

...he would have been tax-free because of a $15,818,562 loss reported on Line 11 of the return under “Rental real estate, royalties, partnerships, S corporations, trusts, etc.” It looks to me that this loss reflects the outrageous, special tax break that real estate developers that people like Trump can get, but that the rest of us can’t.

...people who qualify as real estate developers or managers can use depreciation deductions to offset non-real-estate income. But people who don’t qualify for this special treatment can’t do that.

Now, to the $900-plus million loss reported by the New York Times — which vastly exceeds any cash losses that Trump would have suffered in the collapse of his casino-hotel-airline empire, which fell apart in the early 1990s and resulted in four bankruptcies.

I don’t understand how Trump, who had very little of his own cash invested in his projects in the 1990s but did personally guarantee part of their debt, could end up with tax losses of that magnitude. They’re almost certainly paper losses rather than out-of-pocket losses.
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...the-916-million-loss-everyones-talking-about/
 
#75
#75
hog88 said:
I wouldn't go that far or qualify what is a reasonable person.

Yes, he should have put this to rest immediately after getting the nomination.
Click to expand...

?

Are you making an argument that him following the law could somehow be construed as unreasonable?

Look, you know me - I'd be the first to pile on Trump for crapping the bed. But outside of the hypocrisy of his tweets - he's not done anything any of us wouldn't have done.

I still maintain however, he is at least partially culpable for the deaths in Benghazi.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top