NY Times: Trump paid $750 in US income taxes in 2016, 2017

[Aunt Antifa]

You really don't understand how buying mortgaged properties works, do you?

Men always think these pick up lines work.

 

[can2man]

Hook, line, and sinker.

 

[trouble13]

Do you have a source for this information, or is it merely your opinion?

Are you really gonna sit here and pretend like you don't know that it is illegal to release someones tax records without their permission?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[JMR]

Are you really gonna sit here and pretend like you don't know that it is illegal to release someones tax records without their permission?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

No, because it's not.

the Supreme Court has said that journalists are free to publish truthful information on matters of public concern notwithstanding laws to the contrary as long as they did nothing illegal in obtaining the information.

As long as the Times did not steal the documents, they are free to publish.

 

[Helix]

i figured that he was a slimy tax dodger. however, this is sort of above and beyond. the debt worries me a lot more, though, because it might partially explain some things.

 

[trouble13]

No, because it's not.

As long as the Times did not steal the documents, they are free to publish.

I never accused the times of breaking any law. The person who gave them the information broke the law. The times abused the privilege given to the press by using it in an attempt to politically damage someone they do not like with information that has no real news value. The NYT has lowered itself to mimicking a supermarket tabloid.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[HenryChinaski]

So in 2016 Trump paid a porn actress 173x the amount than what he paid the federal government that year.. interesting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JMR]

I never accused the times of breaking any law. The person who gave them the information broke the law. The times abused the privilege given to the press by using it in an attempt to politically damage someone they do not like with information that has no real news value. The NYT has lowered itself to mimicking a supermarket tabloid.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

The Times was given information of great interest to the American public, and published a well researched article. These reporters have been investigating Trump's tax schemes for years. It is totally absurd that you claim it has "no real news value" That is so hyper partisan as to be be completely ridiculous.

 

[trouble13]

The Times was given information of great interest to the American public, and published a well researched article. These reporters have been investigating Trump's tax schemes for years. It is totally absurd that you claim it has "no real news value" That is so hyper partisan as to be be completely ridiculous.

Its no more newsworthy than typical run of the mill tabloid gossip. Y0u have no more of a right to see his confidential financial records than I have to see Bidens confidential medical records.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[OpportunityCost]

Men always think these pick up lines work.

So no response to the part of the post that required you to think, okay.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

So no response to the part of the post that required you to think, okay.

Didn’t bother. Want to summarize?

 

[OpportunityCost]

Didn’t bother. Want to summarize?

You had your chance to make a substantive response, you passed. Go back and actually read the post instead of wanting a crib sheet.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

And where is this document?

The New York Times has it.

I don't think I saw it on here.

You didn't. That's because the New York Times has not released it yet.

Do you have the document?

Do I look like the New York Times?

When will you share it.

As soon after the New York Times releases it as I have a copy of it.

So far we just have your claims.

The claims are being made by the New York Times. Do I look like the New York Times?

Collusion, tax evasion, where is the proof of either?

Obviously you are blithly ignorant of what my position regarding any "collusion" between the Russians (or any other rational government) and Mr. Trump are.

As far as "tax evasion" is concerned, I haven't made any claims regarding that at all. If you have a beef with what the New York Times wrote in that regard, contact the New York Times.

 

[Hatuey]

Trump is a poor man pretending to be rich, massively endebted to banks, and whoever is behind them, but GOP cultists all want us to talk about Soros, and how Obama was a super secret Muslim terrorist.

Kind of undisputable.




------------------------

Thought had by person at the White House: If you can remember, man, woman, car, camera, TV, you are fit to lead a country and no one has anything to worry about

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

I'm a proponent of a flat tax.

The "Flat Tax" is a great idea in principle.

However, before I can agree with what you are a proponent of I'd have to have answers to a few questions:

1. What would the "Flat Tax" rate be?
   
   
2. Would it be levied on ALL income streams REGARDLESS of nature (and, if not, what income streams would be exempted from it or taxed at a different rate)?
   
   
3. If any income stream would be exempted from it, why?
   
   
4. If any income stream would be taxed at a lower rate, why and what would that lower rate be?
   
   
5. Would it be levied on ALL income REGARDLESS of amount (and, if not, what amount of income would not be subjected to the tax)?
   
   
6. If the taxation would result in a person who was earning (before taxation) enough to be above the poverty line ending up (after taxation) below the poverty line, what you do about that?
   
   
7. If a person was "living on welfare" paid by a state government, should those payments be taxed away by the federal government (and, if so, why)?

I'm sure that you will have absolutely no difficulty in answering any of the above questions and I look forward to you doing so shortly.

 

[JasperL]

What no one is talking about is the NYT hit piece from un-named sources proved Trump was telling the truth when he said he could not release his tax returns because they were indeed under an audit.

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2020...as-telling-the-truth-about-being-under-audit/

There's no law or any other barrier to someone releasing tax returns while under audit. And the issue involves a claim from about a decade ago, and isn't relevant to more recent returns, except that a big amount might carry through to them, but that's easily explained.

It turns out Trump took advantage of Obama administration loopholes to end up with a massive refund. So who was the dumbass in the Obama administration that issued Trump a massive refund?

The way it works is you file your return and the IRS generally considers it accurate. They then select returns for audit, and challenge items. That's what happened here. There was no "dumbass" processing requests for refunds - they did the job as required and as is typical.

 

[Hatuey]

What no one is talking about is the NYT hit piece from un-named sources proved Trump was telling the truth when he said he could not release his tax returns because they were indeed under an audit.

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2020...as-telling-the-truth-about-being-under-audit/

It turns out Trump took advantage of Obama administration loopholes to end up with a massive refund. So who was the dumbass in the Obama administration that issued Trump a massive refund?

... Michelle Malkin? Really?

No. Just no.


------------------------

Thought had by person at the White House: If you can remember, man, woman, car, camera, TV, you are fit to lead a country and no one has anything to worry about

 

[JasperL]

Its disturbing to me that a publication like the NYTs are willing to report on an illegally obtained confidential finacial document for the sole purpose of politically embarrassing someone. This is not how the powers of the press were intended to be used. People should reject their publication until they stop abusing the power of the press.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

LOL, that's funny.

 

[JasperL]

The documents were not legally obtained by the person who gave them to the times. They know that. They chose to publish the story that has no news worthy value. What they did is legal but it also an abuse of power by them

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

I think it's more accurate to say that the leak was almost surely illegal.

The country has been chasing these tax returns for years, and Trump has promised for years to release them. To claim that someone reporting on about 20 years of returns that Trump has gone to the Supreme court to keep hidden isn't legitimately newsworthy just isn't a serious position. It's also not an abuse of power.

We all know the rules change when the target is a Republican, but give us a break here. Imagine if Fox News obtained the missing 30k EMAILS!!! in September of 2016. There is a ZERO percent chance Fox would have sat on that story and a ZERO percent chance a single conservative anywhere would have demanded such an action, and it doesn't matter what the emails contained, and there's a ZERO percent chance any conservative would have claimed publishing stories based on those missing emails was an abuse of the power of the press.

 

[JasperL]

Not newsworthy enough to justify committing crimes to obtain that information.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Accepting leaked information is not a crime. To be sure whoever leaked that information to the NYT might face charges - and hopefully they got a lawyer and did that cognizant of the risks - but there is NO hint the NYT committed any crime by receiving and reporting on that information. News outlets, the best ones, report on information illegally leaked all the time. It's one way those in power are held accountable, when someone on the inside takes a risk and leaks that information. That's a good thing in a free society.

 

[JasperL]

Its no more newsworthy than typical run of the mill tabloid gossip. Y0u have no more of a right to see his confidential financial records than I have to see Bidens confidential medical records.

That's just hilarious nonsense.

 

[NWRatCon]

I was trying to quantify Trump's contribution to the US treasury. I think it's about one toilet seat for AF1, an hour of a secret service detail or a BJ from Stormy Daniels. Oh wait, that last would be a personal expense. At least Bill's was a Freebie.

 

[NWRatCon]

Accepting leaked information is not a crime. To be sure whoever leaked that information to the NYT might face charges - and hopefully they got a lawyer and did that cognizant of the risks - but there is NO hint the NYT committed any crime by receiving and reporting on that information. News outlets, the best ones, report on information illegally leaked all the time. It's one way those in power are held accountable, when someone on the inside takes a risk and leaks that information. That's a good thing in a free society.

The NYT indicated that the entity that disclosed it had legal authority to possess it.

 

[JasperL]

The NYT indicated that the entity that disclosed it had legal authority to possess it.

Right, but I can't imagine a scenario where the person who legally possesses that information can legally leak it to the NYT or anyone else. I prepare tax returns and have all kinds of tax data on my computer for lots of taxpayers, legally in my possession, but if I pdf a return and send it to the local paper without being directed to by the client, I've committed a crime.

Just an aside but the firm I used to work for prepared Henry Kissinger's tax return for one year I know of. It was BY FAR the most guarded information in the firm, and a friend prepared it, and I still kid her about just giving us a little hint about how that guy made his money. I know there had to be some big time stuff that he didn't want known because doing high profile people was routine at that firm, but I never saw anything even approaching the precautions taken with his tax information...

 

[truthatallcost]

From The New York Times
(via Associate Press)

Trump paid $750 in US income taxes in 2016, 2017​

President Donald Trump paid just $750 in federal income taxes the year he ran for president and in his first year in the White House, according to a report Sunday in The New York Times.

Trump, who has fiercely guarded his tax filings and is the only president in modern times not to make them public, paid no federal income taxes in 10 of the past 15 years.

The details of the tax filings complicate Trump’s description of himself as a shrewd and patriotic businessman, revealing instead a series of financial losses and income from abroad that could come into conflict with his responsibilities as president. The president’s financial disclosures indicated he earned at least $434.9 million in 2018, but the tax filings reported a $47.4 million loss.

The tax filings also illustrate how a reputed billionaire could pay little to nothing in taxes, while someone in the middle class could pay substantially more than him. Roughly half of Americans pay no income taxes, primarily because of how low their incomes are. But IRS figures indicate that the average tax filer paid roughly $12,200 in 2017, about 16 times more than what the president paid.

COMMENT:-

​

You van bet your bottom dollar that Mr. Trump paid more than $75 to have his income tax prepared.​

The system works to benefit the 1%, and Trump took advantage of that, as every other weatlthy does. Warren Buffett talked about not paying taxes like 20 years ago. I'm not happy that Trump pays less in taxes than I do, but he's one of many.