Romney's Taxes

[Fern]

Liability lies with the filer, not the preparer in almost all cases.

I know of what I speak: The taxpayer is liable for the proper amount of taxes. (S)he will also be liable for any interest due on late payment, the law says the IRS cannot waive interest.

Penalties, OTOH, can be waived. Penalties can be waived by the IRS if they find that the taxpayer exercised "Good Faith and Due Diligence". So, if the taxpayer hires licensed/qualified professionals and provides them all data the taxpayer is virtually guaranteed to have the IRS waive the penalties.

Everybody, and I mean everybody (especially the IRS) knows that tax law is highly complicated. Non-professionals are generally not expected to be competent in tax law. Accordingly, the "Due Diligence" part means seeking out professionals who ARE suppose to be competent. It's simply not seen as fair to penalize taxpayers for their "Good Faith" reliance on paid professionals.

(The taxpayer return preparer can, however, be heavily penalized. An awful lot of serious penalties for preparers have been added over recent years.)

Fern

 

[Thump553]

Isn't nearly all of this discussion irrelevant? It seems to arise from a certain poster's trollish misuse of the term penalty when describing the hypothethical damages resulting from a temporary overpayment of taxes. No one contends that Romney's calculated manipulation of his 2011 taxes would subject him to any IRS penalties, I don't think.

 

[cybrsage]

So he pays them to lie and cheat and he is off the hook.

Sorry I don't buy that. He is probably presented a slew of tax strategies and has to make the decision. He is a politician, he does not always go with the most money saved, as we have already seen. But who cares really.

You should not buy it, because professional tax firms do not accept money to cheat - it is the fastest way to find themselves out of business.

 

[xBiffx]

Isn't nearly all of this discussion irrelevant? It seems to arise from a certain poster's trollish misuse of the term penalty when describing the hypothethical damages resulting from a temporary overpayment of taxes. No one contends that Romney's calculated manipulation of his 2011 taxes would subject him to any IRS penalties, I don't think.

Grow a pair, call me by name.

No one is talking about Romney's relationship with the IRS but rather his relationship with his tax preparer. I don't believe his dealings with the IRS were ever under question in this thread.

But then again, I don't expect you do understand given your reading comprehension skills and inability to understand language so far.

You suck at trolling by the way.

 

[dank69]

Explain to me how it's relevant, pls.

He's a guy with an enormously complicated tax return that has hordes of professionals doing it - not him.

Obama put a guy in charge in charge of the Treas Dept (and the IRS) who couldn't prepare his own far simpler tax return and actually cheated to pay lower taxes.

The only two things I think can be reasonably inferred from Romney's tax return circumstances are:

1. He knows our laws are ridiculously complicated and can't do his own tax return, in which case he understands frustrations in dealing with our laws. Or,

2. He understands the laws wonderfully and is able to take advantage of them, in which case he qualified.

In any case, Romney is not a tax professional of any sort. He will be advocating reforms but he won't be writing any bill or part of one, not in the least.

Fern

It is relevant because a major platform for Democrats is that the rich are not taxed enough and a major platform for Republicans is that the rich are taxed too much. Now enter Romney who refuses to provide his past tax returns like every other president in modern times to prove his claim that he has never paid less than 13% and a 2011 tax return showing he didn't take all the deductions available to him presumably to keep his rate above the 13% he claims. How can Republicans run on a platform of maintaining the Bush tax cuts for the rich when their presidential nominee refuses to even provide documents showing how much tax someone like him pays? I'm not sure why I have to connect these dots for you.

 

[dank69]

Grow a pair, call me by name.

No one is talking about Romney's relationship with the IRS but rather his relationship with his tax preparer. I don't believe his dealings with the IRS were ever under question in this thread.

But then again, I don't expect you do understand given your reading comprehension skills and inability to understand language so far.

You suck at trolling by the way.

The only reason the relationship with his tax preparer is even being discussed is because the ultimate fucktard of these forums brought it up thinking it was somehow relevant to the conversation. It is not.

 

[Fern]

It is relevant because a major platform for Democrats is that the rich are not taxed enough and a major platform for Republicans is that the rich are taxed too much. Now enter Romney who refuses to provide his past tax returns like every other president in modern times to prove his claim that he has never paid less than 13% and a 2011 tax return showing he didn't take all the deductions available to him presumably to keep his rate above the 13% he claims.

You might have a point if he was a Democrat. He would look foolish bitching about low taxes for the rich and then availing himself of every technicality to achieve low rates for himself.

As far as the Repub assertion that rich people are taxed too high, I've never heard any of them claim that very wealthy people with huge investment-type income are paying high rates. Everybody knows what the rates are. Some do want LTCG not taxed etc, but that is different from pretending the rates are actually high.

How can Republicans run on a platform of maintaining the Bush tax cuts for the rich when their presidential nominee refuses to even provide documents showing how much tax someone like him pays? I'm not sure why I have to connect these dots for

Romney's tax rate of just over 15% (compared to taxable income) is right where everyone should expect it to be. (The reason it's down to 13% is only because he's generous with his money and makes a ton of charitable contributions.)

The inclusion of Romney's personal tax situation into the discussion does nothing but confuse the issue. This, I think, is on purpose. The discussion is being directed away from tax rates on earned income and profits from business activity that are taxed as ordinary income. In some areas, the fed/state/local/medicare tax can bring the marginal rate to 50% or more. Economist agree there is a point where high rates provide unwanted motivation (motivation to defer, to cheat etc.) or produce disincentives to produce more income. They disagree though as to what that % is.

Romney's tax return has nothing to do with any of that.

His return does have something to do with a discussion on the low rates for (qualified) dividends and LTCG. But his return shows us nothing we don't already know about this issue/discussion.

Fern

 

[xBiffx]

The only reason the relationship with his tax preparer is even being discussed is because the ultimate fucktard of these forums brought it up thinking it was somehow relevant to the conversation. It is not.

Please explain how its not relevant to determine who decided how his tax forms were to be filled out? Oh right, you just want to sit here and muck it up and not actually talk about anything pertinent to the thread.

Duh-version 5.0.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Pretty sad to see the conservative hacks like Fern go to such extreme measures to defend a man who is OBVIOUSLY hiding something awful in his returns prior to '10.

There's no other logical explanation for why he'd refuse to release them. It's hurting him in the polls and ruining his chance of winning the election. There's no positive to not releasing them if he's squeaky clean.

 

[mshan]

Just saw this segment on tv about Homer Simpson voting for Mitt Romney (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArC7XarwnWI).

One quip was Homer Simpson, after voting for Romney, then getting to see his taxes, then it says government paid Romney back taxes for 5 years.

Is this actually possible (presumably personal, not corporate tax return)?

I understand capital gains losses carried from year to year, but actually having IRS pay taxes back to Romney in way I think some corporations did?

Also saw yesterday that even if Romney took Swiss bank amnesty, it wouldn't show up on 2009 tax returns. It is apparently a different form called fbar amnesty.

 

[Jhhnn]

Also saw yesterday that even if Romney took Swiss bank amnesty, it wouldn't show up on 2009 tax returns. It is apparently a different form called fbar amnesty.

It is a different form, but any taxes, interest or penalties due would show on the tax return. The fbar just reveals an offshore account, while the tax return enumerates it. Obviously, penalties & interest on previously unreported income would be large.

The amnesty program was such a big hit that it's on a comeback tour-

http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small...of-Foreign-Bank-and-Financial-Accounts-(FBAR)

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Besides derailing the shit out of this thread, I am not sure what you point is or what you are trying to prove. I have already said, multiple times, politicians lie.

Stay on topic, or make another thread. But what would be the point of that, you are regurgitating garbage, as always.

Excuse me, did you even read the article? You pointed out and have been ranting about how Rowney's lies are not important, and I am pointing out yet another total outright lie that is 180deg opposite from his previous position.

He lied multiple times about his taxes, and it shows he is an idiot for saying multiple contradictory lies in a short period of time. This is another case of that.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Besides derailing the shit out of this thread, I am not sure what you point is or what you are trying to prove. I have already said, multiple times, politicians lie.

Stay on topic, or make another thread. But what would be the point of that, you are regurgitating garbage, as always.

Oh, just to make it easier for you, here is showing Romney lying about his taxes...you can't complain about that can you?

Link

You can google this, it is all public record.

So there, in black and white, Romney had to admit to lying on his taxes. Big Oooops!

So when he says nothing is wrong with his taxes now, why should anyone believe him when he himself has admitted he has lied before?

Also, if/when Romney loses, he will retroactively file an amended tax reutrn, and go down to 9% and get his money back. So he is really lying about his taxes yet again as well.

Any comment about Romney's ability to not lie multiple times about his own taxes?

 

[cybrsage]

The only reason the relationship with his tax preparer is even being discussed is because the ultimate fucktard of these forums brought it up thinking it was somehow relevant to the conversation. It is not.

There are people in this thread who said Romney did ZYX on his taxes. The reason I mentioned that Romney does not actually do his own taxes is so people who say Romney did ZYX on his taxes will stop saying it.

The only thing Romney did no his taxes was put his signature. Since his accounting firm is also his tax firm, he is smart enough to know they have all the legal liability involved. If they cheat, he is only responsible for the extra taxes and interest - and they go out of business (or at the least lose his business and that of everyone he knows).


Just to be clear, Romney did not do ZYX on his taxes and we all agree to this.

 

[cybrsage]

...link to the "non-biased" site DAILYKOS...

DailyKOS is more biased than the DNC when it comes to being Anti-Romney.

 

[Thump553]

There are people in this thread who said Romney did ZYX on his taxes. The reason I mentioned that Romney does not actually do his own taxes is so people who say Romney did ZYX on his taxes will stop saying it.

The only thing Romney did no his taxes was put his signature. Since his accounting firm is also his tax firm, he is smart enough to know they have all the legal liability involved. If they cheat, he is only responsible for the extra taxes and interest - and they go out of business (or at the least lose his business and that of everyone he knows).


Just to be clear, Romney did not do ZYX on his taxes and we all agree to this.

The taxpayer who signs the tax return is legally responsible for everything in it (with certain exceptions, like the innocent spouse rule). Are you honestly claiming that Willard Romney had no input whatsoever to (temporarily) forego a portion of his itemized deductions so as to not prove the lie of his previous political statement, that it was solely his tax preparer that made that decision? Come on, you're not that naive.

 

[Thump553]

Grow a pair, call me by name.

No one is talking about Romney's relationship with the IRS but rather his relationship with his tax preparer. I don't believe his dealings with the IRS were ever under question in this thread.

But then again, I don't expect you do understand given your reading comprehension skills and inability to understand language so far.

You suck at trolling by the way.

Thank you for the backhanded compliment. The reason I didn't call you out by name is I'm the least bit interested in internet ego-wars, they are pretty much wrestling with pigs in the mud. You, OTOH, seem to be obessed with them and name calling. I sincerely hope someday you become a mature adult.

 

[cybrsage]

Dunno if he did or did not, I am not privy to his private conversations with his tax firm. Are you?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

DailyKOS is more biased than the DNC when it comes to being Anti-Romney.

Troll fail......did you notice that the article links to other newspapers and web sites that provide Romney's own quotes? I guess reading is too hard for trolls.

So you are saying Romney is lying himself, because he admitted it himself.....great to know you admit that Romney lies! Good to know you have come around to understand that he lies.

If not, then you must provide proof that his quotes aren't true, and that all those newspaper articles that also quoted Romeny aren't true as well.

LOL, stuck again by your own lack of logic. You either have to admit he lies, or find a way to prove that all those quotes actually are made up and not actually said by him. LOL, good luck with that.

 

[cybrsage]

LOL Garf thinks DailyKOS is an unbiased source!

You go girl!

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

LOL Garf thinks DailyKOS is an unbiased source!

You go girl!

So reading fail from our #1 troll again. Obviously, if you could actually read, you would have read the article linked to other Boston news articles.

Here, to make it easier for all to see your trolling and intentional ignorance (because if you had any real defense to Romney's behavior, you would have used it, instead of lying about the article)

These are all links in the article I posted:

NY Times

Boston Globe


Boston Globe

Do you dispute these stories, or are you just trolling again? You want to claim that these major newspapers are all 100% lies? LOL, your ignorance really shows.

Trying to discredit something based on the website is just stupid, especially when the article is just quoting other news articles from major news corporations. But standard fare for trolls that have no real argument to something they don't like.

So once again our little troll fails again. Like I said, you either have to admit that those Romney quotes are true, in which case you lied and are wrong. Or try to prove Romney didn't publicly admit that he was wrong....good luck with proving that, since he admitted it publicly and there are plenty of records of it.

Gee, your own anti-logic puts you in an inescapable hole once again!