It would not matter how much information the left had access to concerning
Romney's taxes, it would never be enough. It's abundantly clear that,
despite Harry Reid's accusations, Mitt Romney pays his taxes. Is it
against the law to use tax reduction strategies? NO! If you have a 401k, you
are using a tax reduction strategy. If you have a Roth IRA, you are using a tax
reduction strategy. And looking at the numbers here, not only are the
Romney's honest, they are extremely generous. What more do the Democrats
So much for Harry Reid being honest. Everyone wants to go after the
"1%", it is a good thing I am not one of the one percent people, I would
close my income doors and sit back and let the government take care of me also.
There are many wealthy people that are leaving this country, guess what goes
with them? Jobs!!!
The liberal philosophy is that elected officials and candidates have absolutely
NO right to privacy in their financial disclosures, in fact no rights at all
because 'public' means 'we own them'. If anyone can't
see what's not only morally wrong, but completely insane about such a
doctrine, they don't deserve to claim the same rights they seek to take
away from others. The fact is that we don't own others, but their
office.The state of this union is most certainly threatened by those
who feel that personal responsibility is less favorable than dependence on
others. The evidence is overwhelming that the moral quality of our society and
therefore the peace we enjoy is weakening. There has never been a greater need
than now for parents to teach their children true principles- as we are ever
more surrounded by such contempt. Contempt, resentment, and jealousy are
inherent to feeling entitled to the fruit of another persons's labor. No
wonder everyone wants to know how much Romney makes- those who would abandon
responsibility to live off others just want to know how much they can be jealous
of. Meanwhile other candidates wealth remains un-scrutinized.
To MoJules 5:16 p.m. Sept. 21, 2012So much for Harry Reid being
honest.--------------------One problem with your
argument -- this isn't one of the years about which Senator Reid was
Furry1993"Price Waterhouse released a letter from his accountants
saying that in the 20 years prior to 2010 the Romneys paid an average annual
effective rate of 20.2 percent, never lower than 13.66 percent."Romney never paid no taxes in any of the last 22 years. That makes Reid look
I am sure its all a lie......just ask Harry Reid the Mormon?
The question that one should ask - is Mitt Romney an honest man - has he paid
his fair share of federal and state taxes - is he a rich man that has
contributed money and time to the betterment of others - is he a proven and
effective leader who sholders and owns his responsibilities - can he solve
problems???? If the answer is yes - then he is head and shoulders above most of
today's polliticians. It would be refreshing to have such a man president
of the United States.
The envy of Romney's wealth is shameful, as if taxing him more is going to
solve our nation's ills. The hypocrisy of the left, including in my
estimation a hypocritical Harry Reid, is truly astonishing. Obama can make
millions, pay little in charity, and golf over a hundred times since being
elected, all on the taxpayer's dime, but somehow is viewed as being more
charitible or worthy of his office, as if stealing one citizen's money to
give to another is somehow honorable. What a sorry state of affairs for the
voting citizens of this country! Wake up!
Obama spent more on just one vacation than what Romney made in a year.How much tax did he pay on that?
prelaxno it makes reid a liar
The "Taxers" are the Democratic Party's equivalent of the
"Birthers."Why don't we focus on the important issues:
the fact that gas prices are raising the cost of everything else from food to
vacations, that our wealth as Americans has declined drastically in the past 3
years, that unemployment is still very high, that the Middle East is in an
anti-American uproar and are murdering American citizens and our embassador?Instead, we get "show us your back taxes from forever until
today...." and a President who acts like a CHILD. Whenever confronted with
his numerous failures and empty promises, he always responds with "it's
not MY fault" or "he started it" (Pointed to George W.) It's
like having a toddler in the White House. It's no wonder he is
not a good leader. He absolutely refuses to take responsibility for anything. I
for one will be thrilled to have an adult as our leader. Oh, and since Obama
paid less in taxes than his secretary, you would think they would be smart
enough to stop talking about how much candidates paid in taxes.
>>>On average, middle-income families — those making from
$50,000 to $75,000 a year — pay 12.8 percent of their income in federal
taxes, according to Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation. If
so, they overpaid significantly.In 2011, a married couple filing
jointly and taking the standard deduction ($11,600) and two personal exemptions
($3700 for each of them), it would take an income of $114,679 to pay 14.1%
($16,170) in income tax. At $75,000 the tax would be $7,550 or 10.1%. At
$50,000, the tax would be $3,800 or 7.6%. And those are based on simply taking
the standard deduction. Itemizing likely would reduce the rates.12.8% average for $50K to $75K would have to include singles, which have
higher tax liabilities by design.
Interesting how few Obama supporters have anything to say on this article. It
seems their motto is "If you can't say anything snarky, don't say
anything at all."
There is a real problem in this country when real hard work is taxed differently
than investment income.Why should someone who works sixty hours a
week, earning a hourly or salary, pay a higher effective rate than someone who
makes their money from investments?
Shaun,Your concern is valid, but the doctrine you advocated is
dangerous.Consider:The construction worker says to the
pianist: I've earned my living, you aren't any more entitled to making
more money than me.The problem:We all have a right to reap
what we sew. If this right did not exist, then no right would exist (simple
math). If no right exists, then others are justified and moral even if they take
what is yours from you. A guy can study math and economics his entire life and
another guy can work out in a gym his entire life. They both put hard work and
time (which cost them money, property, investment, etc.) into their careers and
have every right to work.Even if you say "fine, then just raise
taxes on Paris Hilton type people who inherit millions without working",
then how you quality this and preserve justice? If a parent leaves all their
money and house to their blind and deaf child with a learning disability, would
you take the money from them based solely on their not earning it themselves?It's not the government's job, NOR RIGHT, to redistribute
Shaun:That is because the money that is used for the initial
investment has normally already been taxed as income. In Romney's case
income earned working the 60+ hours a week at Bain Capital. This income that
has already been taxed can now be invested and then any income derived from the
investment is then taxed a 2nd time at a lower rate. Understanding this point,
don't you think it is fair to have a lower tax rate when your income dollar
is being taxed for the second time?? Also worth noting is the fact that every
investment has risk....if you invest wisely you get a return, but if the
investment goes bad then that dollar is lost. An argument could be made that if
my investment dollar has already been taxed when I earned it and then I am
willing to risk losing it by investing it....then why should gov't have any
right to tax the income I may or may not earn?
Our tax laws are meant to encourage investing in the future. Those people who
work 60+ hours a week have opportunities to invest in 401K, IRA, stocks, and
other investment accounts. If they choose to invest, it will also lower their
amount of taxable income for the year. Why do the tax laws allow
that? Well, I am guessing it's because the people who create those laws
understand that Americans will need more than social security as part of a
retirement plan. I have an employee retirement plan, but I also invest a little
extra on my own. It means I don't take home as much money as I would like
right now, but that money is being set aside for my future.
Mitt Romney is wealthy, SO WHAT. So are hundreds of other people in this country
like those in Hollywood, professional sports players, other politicians. Miitt
pays taxes, he gives to charity what more should he do than any of these other
wealthy people do?
Maybe the Dnews can do an article explaining all of the exotic tax tricks that
Mitt uses to lower his taxes, I really don't understand how he uses the
Cayman Islands and other off shore accounts to minimize this taxes. What ever
happened to the $77,000, he tried to deduct for his Olympic horse Trafalca? If
he can deduct expenses for his horse, can I legally claim a deduction for my
over over weight cat Wally?
The larger question is, will Harry Reid, Obama and Nancy Pelosi apologize to
Romney for lying about him? And the second valid question is why do Democrats
contribute next to nothing to charities? Says something about the difference
between Mitt Romney and his critics doesn’t it?
@voice of reason. I never said anything about income equality. I am talking
about tax income equality. Income should be taxed as income whether you are
flipping burgers, a construction worker or what ever. I will pay
over twenty five percent in federal taxes this year, but romney only pays 14
percent. I do think that is right.@Sportsfan. Romney do not take a
salary from bain get taxed at ordinary income tax rates then reinvest it. He is
a beneficiary from the carried interest tax rule that allows him to avoid being
taxed like a worker and instead gets a sweet heart deal at 15 percent.
Romney is defying candidate tradition by refusing to release more tax returns -
a tradition embraced by his own father. There is no reason to assume anything
other than he's got something to hide.
In 1932, One percent of the population owned 59% of the wealth. In 1929, 1930
and 1931, J. P. Morgan paid no income taxes and said that he owed society
nothing. He also said that if we destroyed the leisure class, we would destroy
civilization. But J. P. Morgan was not running to be President of the United
States. I am really disappointed st it seems that Mitt Romney is so alined with
the J. P. Morgans and Herbert Hoovers. I will still await for the debates before
I decide to vote or not. I will not vote for the incumbent, but I may write in
the mailman's name.
liberal larry,The banks in Cayman Islands and other off shore
accounts pay more interest.Romney has been very wise with money, and
it's a shame that many Americans have traded wisdom for envy.
Over the last 20 years Romney average 20% Federal tax, 8% state tax, and 14%
charitable donations. That means he paid out 42% of all of his income and kept
just 58%. Isn't 42% enough?If Democrats want to end poverty
their solution is simple. Have every American pay the same tax rates and donate
the same percentage of income as Mitt did and poverty will be a thing of the
past. Just have everyone do what Mitt did and the problem is solved.Attacking Mitt on his taxes is intellectually bankrupt - shame on you.
The problem with Romney releasing his taxes is just like politics and the bible
people would spin it and twist it and leave out important information to conform
to their allegations. Romney knows this and is smart not to play that game.
Shaun,You misunderstand the reason why Democrats and Republicans
aren't asking for the taxes to be treated the same. Why do you think that
Harry Reid hasn't brought up a bill saying the rates should be the
same??The reason is; who would invest in the US if the tax rate were
over 40% (Fed and State combined) on investment dollars? I wouldn't.
Guess what the cap gains rates are in India?? or Germany?? or many other
countries. If you guessed zero percent you win. If you had investment dollars,
where are you going to invest them - in a country with a tax rate of zero
percent or 40 percent???
Rewards, of hard work, responsibility, creativity, wisdom, and living the
American dream, are transforming to jealousy, coveting, and envy.Thank you Barack Obama for unifying the country. opps! I mean dividing the
country. Yep! We don't make businesses, do we?
Bottom line..Tax returns whirligigs, cooked up by Mitt Romney and his tax
attorneys, are now, just a small part of Romney's negative baggage. Buckle
the seat belt for more surprises this week concerning the Mitt no one really
knows.Remember Roy Orbison's famous tune, " It's Over"
?Ya'll can start singing it, or humming it, if you are out in public.
.No thinking citizen or voter is being fooled by Romney cooking the books and
doctoring his tax return to benefit his campaign. It is time for Romney to man
up and release all his tax returns and stop the charade of putting more lip
stick on the elephant; he is not fooling anyone and he is making a donkey of
Romney probably will file an amended tax return because he did not take full
advantage of the tax deductions allowed by current law. The 14.1% tax
apparently was generated to off-set much of the criticism directed at him this
election cycle. He probably would have paid less as a percentage of income if
he had taken full advantage of the current tax system to which he is entitled.
Unfortunately, those with significantly less income do not have the same
benefits for tax manipulation.
Mad Hatter,Project much? You don't know why he
didn't take all of his deductions. Perhaps it was because people were
calling him un-American if he DID take all the deductions?You also
don't know what he will do in the future. I recall reading the exact same
thing at the New York Times, without any named source. That probably isn't
a very reliable statement to go around making, unless you are some sort of
mind-reader with a proven track record.Sergio & No Fit,You
don't have any proof of cooked books or doctored taxes. Your source is
Harry Reid-the shameful Senate majority leader who stood on the Senate floor and
declared that Romney didn't pay ANY taxes for the past ten years. Get a
life. He paid his full taxes in a legal and lawful manner. Do you think that
Obama didn't have the IRS on Romney's tail to dig up any dirt on him?
If you don't believe it, you should go research some history on
Obama's opponents for the Senate in 2004, both in the primary and the
SportsFan7 is right - Mitt Romney gets taxed twice. This discussion
about Romney's wealth is all about envy. It isn't about having a
person in the White House who knows how to manage finances - which is where the
discussion should be.
Those complaining so-called Liberal bias in requesting full-disclosure on tax
filings and compliance with existing law need look no further than Richard
Nixon's Checkers speech. The insistence upon full-disclosure has been both
a Republican and a Democratic theme for many decades. Transparancy, paying
one's fair obligation, obedience to law has always been demanded of those
seeking higher office and desiring to serve the public good.Many in
this dialog may simple be anti-tax anything because they say taxation is
"theft", whether by the federal, state, or local government,
particularly when it is their own money they're talking about. Regardless
of the compact made when a society organizes under a government (as established
by the Constitution), they simply don't want to pay taxes. Most people
don't like to pay taxes but accept it as necessary for living in a
civilized society. However, these anti-tax zealots don't want to pay
taxes, yet they want the services other people's taxes pay for.The argument should be: What is a fair tax, how should that money be used,
and how should everyone in our society be given the opportunity to succeed.
Liberals cannot stand that Romney would give $4 million to charity, where it
actually helps more people more efficiently and more directly. Instead,
liberals want to require people like Romney to give all of their money to
government until they are poor. LIberals and Democrats are never satisfied to
see another person succeed and have wealth. The libs greed causes them to try
and get all the wealth in the country for their own purposes.
Romney pays more taxes than the law requires because he doesn't claim all
of his deductions. He also pays a full 10% tithing on his gross earnings before
taxes, social security and Medicare. What a patriot, yet huff post is now
calling him a flip-flopped because he release tax history, which incident,y is
not required by law, far too late after their demands. Apparently, this
flip-flopping charge is the only mud they can dream up.
To Joan Watson 6:53 p.m. Sept. 21, 2012The answers to your
questions:is Mitt Romney an honest man? - Nohas he paid
his fair share of federal and state taxes? - I don't know. A forensic
accountant will need to evalute his rreturns going back to 1999 beore that can
be answered.is he a rich man? Yes. . . that has
contributed money and time to the betterment of others? - Some time and money,
as a way to make a good showis he a proven and effective leader who
sholders and owns his responsibilities? - Nocan he solve problems?
No -- he causes more than he has arguably solvedDue to the ansers
above - he is exactly the same as most of today's polliticians. It would be a disaster to have Romney as president of the United States.
Romney deliberately isn't claiming every deduction to which he is entitled
because that would bring his effective tax rate down to about 9% and he
doesn't want it to look like he doesn't pay enough taxes (of course he
can always amend his return and take the full deduction after the election, when
his finances aren't in question any more). Romney is therefore paying more
taxes than he is required to pay. Romney has said that, if he paid more taxes
than he is required to pay, he is not qualified to be president. Romney has
just proved, by his own words and standards, that he is not qualified to be
@Shaun Capital gains are taxed a lower rate because they are earnings or
dividends of money that has been invested and has been taxed previously. If a
person invests some of the money they earn, which was taxed at the standard
income tax level, they should not have to pay regular taxes levels on the money
earned from those investments because it has already been taxed when first
earned. An exception would be IRA investments which are purchased with pre-tax
Shaun,I'm sorry that I misunderstood you. With the things I was
thinking about at the time, I thought you had meant that 'hard
workers' should pay less tax than those who earn through investing, etc. I
did not realize that you only meant that they shouldn't be taxed higher
(which is principally different). Although I think you had a typo and meant to
say 'I do not think that is right'.Either way, I would at
least agree that a flat tax is just and fair. I don't know if I agree that
it is the most logical choice for America right now (long story, different
debate). But I do believe it is just and fair- that a better people would tax
equally.liberal larry,You still pay taxes on offshore
accounts. The only way to evade taxes through offshore accounts is if they are
not known. Such accounts aren't known for security in vaults, etc. They are
known for keeping the existence of your account secret. If Romney has accounts
and they are known to the public, then he isn't using any sort of
'secret tax trick' but honest earning of interest.
GkwahlbergTaylorsville, UTIs not capital gains tax a tax on
new income derived from investments? Somewhere along the line, capital gains
tax was set differently from earned income although the money obtained through
investments is basically "earned income". The money used in the
investment is not taxed. Only the new money earned from the investment is
taxed. Government, through changing tax laws, consider money earned through
investments to be different from money earned through labor.Let's get on the same page here, okay? The benefits of investment income
only comes to those wealthy enough to make investments. The regular worker who
only makes money through his or her labor (maybe not having enough to make
investments because they don't earn enough income to have much
descretionary spending) don' have these opportunities.Also, in
the debate about taxes, everyone who earns more than $250K in earned income has
the benefit of lower taxes under current proposals on that first $250K. This is
the progressive tax idea in a nutshell. Everyone gets this savings. Proposals
on removing the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy (making more than $250K) still
have the savings on the first $250K. Nothing chanes.
MountanmanHayden, ID"The larger question is, will Harry
Reid, Obama and Nancy Pelosi apologize to Romney for lying about him?"They would rather apologize to a mid-eastern country.
Mitt Romney will now always be viewed as a tax cheat by some because Harry Reid
chose to bear false witness. This is exactly the same thing that happened when
Hillary Clinton (or someone in her campaign) chose to question the birthplace
and religion of Barack Obama. This is the nature of a lie, folks.
It has the potential to spread like seeds blown in the wind, which you can never
recover even if you tried. Are we surprised then when the Lord
informs us that liars, “those who love and make a lie”, will inherit
the same place as sorcerers, adulterers and whoremongers in the Spirit World?
(Doctrine & Covenants 76:103)
Lasvegaspam, are you sure you are not bearing false witness against Harry Reid.
The right thing and honest thing is for Romney to release his tax returns so
that all the voters can judge for themselves; after all Romney is running for
the highest office in the nation and the voters need to see what it is Romney is
asking them to vote for and who and what he is. The voters have a right to know,
it is the only honest thing for Romney to do to show the voters he is not a liar
and cheat. As one of the church leaders once said: just do it.
I've done a bit of research. The partnerships in which Romney/Bain is
involved in the Cayman Islands contain the following provision (See Gawker page
concerning Romney/Bain documents):The Partnership is a qualified
intermediary and intends to conduct it operations so that it will not be engaged
in a United States trade or business and, therefore, will not be subject to
United States federal income or withholding tax on its income from United States
sources.... Under the current laws of the Cayman Islands, there are no income,
estate, transfer, sales, or other Cayman Islands taxes payable by the
Partnership.In other words, nothing these Cayman Island partnerships
do is taxable either by the United States or the Cayman Islands. Romney/Bain
has evaded taxes on these investments since the inception of his/their
involvement with them. Lovely [end sarcasm].
Romney, 65, and his wife, Ann, paid $1.9 million in taxes on $13.7 million of
income in 2011 for a 14.1 percent rate. Charitable Contributions The Romneys donated more than 29% of their income to charity, including more
than $1.1 million in cash to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Is it just me, or does that only add up to 8% tithing [BTW - not including Fast offerings, Missionary Fund, Temple Construction,
Humanitarian Aid, and Perpetual Education Fund]
@fresnogirl"The "Taxers" are the Democratic Party's
equivalent of the "Birthers.""That would be the perfect
comparison - except for the fact that Clinton supporters started the whole
birther movement and it was fueled by Obama's own claims of being born in
Kenya (when it served his purposes to do so)So it would seem that
"birthers" are just another democratic equivalent of "taxers"
Furry - or is it fury? In my book Romney is a rare good man regardless how his
integrity and reputation is besmirched by others. His dad IM sure is very proud
of his son. By the way, speaking of leadership - Harry Reid, who's ear
fills with rumor and twitterings seems to have a few problems?
Furry/fury - from Joan Watson Sept 25 9:12PM here's a different take on
the charactar/leadership you gave of Mitt Romney. Is he an honest man who has
paid his fair share of federal taxes? Yes - or those who franticaly dig in the
mud to prove he hasn't would be exposing it to the whole world, with proof.
So if you have info proving that he is not honest it is time to put up or ----
up. Has he been an effective governor of Mass, and set the state on a course
of economic stabilty - and at the same time declined the governors salary? yes.
Did he also put the bankrupt Olympics on a sound financial footing - yes
Has he slung personal mud at President Obama - no - he disagrees with his
politics and debates the issues. Those who have it in for Mitt Romney either do
not know him or his leadership qualitites - or just plain don't like him
because he is very rich and or perhaps 'mormon'. As for the off shore
investments - any one of us who have investments out of the US know that gained
income is income - and it becomes taxable income.
That's 1.9 million more dollars, then most nay Sayers make in a year. He
paid that in taxes. So it's just called jealousy in my mind.