The most shocking part of Donald Trump’s tax records isn’t the $916 million loss

[GMDino]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/10/02/the-most-shocking-part-of-donald-trumps-tax-records-isnt-the-916-million-loss-everyones-talking-about/

Quote:Despite what Donald Trump says, we really can learn a lot from his tax returns — even from the partial ones made public by The New York Times.


The major takeaway from the three pages of Trump’s 1995 returns that the Times made public is that Trump is right when he says the system is rigged. What he doesn’t say is that it’s rigged in his favor and in the favor of people like him — and against regular people, those of us who earn money, pay income tax on it, and financially support the country in which we live.

To keep things relatively simple, I’m telling you what I see in Trump’s returns, based on my decades of experience parsing financial filings. I will try not to get bogged down in numbers and technicalities.

Sure, the $900 million-plus of losses reported by the New York Times — losses that could be used to offset income for a total of 18 years — are totally shocking. Legal, yes. But shocking.

But there’s something I consider even more shocking — although it involves a much smaller number.

By my read of the Trump tax return published by the New York Times, 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.

To give you the brief version, 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. (For full details, ask a tax expert about Section 469 of the tax code.)

Now, to the $909 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. (He had two more bankruptcies, in 2004 and 2009, from a publicly traded company in which he was the primary shareholder.)

I’m guessing, but I can’t tell for sure — there’s not enough information — that the loss has to do with the collapse of his empire. 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.

It’s possible that those losses somehow vanished into the ether from which they came — we have no way to tell.


What we can tell, though, is that what I wrote recently about Trump’s “That makes me smart” boast when Hillary Clinton prodded him about not paying taxes was right.

If Trump were truly smart — and wanted to lead by example — he would have disclosed his tax returns, showed the loopholes he used, and vowed to close them.

I have plenty of problems with the Clintons’ financial behavior, as I wrote. But at least Hillary Clinton is proposing tax code changes that would cost her and her family money. Trump, by contrast, is proposing tax changes that would greatly benefit the commercial real estate business, which is his primary field, and would greatly benefit his own family. And when I asked his campaign last week whether he was proposing any tax changes that would cost him and/or his family any money, I got no reply.

This whole column and most of the articles I’ve read are based almost entirely on just one page of Trump’s tax filings — the front page of his 1995 New York return. So, you see, we have learned quite a lot from Trump’s tax returns — and we could learn a lot more when and if more of them make their way into the public domain.

[Mike M (the other one)]

The same loophole that Hillary used in 2015?
If you truly believe that she's going to close it, you're out of your mind.

[GMDino]

(10-03-2016, 08:15 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: The same loophole that Hillary used in 2015?
If you truly believe that she's going to close it, you're out of your mind.

1) don't know.  Please share that info with a link

2) Didn't say that.

3) Do you think he will when he says he's cutting the tax rates and closing loopholes?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-04-2016, 08:45 AM)GMDino Wrote: 1) don't know.  Please share that info with a link

2) Didn't say that.

3) Do you think he will when he says he's cutting the tax rates and closing loopholes?

1) https://www.thenation.com/article/when-it-comes-to-taxes-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-have-one-thing-in-common/

2) A big part of her Campaign is all about closing the loopholes and getting that money back. She made the same promises when she was campaigning to be NYC Senator, yet never once made a single bill about it. So proven track record that she won't do shit this time either.

3) He's not really stated that he's going to do that, he just wants that money that the businesses have moved out of the US and is hiding overseas to come back.

[fredtoast]

(10-04-2016, 07:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: 1) https://www.thenation.com/article/when-it-comes-to-taxes-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-have-one-thing-in-common/

Nothing in your link says anything about Hillary using the same "loophole" that Donald did.

Sure that is that right one?

[GMDino]

(10-04-2016, 07:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: 1) https://www.thenation.com/article/when-it-comes-to-taxes-donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-have-one-thing-in-common/

2) A big part of her Campaign is all about closing the loopholes and getting that money back. She made the same promises when she was campaigning to be NYC Senator, yet never once made a single bill about it. So proven track record that she won't do shit this time either.

3) He's not really stated that he's going to do that, he just wants that money that the businesses have moved out of the US and is hiding overseas to come back.

Had a friend on FB say that exact same thing.  She never sponsored a bill of her own making...she just co-sponsored many, many bills to close loopholes.

https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/C001041?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22tax%22%2C%22loophole%22%5D%2C%22within%22%3A%5B%22tax%22%2C%22loophole%22%5D%7D

(note: That's the link I shared on Facebook...it doesn't seem to be working right now.)

Trump meanwhile never speaks in specifics (that would require him to understand something beyond talking points).

However he has called for closing "loopholes"...though probably none that would cost HIM any money.  (Not that he has any with all the debt he has.)

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-04-2016, 08:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Nothing in your link says anything about Hillary using the same "loophole" that Donald did.

Sure that is that right one?

My bad, but it was a good read.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/p/files/returns/WJC_HRC_2014_Form_1040.pdf

Under Bill Clinton claims:
WJC, LLC
Under Hillary:
Z FS HOLDINGS, LLC

Both business locations... 1209 North Orange Street Delaware, DE, Just 2 of 5 Shell companies they own with that registered address.
I for the life of me can't figure out how 285,000 business can fit in that 1 little 2 story building (and before you have heart attacks, yes Trump has some listed there as well).

But here's what you wanted, the $700k business loss that Hillary used as a write off to avoid paying taxes as well.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-02/clinton-campaign-admits-hillary-used-same-tax-avoidance-scheme-trump

[SunsetBengal]

It's the same loophole that Americans of modest means that happen to own a second home that they rent out, are free to use as well.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-04-2016, 10:54 PM)GMDino Wrote: Had a friend on FB say that exact same thing.  She never sponsored a bill of her own making...she just co-sponsored many, many bills to close loopholes.

https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/C001041?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22tax%22%2C%22loophole%22%5D%2C%22within%22%3A%5B%22tax%22%2C%22loophole%22%5D%7D

(note: That's the link I shared on Facebook...it doesn't seem to be working right now.)

Trump meanwhile never speaks in specifics (that would require him to understand something beyond talking points).

However he has called for closing "loopholes"...though probably none that would cost HIM any money.  (Not that he has any with all the debt he has.)

She sponsored 3 bills that became laws. None of which had anything to do with her campaign promises.
Co-Sponsoring is another way of using the "like" button on FB. Her contribution could be zero or she could have contributed something, in most cases she did not contribute anything.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2015/jun/23/jeb-bush/did-hillary-clinton-have-her-name-only-three-laws-/

S. 1241: A bill to establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site in the State of New York. Bush signed the bill Dec. 3, 2004.
[*]S. 3613: A bill to name a post office the "Major George Quamo Post Office Building." Bush signed the bill Oct. 6, 2006.

S. 3145: A bill to designate a highway in New York as the Timothy J. Russert highway. Bush signed the bill July 23, 2008.

[GMDino]

(10-05-2016, 08:10 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: My bad, but it was a good read.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/p/files/returns/WJC_HRC_2014_Form_1040.pdf

Under Bill Clinton claims:
WJC, LLC
Under Hillary:
Z FS HOLDINGS, LLC

Both business locations... 1209 North Orange Street Delaware, DE, Just 2 of 5 Shell companies they own with that registered address.
I for the life of me can't figure out how 285,000 business can fit in that 1 little 2 story building (and before you have heart attacks, yes Trump has some listed there as well).

But here's what you wanted, the $700k business loss that Hillary used as a write off to avoid paying taxes as well.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-02/clinton-campaign-admits-hillary-used-same-tax-avoidance-scheme-trump

(10-05-2016, 08:21 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: It's the same loophole that Americans of modest means that happen to own a second home that they rent out, are free to use as well.

Huh.  Did you find that out from their tax returns?  

[Mike M (the other one)]

yes, when a person lists a company and a loss, find out the address of the company listed.
As I said, there is over 280k businesses with the same address as that 1 little building that is used as a tax haven/loop hole.

[GMDino]

I was wondering this morning if Trump lost darn near a billion dollars in 1995 how much he must have lost when the economy tanked in the 2000's?

I wonder if EVER made any money?

If only there was a way to find out....

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-06-2016, 02:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: I was wondering this morning if Trump lost darn near a billion dollars in 1995 how much he must have lost when the economy tanked in the 2000's?

I wonder if EVER made any money?

If only there was a way to find out....

I'd rather know how someone that left the White House broke, didn't invent or sell anything tangible is suddenly worth over 110 million dollars 12 years later? Being a US Senator/SOS doesn't pay that well.

[GMDino]

(10-10-2016, 08:44 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'd rather know how someone that left the White House broke, didn't invent or sell anything tangible is suddenly worth over 110 million dollars 12 years later? Being a US Senator/SOS doesn't pay that well.

Speaking fees do.

Book deals do.

Oh, crap...sorry.  You wanted to think they did something illegal or shady.

Sorry.

[Rotobeast]

(10-10-2016, 11:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: Speaking fees do.

Book deals do.

Oh, crap...sorry.  You wanted to think they did something illegal or shady.

Sorry.

Seriously..... you do not think either Clinton has ever done something "shady" ?
I'll give you the illegal aspect, but shady is kind of broad.
Heck, I'd wager we've all done something shady.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[GMDino]

(10-12-2016, 01:32 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Seriously..... you do not think either Clinton has ever done something "shady" ?
I'll give you the illegal aspect, but shady is kind of broad.
Heck, I'd wager we've all done something shady.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

Shady?

 dunno...have they investigated anything?  

Seriously though if only she would release her tax returns so we could could see where they get their income!!!