Skip to main content

View Diary: Rolling Stone Magazine Exposes how Mitt Romney Dodged his Taxes (252 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Then you haven't looked in the right places (6+ / 0-)

    Try here:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/...

    "He aggressively exploits every loophole he can find," says Victor Fleischer, a professor of tax law at the University of Colorado. "He's pushing the limits of tax law beyond what many think is reasonable."
    Not content with the carried-interest boondoggle, Bain also uses a scheme known as fee conversion to transform smaller management fees – which are supposed to be taxed as regular earnings – into investment income taxed at only 15 percent. A Bain manager simply "waives" his right to his fee and is instead staked an investment of equal value in the private equity fund. Because the manager can then cherry-pick from the fund's investments, he is virtually guaranteed a rich return – flouting the spirit of the lower tax rate on capital gains, which is designed to reward investors who take risks with their money. "Because they didn't receive the cash, they claim that it's not a taxable event," says Fleischer. "It's not legal." New York's attorney general has launched a criminal investigation into the practice.

    Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

    by Just Bob on Sat Oct 13, 2012 at 10:25:56 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Bob - thanks for the reference (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grumpelstillchen

      I thought that practice started after Romney had left Bain Capital.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Sat Oct 13, 2012 at 11:00:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Speaking of looking, check out Mitt's Blind Trust (4+ / 0-)

      Mitt's Blind Trust (to the meter of 3 blind mice)

      Mitt's blind trust
          see how it grows
      Its being fed
          by heaven only knows
      normal people like you and I
      working three jobs just to try and get by
      While Mitten's fine millions are hanging to dry
      in Mitt's blind trust

      Mitt's blind trust
          my how it grows
      no matter who's in charge
          it never seems to slow
      companies go into bankruptcy
      Mitt just say's that its OK by me
      'cause all that they are is an entity
      in Mitt's blind trust

      Mitt's blind trust
          tied up in bows
      he's cleaning up   
          his earnings never close
      He wakes up each morning to find he's made more
      than two years of wages for scrubbing his floors
      he's hoarding his money behind the locked doors   
      in Mitt's blind trust

      Mitt's blind trust   
          who could complain?   
      the guy that runs his trust
          is running his campaign
      behind the curtains he's pulling the strings
      deftly outrunning the masses he thinks
      and hoping that no one will notice the stink
      from… Mitt's Blind Trust.
      Copyright 2012
      I invite any kosacks with musical ability to make a recording or anyone can offer additional verses. Thanks for looking. Let's bury this guy in the next two weeks.

    •  that's not criminal, and its not even (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib, Shawn Russell

      obvious its the wrong tax position to take.

    •  My understanding (4+ / 0-)

      of the current federal tax law in this issue is that it is an open question as to whether or not that "waiver" is a realization event.  Thus it would be very hard to get someone for criminal tax fraud on the issue because it is an open question, so you can't willingly violate a law that is unclear.    It is, however, a very aggressive position because it goes against the standard structure and thinking that underpins the code.

      I can easily argue the reason why is is not appropriate under the current tax laws.  If I (or the IRS) were to win, he would have his taxes adjusted and pay interest, and maybe penalties.  In that sense, it is not "legal" but I do not think it is federally criminal.

      The bigger question, in my mind, is that if good tax policy should say that it is a realization event and we should tax it as if he got the fee (ordinary income) and reinvested it in the partnership, is Mitt Romney the guy who is going to advocate for that change in the code.  Hell no.

      I don't know upon what basis NYS is looking into it, but I do not believe they have authority to enforce the federal tax laws.  Therefore, it must be a state issue.

      •  Part of my point is that if someone is (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shawn Russell, Just Bob, JG in MD

        running for the highest elected office in the country, neither the feds, nor the state/s, nor the people of the US should have to expend this much time/effort/money into figuring out whether the guy's a criminal or not. This level of ambiguity should be a disqualifier from the get go. Period.

        •  I don't have an issue with this (0+ / 0-)

          I don't think his attitude toward the tax code is appropriate for a chief tax administrator ... EVEN IF NOTHING HE DID WAS CRIMINAL... or someone I would want to see overseeing change in the tax code.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site