8 Years of Trump Tax Returns Are Subpoenaed by Manhattan D.A.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Michael Cohen was Trumps legal counsel for the Stormy Daniels transaction and has admitted responsibility for any criminal campaign finance violations. That is a complete defense for Trump as to any criminal charges which is why he wasn't charged by the feds. Cohen did not implicate Trump in Cohen's own criminal activity. To prove a.criminal charge of campaign finance violation they have to show specific intent to break campaign finance law on the part of Trump. Cohen never said that Trump ever directed him to violate the campaign finance laws. That was Cohen's own idea. |
Anonymous
And to think of all of the politicians that were brought down by simply having a hooker, regardless of how it was financed. Seems so quaint now. |
Anonymous
| Tax returns are confidential. Even if the authorities are successful in getting them, they won't be able to disseminate them to use against Trump for political purposes without exposing themselves to harsh sanctions. Presumably they are extremely complex and prepared by a team of lawyers and accountants for Trump. If errors were made for example the payment to Stormy was listed incorrectly as a business expense, Trump May incur civil tax liabilities and penalties, but could never be held criminally liable. Presumably his accountants had at least a good faith basis for preparing his tax returns in whatever manner that they did, but if not, it would be the tax preparers but not Trump who might be criminally responsible. |
Anonymous
I don't think this is true. It's why you have to sign your tax return even if someone else prepares it. |
Anonymous
This... has nothing to do with the topic at hand? |
Anonymous
Stormy did not receive 130K in exchange for sex, which is illegal in most places. She received the money in exchange for a non disclosure agreement, which are legal everywhere although sometimes deemed unenforceable. In this case, Trump paid 130K for an NDA which Stormy claimed was unenforceable and as a result Trump released her from it. In other words Trump received nothing of value in exchange for what he paid. Thus he committed no criminal campaign finance violation. |
Anonymous
The State of New York’s point is that the Trump Organization didn’t call that payoff what it was and called its reimbursement of Michael Cohen for that payoff legal services or something else that was totally false. |
Anonymous
There will be no basis for a charge of criminal tax evasion against Trump unless the authorities can show Trump criminally violated campaign finance law with the stormy Daniels payment. Assuming he owes unpaid taxes on $130K based on him paying about $20 million in taxes per year, there is no presumption. of criminal intent to underpay taxes. This is equivalent to a middle class person mistakenly underpaying his taxes by $10 because H&R Block made a mistake on the return. |
Anonymous
There is no magic bullett for the Democrats here via Trump's tax returns. Remember, the IRS has had access to all of Trump's federal returns for many many years. And, in New York State, while the NYS taxation authorities may not have direct access to his full federal returns, they do have complete and direct access to Trump's New York State tax returns, which undoubtedly contain a great deal of the same information in terms of business expensing and deductions as do the federal returns. Clearly, the path of least resistance for NY State authorities to demonstrate criminal tax fraud would be to start with an investigation of Trump's NY State tax returns, and not with the federal returns. As far as disagreement about the details, tax returns are and should remain confidential, for all of us. If the authorities can gain unfettered access to a President's tax returns, they can justify doing the same for the common citizen. I don't want to live in that world, and neither should you. Our affairs are already being heavily monitored not only by government but by large private corporations, many of which do not seem to have much respect for our personal privacy. Even if the authorities gain access to Trump's tax returns, they will remain confidential and usable only within the context of the criminal investigation. Anyone who leaks them to say, Adam Schiff, or Rachel Maddow, wil be exposing themselves to harsh criminal and certainly career-ending penalties. My tax returns are no one else's business, neither are yours, neither are Trumps, neither are Biden's, neither are Schiff's, neither are Pelosi's. |
Anonymous
You clearly have no idea what is going on. The subpoena is to Trump's accountants for his tax returns. There is no "tax return privilege" -- an accounting firm must comply with a valid criminal subpoena. Since one of the things the NY DA is investigating Trump for is tax fraud, his tax returns are highly relevant. And the DOJ has no business intervening. |
Anonymous
To unpack this, non disclosure agreements are pefectly legal in NYS although in this case perhaps legally unenforceable. In this case the Trump Organization, which is a separate legal entity from Donald J. Trump, the individual, reimbursed Michael Cohen for his payment to Stormy Daniels on behalf of Donald J. Trump. The only real issue from a taxation standpoint would be whether or not the Trump Organization improperly (or properly?) deducted the payment (not "payoff", it was completely legal for Stormy Daniels to accept that payment; she was never charged with a crime nor should she be for accepting that money to remain silent) as a "business expense" and as a result paid a lesser amount of taxes than it otherwise would have. If the payment (not "payoff) was miscategorized as a "legal expense", that does not necessarily mean the Trump Organization underpaid its tax liability as a consequence of the miscategorization of the payment. And it certainly does not imply that anyone in the Trump Organization responsible for preparation of its tax returns (probably the CFO or comptroller) committed a crime. Since Donald J. Trump is a key figure in the Trump Organization, the payment could legitimately be deducted as a business expense to the organization for the preservation of the organization's intangible good will value. There is at least a good faith argument to be made there. Alternatively, the Trump Organization could recategorize the payment as "other compensation" or "income" to Donald J. Trump, if it is deemed reimbursement of a purely personal expense of Donald J. Trump. This would be analagous to using a corporate credit card on a business trip for some personal expenses (with permission of the employer of course) and then having the corporation count that as part of the employee's income (rather than as reimbursement of a business expense). If so, the Trump Organization might have to send Donald J. Trump a 1099 form to correct the error, and Donald J. Trump might have an additional tax liability due to the Organization's error in failing to properly account for the payment as income to Trump. Regardless, it doesn't constitute criminal fraud or criminal tax evasion. |
Anonymous
Individual 1 begs to differ. |
Anonymous
True, but if you are being investigated for Tax fraud, then there is a right for the returns to test the case. |
Anonymous
Taxpayer = ----------------------------------------------------------- Target = -------------------------- Date 1 = ------------------- Year 1 = ------- Date 2 = ------------- Date 3 = ----------- Year 2 = ------- Year 3 = ------- Amount 1 = ------------------ Dear ----------------: This is in response to your request for a ruling that the liabilities incurred to settle a lawsuit, including legal fees and other expenses attributable to the lawsuit, are deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses under section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code. We conclude that Taxpayer’s payment of these liabilities is deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses under section 162. FACTS On Date 1, ---------, Taxpayer and Target, publicly traded corporations, entered into a merger agreement under which Taxpayer agreed to acquire Target in a stock-forstock transaction. The merger closed on Date 2, -- Tax returns are confidential. Whether the subpoena is valid or not is for the court to determine. Trump has asked the court to determine the validity of the subpoena. That is called "due process" and we are all entitled to it. Should the court determine the supboena to be valid, the tax returns will remain confidential, and re-disclosure in violation of that confidentiality will subject the NY state prosecutors to serious sanctions. So, please don't ever expect to see what is in those tax returns yourself, because you won't, unless some Democratic operative in the NYS prosecutor's office decided to risk jail time by leaking them. The NY State prosecutor does not need to subpoena Trump's accountants. Or does it? They can subpoena NY State taxing authorities, who already have copies of Trump's NY State tax returns. Or can they? Why havent they asked NY State's taxing authorities for copies of those returns? Because doing so is illegal. It is illegal because the returns are confidential. The state taxing authorities are not allowed to "share" with the criminal prosecutors. This is called a "gross abuse of governmental authority and power." Perhaps you should look at the following IRS bulletin before making accusations of tax fraud: Internal Revenue Service Department of the Treasury Washington, DC 20224 Number: 201412002 Release Date: 3/21/2014 Index Number: 162.00-00 ------------------------- --------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- --------------------- ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ---------------- ----------------------- Third Party Communication: None Date of Communication: Not Applicable Person To Contact: ---------------------- ------------------------ Telephone Number: ------------------- Refer Reply To: CC:ITA:B03 PLR-121178-13 Date: December 13, 2013 TY: ------- Legend Taxpayer = ----------------------------------------------------------- Target = -------------------------- Date 1 = ------------------- Year 1 = ------- Date 2 = ------------- Date 3 = ----------- Year 2 = ------- Year 3 = ------- Amount 1 = ------------------ Dear ----------------: This is in response to your request for a ruling that the liabilities incurred to settle a lawsuit, including legal fees and other expenses attributable to the lawsuit, are deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses under section 162 of the Internal Revenue Code. We conclude that Taxpayer’s payment of these liabilities is deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses under section 162. FACTS On Date 1, ---------, Taxpayer and Target, publicly traded corporations, entered into a merger agreement under which Taxpayer agreed to acquire Target in a stock-forstock transaction. The merger closed on Date 2, -- |
Anonymous
Except the money that was used was related to the campaign and was not disclosed in FEC filings. |