Someone leaked Trump's 1995 tax returns

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again no taxes paid, not even $1 contribution to NJ children fund. So now we know for sure he hasn't paid taxes for multiple years. Potentially he could have carried over his bankruptcy loss for decades without paying any taxes or anything to charity.

So we now know he hasn't paid taxes for sure in 1991,1993 and 1995 and for atleast two more decades. So his business MO is to accumulate debt and declare bankruptcy and use the loss to eliminate tax obligations since he uses S-Corp, which allows pass through of business loss to his personal tax returns.

I use the same model for my taxes and had huge losses which I offset against my personal taxes for years. I did however pay 1.3 million in taxes this year when said properties were sold. Eventually the losses are recovered and taxes are paid, it's just a deferment. All businesses in this situation do this. No big deal.

This is the point that people seem to miss!

The carry forward of a NOL (net operating loss) is something that happens everyday and is entirely legal and legitimate. Individuals are allowed to carry forward a limited amount of a capital loss each year against their taxes into future years. It would be idiotic for an individual not to avail of a legal way to reduce taxable income.

What is also known in Trump's case is whether the $900 million in a single year or whether it is an accumulation over several years. Now what message this conveys about Trump's business savvy is a fair point though if these losses were incurred.

BTW, the losses appear to relate to the Trump Tajmahal and the Trump Plaza just based on the timing and given the amounts involved and if this is correct the losses predate 1995 and may have been even higher when they occurred. But whatever the facts, the carry forward of losses is legal.

The basic issue is that if anyone finds these tax loopholes as being unfair then the answer is to change the tax laws. Faulting anyone - whether it is Trump or anyone else - for using the tax laws to their advantage is ludicrous.

Not the PP, but you both are, of course, correct. I guess the educated aren't really that smart. I can guarantee some of their favorite Congressmen have similar tax legal deferments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again no taxes paid, not even $1 contribution to NJ children fund. So now we know for sure he hasn't paid taxes for multiple years. Potentially he could have carried over his bankruptcy loss for decades without paying any taxes or anything to charity.

So we now know he hasn't paid taxes for sure in 1991,1993 and 1995 and for atleast two more decades. So his business MO is to accumulate debt and declare bankruptcy and use the loss to eliminate tax obligations since he uses S-Corp, which allows pass through of business loss to his personal tax returns.

I use the same model for my taxes and had huge losses which I offset against my personal taxes for years. I did however pay 1.3 million in taxes this year when said properties were sold. Eventually the losses are recovered and taxes are paid, it's just a deferment. All businesses in this situation do this. No big deal.

Have a cake recipe you'd like to share?

Wow your just as small and bitchy as HRC. You must be a lobbyist who contributes greatly to her failure as a human being. In sorry you don't have the work ethic I possess.

No, "your" just as small and bitchy. And with a weird lot of anger - or can you not see that that's a disproportionate amount of defensiveness and anger for a simple question? Sorry that the Great Businessman you're excited to vote for is even worse at his job than he is at being a good husband.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again no taxes paid, not even $1 contribution to NJ children fund. So now we know for sure he hasn't paid taxes for multiple years. Potentially he could have carried over his bankruptcy loss for decades without paying any taxes or anything to charity.

So we now know he hasn't paid taxes for sure in 1991,1993 and 1995 and for atleast two more decades. So his business MO is to accumulate debt and declare bankruptcy and use the loss to eliminate tax obligations since he uses S-Corp, which allows pass through of business loss to his personal tax returns.

I use the same model for my taxes and had huge losses which I offset against my personal taxes for years. I did however pay 1.3 million in taxes this year when said properties were sold. Eventually the losses are recovered and taxes are paid, it's just a deferment. All businesses in this situation do this. No big deal.

Have a cake recipe you'd like to share?

Wow your just as small and bitchy as HRC. You must be a lobbyist who contributes greatly to her failure as a human being. In sorry you don't have the work ethic I possess.

No, "your" just as small and bitchy. And with a weird lot of anger - or can you not see that that's a disproportionate amount of defensiveness and anger for a simple question? Sorry that the Great Businessman you're excited to vote for is even worse at his job than he is at being a good husband.

And therein lies the issue I have with Trump. He keeps talking about how great a businessman he is yet writes off a billion $$ in losses! However, he was right saying it makes him smart he didn't pay taxes. And it makes him SLICK.

[Anonymous]

A more legitimate concern would be his charitable contributions. As a business owner myself (not in Trump 's league, LOL), I've had years where I legally had no tax obligation, but I've always been generous with charitable contributions.

I agree with Trump that the government wastes an extraordinary amount of money, and - if legally allowed - I'd much prefer to choose how to give my money: veterans' groups, disease research, animal programs, etc. So....did Trump's taxes reveal a total for charitable deductions? That would be much more telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A more legitimate concern would be his charitable contributions. As a business owner myself (not in Trump 's league, LOL), I've had years where I legally had no tax obligation, but I've always been generous with charitable contributions.

I agree with Trump that the government wastes an extraordinary amount of money, and - if legally allowed - I'd much prefer to choose how to give my money: veterans' groups, disease research, animal programs, etc. So....did Trump's taxes reveal a total for charitable deductions? That would be much more telling.

They probably all went to the Trump foundation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically because he was a horrible businessman, he took a 900 Million loss and has been amortizing it for decades in tax avoidance.

So we are all chumps for paying our 30% or whatever while he freeloads on the government and then bases his campaign on poor government and his business acumen.

Ya, he's smart.

Asshole.

Where's your outrage for the TRILLIONS Google, Facebook, Exxon, Amazon, General Electric, etc. dodge? Trump is small potatoes.

I am outraged. You think Trump is going to address that? Hell no.

He's supporting them through larger tax breaks. But unless Hillary changes the laws, these companies will continue to make gobs of money.

Does everyone hate Zuckerberg, too? He's charitable to others AND to himself.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/12/02/the-surprising-math-in-mark-zuckerbergs-45-billion-facebook-donation/#263baa0110db

Facebook’s SEC filing notes that:

On December 1, 2015, our Founder, Chairman and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, announced that, during his lifetime, he will gift or otherwise direct substantially all of his shares of Facebook stock, or the net after-tax proceeds from sales of such shares, to further the mission of advancing human potential and promoting equality by means of philanthropic, public advocacy, and other activities for the public good. For this purpose, Mr. Zuckerberg has established a new entity, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, LLC, and he will control the voting and disposition of any shares held by such entity. He has informed us that he plans to sell or gift no more than $1 billion of Facebook stock each year for the next three years and that he intends to retain his majority voting position in our stock for the foreseeable future.

This generosity is also incredibly tax efficient. One can assume that he will make these enormous gifts in shares, not in cash, just like famously savvy Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway. Why donate stock? With stock, the donor gets a charitable contribution deduction based on the fair market value of the shares. Value and basis are different things, which can mean enormous tax advantages.

And I guess you all hate Buffett, too? He's a staunch liberal who can pay little in taxes, too.

[Anonymous]

A billion dollar loss, but he keeps the jet, the millions in the bank, the property the businesses, and still gets to file several bankruptcies and on and on. Most people whow pull a film flam like Trump would barely be allowed to keep their house or car and possibly lose their job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically because he was a horrible businessman, he took a 900 Million loss and has been amortizing it for decades in tax avoidance.

So we are all chumps for paying our 30% or whatever while he freeloads on the government and then bases his campaign on poor government and his business acumen.

Ya, he's smart.

Asshole.

Where's your outrage for the TRILLIONS Google, Facebook, Exxon, Amazon, General Electric, etc. dodge? Trump is small potatoes.

I am outraged. You think Trump is going to address that? Hell no.

He's supporting them through larger tax breaks. But unless Hillary changes the laws, these companies will continue to make gobs of money.

Does everyone hate Zuckerberg, too? He's charitable to others AND to himself.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/12/02/the-surprising-math-in-mark-zuckerbergs-45-billion-facebook-donation/#263baa0110db

Facebook’s SEC filing notes that:

On December 1, 2015, our Founder, Chairman and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, announced that, during his lifetime, he will gift or otherwise direct substantially all of his shares of Facebook stock, or the net after-tax proceeds from sales of such shares, to further the mission of advancing human potential and promoting equality by means of philanthropic, public advocacy, and other activities for the public good. For this purpose, Mr. Zuckerberg has established a new entity, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, LLC, and he will control the voting and disposition of any shares held by such entity. He has informed us that he plans to sell or gift no more than $1 billion of Facebook stock each year for the next three years and that he intends to retain his majority voting position in our stock for the foreseeable future.

This generosity is also incredibly tax efficient. One can assume that he will make these enormous gifts in shares, not in cash, just like famously savvy Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway. Why donate stock? With stock, the donor gets a charitable contribution deduction based on the fair market value of the shares. Value and basis are different things, which can mean enormous tax advantages.

And I guess you all hate Buffett, too? He's a staunch liberal who can pay little in taxes, too.

Warren Buffet's generous charitable donations are well known. And Trump's? Hiding alongside his hidden tax returns?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How much tax has Amazon paid?

They have been running a huge loss for many years.

Poor attempt at trying to change the subject. Not working.

No, not a detour

In fact, if you were bright, you'd see how any large corporation or bigwigs like Zuckerberg and Buffett are no different from Trump. Trump goes bankrupt; they donate to charitable organizations. And guess who's paying taxes? not them!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So basically because he was a horrible businessman, he took a 900 Million loss and has been amortizing it for decades in tax avoidance.

So we are all chumps for paying our 30% or whatever while he freeloads on the government and then bases his campaign on poor government and his business acumen.

Ya, he's smart.

Asshole.

Where's your outrage for the TRILLIONS Google, Facebook, Exxon, Amazon, General Electric, etc. dodge? Trump is small potatoes.

I am outraged. You think Trump is going to address that? Hell no.

He's supporting them through larger tax breaks. But unless Hillary changes the laws, these companies will continue to make gobs of money.

Does everyone hate Zuckerberg, too? He's charitable to others AND to himself.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/12/02/the-surprising-math-in-mark-zuckerbergs-45-billion-facebook-donation/#263baa0110db

Facebook’s SEC filing notes that:

On December 1, 2015, our Founder, Chairman and CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, announced that, during his lifetime, he will gift or otherwise direct substantially all of his shares of Facebook stock, or the net after-tax proceeds from sales of such shares, to further the mission of advancing human potential and promoting equality by means of philanthropic, public advocacy, and other activities for the public good. For this purpose, Mr. Zuckerberg has established a new entity, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, LLC, and he will control the voting and disposition of any shares held by such entity. He has informed us that he plans to sell or gift no more than $1 billion of Facebook stock each year for the next three years and that he intends to retain his majority voting position in our stock for the foreseeable future.

This generosity is also incredibly tax efficient. One can assume that he will make these enormous gifts in shares, not in cash, just like famously savvy Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway. Why donate stock? With stock, the donor gets a charitable contribution deduction based on the fair market value of the shares. Value and basis are different things, which can mean enormous tax advantages.

And I guess you all hate Buffett, too? He's a staunch liberal who can pay little in taxes, too.

Warren Buffet's generous charitable donations are well known. And Trump's? Hiding alongside his hidden tax returns?

And his generous donations cut into his taxes, genius.

The American public is dead in the head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A more legitimate concern would be his charitable contributions. As a business owner myself (not in Trump 's league, LOL), I've had years where I legally had no tax obligation, but I've always been generous with charitable contributions.

I agree with Trump that the government wastes an extraordinary amount of money, and - if legally allowed - I'd much prefer to choose how to give my money: veterans' groups, disease research, animal programs, etc. So....did Trump's taxes reveal a total for charitable deductions? That would be much more telling.

They probably all went to the Trump foundation.

Just like the Clintons did with the CF, then? They "donate" money to their foundation so they can travel first-class and stay in expensive hotels. My point is....both candidates are unethical sleaze bags.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A more legitimate concern would be his charitable contributions. As a business owner myself (not in Trump 's league, LOL), I've had years where I legally had no tax obligation, but I've always been generous with charitable contributions.

I agree with Trump that the government wastes an extraordinary amount of money, and - if legally allowed - I'd much prefer to choose how to give my money: veterans' groups, disease research, animal programs, etc. So....did Trump's taxes reveal a total for charitable deductions? That would be much more telling.

They probably all went to the Trump foundation.

I believe the Clinton Foundation worked in a similar fashion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again no taxes paid, not even $1 contribution to NJ children fund. So now we know for sure he hasn't paid taxes for multiple years. Potentially he could have carried over his bankruptcy loss for decades without paying any taxes or anything to charity.

So we now know he hasn't paid taxes for sure in 1991,1993 and 1995 and for atleast two more decades. So his business MO is to accumulate debt and declare bankruptcy and use the loss to eliminate tax obligations since he uses S-Corp, which allows pass through of business loss to his personal tax returns.

I use the same model for my taxes and had huge losses which I offset against my personal taxes for years. I did however pay 1.3 million in taxes this year when said properties were sold. Eventually the losses are recovered and taxes are paid, it's just a deferment. All businesses in this situation do this. No big deal.

Have a cake recipe you'd like to share?

Wow your just as small and bitchy as HRC. You must be a lobbyist who contributes greatly to her failure as a human being. In sorry you don't have the work ethic I possess.

Many of the properties my friend owns come from Daddy. It's easy to possess work ethic when the work is already done for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, the issue here is the candidate is running based on his experience as a successful businessperson.

He has needled the Obamas, the Clintons and scores of others over the past several years about the unfairness of the tax code, the scourge of "those people" on the hard-working "real" Americans, etc and in fact he is the scourge as he has been freeloading on the government for decades and has paid less in taxes than the most lower-middle class of the people whose votes he is trying to attract.

People who pay hundreds of dollars in taxes have paid more than he has. Let that sink in.

He is a hypocrite and lousy businessman who has let his business failings subsidize his existence for decades as he remade himself from a developer to a branding machine. This news punches a huge hole in that facade.

Illegal? Who knows - the public needs more information, particularly on whether the initial "loss" was really almost a BILLION dollars. People take paper losses that aren't based in reality for the tax benefit. It is entirely possible Trump did the same.

As I said previously, the issue of his business prowess is legitimate given the bankruptcies of companies that he has been associated with over the years. The bankruptcies don't necessarily make him a lousy businessman because many successful people in business do use the bankruptcy laws to their advantage.

With regard to the legality of what he did, given the magnitude of the losses and his acknowledgement that he has been audited over many years, I am sure if there was legal or tax exposure, the IRS would be all over it. Also, although he has not released his tax returns, the IRS has those returns and if he did anything inappropriate they have he information and resources to investigate him. However, given his position and the professional advisers he has available to him, I am sure that he would not leave himself exposed to tax fraud.

There are myriad tax loopholes that are available to those with the resources and sophistication and it is used all the time. I was actively involved in advising on an acquisition some years ago and the company being acquired had a very large NOL - multi-million dollars - that could be used to offset against the income of the acquiring entity. Now that large NOL actually had a value from the standpoint of the acquiring entity, hard as it may be to understand for most people.

To repeat: if we don't like the tax laws and loopholes, then change them - but don't blame anyone for taking advantage of them. But it will not happen because our elected representatives are too beholden to the special interests that want to preserve them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They probably all went to the Trump foundation.

I believe the Clinton Foundation worked in a similar fashion.

You would be quite wrong.