Someone leaked Trump's 1995 tax returns

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No, the Clinton Foundation actually gave money to charities and did charitable works. The Trump Foundation paid little Donald's legal fees and bought a Tebow helmet. One of the candidates is a sleaze bag, and he's got tiny hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Still pays about 18% in taxes, genius

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is legal and that is what matters ...... I say this as a liberal who uses every available loophole and strategy to pay as little in taxes as I can.

Who in their right mind would forgo legitimate deductions to pay more in taxes than they should? Trump can be faulted for many other things but minimizing his taxes using legitimate methods is not one of them.

I agree (another liberal here). I think the bigger issue is that he had almost a 1 billion dollar loss. Granted it was over 20 years ago. But this is a guy who boasts about what an amazing businessman he is. Most people can't conceive of a million dollar loss, let alone a billion dollar loss!

[Anonymous]

Admit it, Trumpsters, he sucks in every possible way. There went the narrative that he is a good businessman. Joke's on you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Do you realize how dumb you come across with this sort of argument?

Individuals used to run up debt and then declare personal bankruptcy wiping out all of the debt. Doing this became more difficult after Congress passed legislation limiting this because of pressure from banks, credit card companies, hospital costs, etc. One of those backing the legislation was Hillary Clinton! So the individuals who got into debt were limited in their ability to wipe their debts clean but large companies still are able to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is legal and that is what matters ...... I say this as a liberal who uses every available loophole and strategy to pay as little in taxes as I can.

Who in their right mind would forgo legitimate deductions to pay more in taxes than they should? Trump can be faulted for many other things but minimizing his taxes using legitimate methods is not one of them.

Just because it is legal doesn't mean it looks good when you are promoting yourself as "for the regular guy"

Just as getting a medical deferment to the draft for having "heel spurs" when you have been playing squash football and tennis in college may have been legal. But it doesn't look good, especially when you are putting yourself forward as being "for the veterans".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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!!!!

You may not care, but this will resonate with the undecideds. A very bad week for.Trump just became two weeks.

[Anonymous]

As it turn out, he has been right about exactly one thing. The system is rigged. It's just rigged in HIS favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As it turn out, he has been right about exactly one thing. The system is rigged. It's just rigged in HIS favor.

And if the Trump supporters think he would do anything to change it, they would be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Do you realize how dumb you come across with this sort of argument?

Individuals used to run up debt and then declare personal bankruptcy wiping out all of the debt. Doing this became more difficult after Congress passed legislation limiting this because of pressure from banks, credit card companies, hospital costs, etc. One of those backing the legislation was Hillary Clinton! So the individuals who got into debt were limited in their ability to wipe their debts clean but large companies still are able to do so.

Oh, dear. Yes, you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Admit it, Trumpsters, he sucks in every possible way. There went the narrative that he is a good businessman. Joke's on you

I enjoy watching the seeds of the talking points taking root, though. It's not that he sucks as a businessman (husband, father, citizen, etc), this is how everyone does it! He's a genius! The whole point is to lose money because that's how you make money!

[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.

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

Look I fully admit I don't understand how people take advantage of tax loopholes. I also agree that if you are doing something legal under the tax code, you are doing nothing wrong. What you are failing to understand is that the average American (like me) sees a billion dollar loss as proof you aren't a particularly good businessman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is legal and that is what matters ...... I say this as a liberal who uses every available loophole and strategy to pay as little in taxes as I can.

Who in their right mind would forgo legitimate deductions to pay more in taxes than they should? Trump can be faulted for many other things but minimizing his taxes using legitimate methods is not one of them.

Somebody who realizes that society will collapse if each of us only thinks about ourselves and never society as a whole. Also anbody with any moral sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not illegal. That's the problem. This is how the rich stay rich. They hire the best CPAs and attorneys who find loopholes.

And there is no way in hell he would close those loopholes as POTUS. His tax policies are mostly to benefit the rich. He just threw in a little morsel for the middle/lower class to make it look like his policies were more of a benefit for them. Bait and switch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is legal and that is what matters ...... I say this as a liberal who uses every available loophole and strategy to pay as little in taxes as I can.

Who in their right mind would forgo legitimate deductions to pay more in taxes than they should? Trump can be faulted for many other things but minimizing his taxes using legitimate methods is not one of them.

Somebody who realizes that society will collapse if each of us only thinks about ourselves and never society as a whole. Also anbody with any moral sense.

Then change the tax laws to make sure that everyone pays their fair share. What is the level that people should pay to show they have a "moral sense"?

The reality is that you know as well as I do, that whether Hillary is elected or Trump is elected, they will not be able to make meaningful changes in the tax laws. There are vested interests that will work against any changes.