No surprise - Clarence Thomas is completely corrupt
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
No, no one has to report gifts, only income. |
Anonymous
This is incorrect. IRS rules have limits on what can be excluded from reporting as income and what can't. |
Anonymous
You’re both wrong. The giver has to report gifts in excess of the annual allowance. So if Crow didn’t report the gifts, he’s the one in trouble. I’m assuming he didn’t—because they were bribes. In which case Thomas is in trouble too. If Crow reported them, there’s less of a case that they were bribes. I’m sure there’s a sham charity or two involved that laundered the gifts though. |
Anonymous
Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t. The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response. So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it. See paragraph 5 of the Statement: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf |
Anonymous
I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail. |
Anonymous
Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything. |
Anonymous
does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly? The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it. |
Anonymous
You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud. |
Anonymous
this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income. |
Anonymous
| Disclosing or not seems almost irrelevant. It's like disclosing a bride, but somehow the bribe is legal. And Ginni Thomas was paid - secretly - by right wing groups with cases before the court. They are MARRIED. That's marital income. How on earth is that not an out-and-out bribe? And how is this guy still sitting up there and there is apparently no way to get rid of him unless he just up and dies? |
Anonymous
No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income. There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee. |
Anonymous
DoJ does criminal tax cases. Crow would have had to declare and pay taxes, not Thomas |
Anonymous
There is a gift limitation, above which it is taxable. In 2022, you could give $16,000 to someone before it became taxable. For 2023, it is $17,000. |
Anonymous
that's just weird. so you pay taxes when you earn your money, and then pay again when you give it as a gift to somebody? and if all your income were gifts, you would never have to pay taxes? fascinating |
Anonymous
That is true (although there are actually a number of other exceptions), but when taxes are due they are paid by the giver, not the receiver. |