Reply to MoCo Council candidate Natali Fani-Gonzalez under review for possible tax evasion

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "MoCo Council candidate Natali Fani-Gonzalez under review for possible tax evasion"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I know a 100% disabled veteran who is a judge. No visible disabilities btw. [/quote]
False. To retain 100% disability first of all means that you cannot work. [/quote]

That's not true, it means you can't work in the job that you had previously. [/quote]
If you work your disability payments are reduced and the hours you can work are capped to retain the disability. [/quote]

disability is not a permanent state, it was never (hopefully) supposed to be so.

As people get medical interventions the hope is that they are not 100% disabled.

Riding a bike does not mean you are not 100% disabled, people with PTSD can ride a bike.[/quote]

The VA, which is the sole arbiter of whether someone has a service-connected disability for the purposes of the property tax benefit, has criteria for this. A panel and a judge found that he wasn’t even temporarily totally disabled. It’s a public record. In light of that finding, the next question is how they got the property tax benefit. [/quote]

It was 100% but later 30%[/quote]
It’s not complicated.

She should not have claimed the benefit for every year that it was less than the 100%, should have know not to do so and also should repay the back taxes owed.

This is not a great way to start one’s political career and I do worry about the quality of her decision making.

Because it’s financial and she refuses to be transparent, this is much worse than Brandi Brooks. [/quote]

I agree but the OP is not informed.

Riding a bike does not mean you are not disabled.

Being 30% disabled does not mean you were never 100%

Is it really that hard to report facts.[/quote]
The only known and important facts are:
- the VA and a court have determined that he is not 100% disabled
- a 100% disability is required to claim the benefit

[/quote]

We know the VA court ruled him 100 at some point.

Then they ruled him 30% at some point.

At that point he did not change his status on his taxes and he owes ~$30K in taxes.

[/quote]
According to the documents, when he first filed his claim, I believe in 2017, he was given an interim/temporary 100% disability status. His claim was adjudicated in early 2020 and he was awarded a 30% disability status. He then appealed which ruled in 2022 and confirmed the 30% disability status.

He began receiving the tax benefit from the time of the interim/temporary status through present. I don’t believe that they should have continued to receive the benefit once it was adjudicated and pending appeal. So at minimum they should have paid property tax in 2020, 2021 and 2022.

[/quote]

I agree, but it’s not fraud. He had temporary 100 status and he filed correctly. [/quote]
And then he never informed SDAT of the change in status in 2020 when he should have. I don’t know what “fraud” is as it pertains to the facts here, but there is surely an unpaid tax bill that needs to be paid.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics