so are the other american horse owners not taking tax deductions?

like i said earlier, who gives a shit? folks realize that most people who run for president are independently wealthy correct?

im not a romney fan but all these attempts to count his money is pathetic.i get hounding him for going out his way to avoid taxes via having his money overseas but we really going to get on his case for tax deductions?

i guess im just tired of this petty nonsense. its not a newsflash that romney is rich. im just sort of tired of acting like hes the only wealthy man in america taking tax deductions or not paying his "fair share" in taxes.

if anything, this tells us that our tax code needs real reform if someone like him (and there are many) have many ways to lessen their tax burden whereas the little guy does not.

Do you think she actually rides this horse? She part owns this horse dumbass.

Enough, it seems, to take some pretty nice dumbass Federal tax deductions on the partially-owned horse. So come on, America, cheer for the gold! After all, you helped subsidize this horse. "Best games ever...."

Wonder what other horse**** deductions Mitt took on his taxes? We'd know, if he'd only release more than one tax return!

Because nothing says connecting with the average Joe American better than owning an Olympic dressage horse (oh, and being good friends with some Nascar team owners).

I'm curious as to whether it would make a difference if the horse were competing in Grand Prix jumping or three-day eventing (combo of dressage, cross-country jumping, and show jumping in ring). I don't care for the Romneys (who seem unable to wear their wealth comfortably in the presence of us non-rich types) but I wonder if this isn't also being driven by a gender thing. I bet people think dressage (think horse ballet) is girly and feminine. If the Romneys had a great kick-ass jumper, I wonder if they would get as much criticism.

I do agree that the MS argument is BS. You don't need an Olympic-level dressage horse to use riding as a therapy to counter MS.

Anonymous wrote:WHAT? A person has MS, gets a horse, uses riding as therapy instead of using insurance to minimize the pain of MS and you chumps inside the beltway think people will view this as a negative? Only a non-patriotic jerk would ask is it better if Rafalca losses. It is best for America for Rafalca to win and that is best for everyone. Grow a pair.

Do you think she actually rides this horse? She part owns this horse dumbass.

Rafalca is not her therapy. Rafalca is a horse bred and trained beyond her means as a rider. Jan Ebeling is rafalcas rider and part owner. He picked out this horse, trains this horse, and rides this horse. Romney is the benefactor, because this sport makes almost no money even at the highest levels.

I don't go for this picking on Romney for the horse, my inlaws have two dressage horses and we have one good rider. But come on, put down the Kool Aid.

Totally agree that they couldn't have picked a snootier hobby.

But in the end, contributing to the US medal count would be plus for Romney.

Participating in dressage is a vivid example of how Romney is not line the average American. Romney goes to length to down at his wealth. The question is whether the horse being in the news for winning will overshadow that the horse is a symbol of his extreme wealth.

The fact that Ms. Romney is able to choose participating in dressage as a theraphy for her MS just high lights the inequity in health care. I think it is great that she has the means and opportunity to use dressage for therapy, but it reminds me that there are people with MS who are not so fortunate.

seriously who gives a fuck if the horse wins or loses?

+1

seriously who gives a fuck if the horse wins or loses?

im a dem and im not going to waste my time and energy cheering against a horse just because the romneys own it and possibly dont pay taxes on it.

not every single thing in our lives revolve around politics.

for all i know, the women beach volleyball teams are flaming conservatives. all i care is that they look good in their bikini's and win. they talk politics after the games, ill address it then. before that. who cares?

Anonymous wrote:WHAT? A person has MS, gets a horse, uses riding as therapy instead of using insurance to minimize the pain of MS and you chumps inside the beltway think people will view this as a negative? Only a non-patriotic jerk would ask is it better if Rafalca losses. It is best for America for Rafalca to win and that is best for everyone. Grow a pair.

1. The fact that you know the horse's name is . . . well, I don't know. But it's something.

2. It's best for America? Really? The fortunes of this great nation rise and fall on horse ballet? Huh.

WHAT? A person has MS, gets a horse, uses riding as therapy instead of using insurance to minimize the pain of MS and you chumps inside the beltway think people will view this as a negative? Only a non-patriotic jerk would ask is it better if Rafalca losses. It is best for America for Rafalca to win and that is best for everyone. Grow a pair.

I'm sure he would prefer this horse to beoutof the news.

Everyone loves a winner.

OP here - turns out that while the loss reported was $77k, the deduction taken (at this point because there was not prize money to offset) was modest.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/06/16/the_tax_deductibility_of_horse_related_expenses.html

If the horse wins, he (and the taxpayers due to the tax deductions he took for caring for the horse) helped finance an Olympic winner,
but it keeps he horse and his wealth in the news.