One speculation is, " The answer may well be that 2009 was the year that the Treasury Department decided to offer an amnesty from prosecution for tax fraud to any of the tens of thousands of millionaires who were known or suspected to have illegally hidden income abroad in the Cayman Islands or in Swiss banks — a felony, but one that people thought they’d never be caught at."

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/21/mitts-big-secret/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a stupid as*****. 13% and he thinks he paid his fair share.

Are you retarded? The tax rate of investment income is 15% for all US citizens. Why would anyone pay more than their fair share?

Yeah but in his case, his actual income is also taxed at 15% because he got paid in carried interest, which is not an investment. And there are people who think a 15% rate on investment gains is a giveaway to people with wealth. If you want to make the argument that it stimulates investment, show the proof because there is a strong case to be made that it does very little to increase investment.

So he should volunteer to pay above the set rate? And I'm not making any argument, it is what it is and he's playing by the rules.

No but the people deserve to know what stake he has in tax policy since he will be setting it. If we are on a national discussion about what is fair then they should know where he fits.

And lastly we really don't know that he has been playing by the rules. We don't know whether he has trust money in foreign banks or other tax dodges.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a stupid as*****. 13% and he thinks he paid his fair share.

Are you retarded? The tax rate of investment income is 15% for all US citizens. Why would anyone pay more than their fair share?

Yeah but in his case, his actual income is also taxed at 15% because he got paid in carried interest, which is not an investment. And there are people who think a 15% rate on investment gains is a giveaway to people with wealth. If you want to make the argument that it stimulates investment, show the proof because there is a strong case to be made that it does very little to increase investment.

So he should volunteer to pay above the set rate? And I'm not making any argument, it is what it is and he's playing by the rules.

Why are the republicans so anti free market? The government should not be stimulating investment. Let the market dictate investment, not some anti tax republican bureaucrat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is a stupid as*****. 13% and he thinks he paid his fair share.

Are you retarded? The tax rate of investment income is 15% for all US citizens. Why would anyone pay more than their fair share?

Yeah but in his case, his actual income is also taxed at 15% because he got paid in carried interest, which is not an investment. And there are people who think a 15% rate on investment gains is a giveaway to people with wealth. If you want to make the argument that it stimulates investment, show the proof because there is a strong case to be made that it does very little to increase investment.

Income is income, should all be taxed at the same rate unless you are in favor of the government picking winners and losers.

Anonymous wrote:He is a stupid as*****. 13% and he thinks he paid his fair share.

Are you retarded? The tax rate of investment income is 15% for all US citizens. Why would anyone pay more than their fair share?

Anonymous wrote:I didn't used to care all that much about this but now it's really starting to bug me. It's really starting to feel like he's hiding something. Whereas if he had released his taxes after some prodding, I figured that it wouldn't be a great reflection on him but it would all pass.

But now, wtf is going on?

Completely agree, I thought this was a non-issue at the beginning, but now it looks like he is clearly hiding something. He has a right to make a lot of money, pay as little in taxes as is legal and open accounts in any country he wants. Lots of wealthy people do that. He doesn't have the right to be president. There is a higher level of scrutiny for that office.

Whatever he is unwilling to share will probably come out eventually. It would be better for us to learn it now than after he's in the WH.

Anonymous wrote:All this time wasted on discussing Romney tax returns. Do you honestly believe the tax returns reveal anything other than Romney is wealthy? However, the Obama campaign knows that whatever’s in them they’ll be able to twist into more cheap, populist, class-warmongering appeals. So it's nothing more than class warfare, about constantly repeating Romney is “rich," about trying to make legal tax deductions and credits seem sordid and shady, about trying to make Romney’s wealth appear ill-gotten and at the cost of ordinary Americans, and about taxing capital gains at a lower rate than earned income.

Let's spend less time talking about tax returns and more talking about tax policy. That's what matters, the whole tax return thing is a diversion . The tax code is the antithesis of "fair" on all levels. Much of it is not set up to maximize revenue but to facilitate social engineering and curry political favor. It rewards behavior deemed desirable (electric cars, home buying) and contains loopholes and deductions designed to help narrow constituent groups. Both political parties engage in using the tax code to their perceived advantage. The result is a system which has strayed far from its original intended purpose, which is to fund the federal government. This would be a good discussion, but instead we focus on a tax return.

Yes, I do.

We know he is wealthy. He has been scared to show his returns, and it loooong predates his presidential campaigns. He was dodging this issue when he ran for Governor. You can call it twisting, but if this guy had some shady tax dodging investments or some politically embarrassing ones (say oil companies violating the Iran embargo), it's relevant and bad and not just a matter of him being wealthy.

All this time wasted on discussing Romney tax returns. Do you honestly believe the tax returns reveal anything other than Romney is wealthy? However, the Obama campaign knows that whatever’s in them they’ll be able to twist into more cheap, populist, class-warmongering appeals. So it's nothing more than class warfare, about constantly repeating Romney is “rich," about trying to make legal tax deductions and credits seem sordid and shady, about trying to make Romney’s wealth appear ill-gotten and at the cost of ordinary Americans, and about taxing capital gains at a lower rate than earned income.

Let's spend less time talking about tax returns and more talking about tax policy. That's what matters, the whole tax return thing is a diversion . The tax code is the antithesis of "fair" on all levels. Much of it is not set up to maximize revenue but to facilitate social engineering and curry political favor. It rewards behavior deemed desirable (electric cars, home buying) and contains loopholes and deductions designed to help narrow constituent groups. Both political parties engage in using the tax code to their perceived advantage. The result is a system which has strayed far from its original intended purpose, which is to fund the federal government. This would be a good discussion, but instead we focus on a tax return.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's proud of paying a 13% rate? Please God don't let this greedy monster win the presidency! The nerve of this man!

Plus we won't even PROVE the sickeningly low rate!!!

Do you realize that 80% of americans pay less than 15% effective tax rate?

http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/16/news/economy/romney-taxes/index.html

according to this article:

"For families making $50,000 to $75,000, the effective tax rate is 5.7%. From $75,000 to $100,000, it's 7.2%. And if you make $200,000, it goes up to 9.9%
"

So you are saying that our tax rate is incredibly low. Then why are we fighting over taxes?