Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I could care less about Trump's taxes as an individual. But I love what he has done for us.

What concrete things has he done for us?

Owned the libs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I could care less about Trump's taxes as an individual. But I love what he has done for us.

What concrete things has he done for us?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone saying this is all totally legal and normal (which is far from evidence and you know it), there is still a big problem here, which is that teachers and nurses and construction workers shouldn’t be paying ten times more in races every year than a purported billionaire. If Trump really cared about the American people, his tax law would have been focused on closing loopholes and easing the burden on middle income Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, rather than further enriching himself at their expense.

Cheer for him all you want, but don’t fool yourself for a minute that he cares about you. He thinks of you all as useful idiots, nothing more.

+1
The "accountants" on this thread are either too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Trump supporters.

Don't democrats value the opinion of experts? Imagine if someone said that climate scientists are too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Democratic supporters.

It would be weird if people were getting their information on climate science from anonymous posters on DCUM.

I don't think the PP's point was complaining about the anonymity of DCUM.

Oh that was definitely a big part of what I was saying. That's why I put "accountants" in quotes. Plenty of DCUMers like to your their credentials, but most readers are smart enough to take that with a grain of salt.

Think what you will, I don't speak for others but I myself am not here to look for your approval or acknowledgement. I'll share what I know and hope it help others come to a more informed opinion. You may choose to ignore facts and logic if you want to, it doesn't bother me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So Trump is like 75,000,000 other Americans who pay no income taxes.



As a CPA I can professionally tell everyone here that >99% of DCUMers have absolutely no idea how business or high wealth taxes work, yet will jump to whatever conclusions they see fit.

Look at amazon as an example. Every letter to shareholders they advocate for “maximizing the present value of future cash flows” (if you don’t know what that means you have no hope of understanding Trump's tax returns).

Ultimately it is a strategy to reinvest cash flows into future earning potential to avoid paying income taxes. Amazon as a company had negative net income but was still worth hundreds of billions of dollars due to generating massive future free cash flow.

At some level, if you have positive net income as a business, you don’t know what to do with your money and are happy to waste some on tax. That sums up trumps tax returns - he doesn’t want to waste any money paying taxes.

Reading New York Times attempt to analyze trumps tax returns is like reading a toddler try to interpret Benjamin Graham. NYT's hack job is pure cringe worthy. They aren’t even consistent on how they talk about depreciation and never even mention what free cash flow even is.

To all the democrats out there - this ain’t it chief. Of course this will never get brought to light with a free and fair counter argument published in the NYT, because discussing gritty aspects of the US tax code is a snooze fest. Gotta sell the hyperbole and outrageous headlines.

Except that the market or rather the enterprise value of his properties is currently underwater. Also, the article makes clear that he's been cashing out his actual equity in stocks as well as his money making operations for years. This is no Benjamin Graham-style value investing business that generates huge amounts of FCF. It's a money losing operation. And hey, if was so profitable, then why aren't other value investors or growth investors going to same well? That is, why isn't there a feeding frenzy among private equity funds buying up golf clubs and leveraging them up because they're so profitable? And if so, then wouldn't you see record prices being paid for flipping the properties as golf clubs. This doesn't add up - and that's before the pandemic decimated the cash flows of the hotel industry.

Anonymous wrote:I could care less about Trump's taxes as an individual. But I love what he has done for us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone saying this is all totally legal and normal (which is far from evidence and you know it), there is still a big problem here, which is that teachers and nurses and construction workers shouldn’t be paying ten times more in races every year than a purported billionaire. If Trump really cared about the American people, his tax law would have been focused on closing loopholes and easing the burden on middle income Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, rather than further enriching himself at their expense.

Cheer for him all you want, but don’t fool yourself for a minute that he cares about you. He thinks of you all as useful idiots, nothing more.

+1
The "accountants" on this thread are either too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Trump supporters.

Don't democrats value the opinion of experts? Imagine if someone said that climate scientists are too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Democratic supporters.

It would be weird if people were getting their information on climate science from anonymous posters on DCUM.

I don't think the PP's point was complaining about the anonymity of DCUM.

Oh that was definitely a big part of what I was saying. That's why I put "accountants" in quotes. Plenty of DCUMers like to your their credentials, but most readers are smart enough to take that with a grain of salt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone saying this is all totally legal and normal (which is far from evidence and you know it), there is still a big problem here, which is that teachers and nurses and construction workers shouldn’t be paying ten times more in races every year than a purported billionaire. If Trump really cared about the American people, his tax law would have been focused on closing loopholes and easing the burden on middle income Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, rather than further enriching himself at their expense.

Cheer for him all you want, but don’t fool yourself for a minute that he cares about you. He thinks of you all as useful idiots, nothing more.

+1
The "accountants" on this thread are either too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Trump supporters.

Don't democrats value the opinion of experts? Imagine if someone said that climate scientists are too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Democratic supporters.

Sorry, are you saying Trump doesn't pay a tiny fraction in income taxes of what teachers, nurses and construction workers pay? Please give me your expert opinion. I'm just a lay person so I don't know if I can understand this fundamental point.

There seem to be a lot of “CPAs” and “accountants” posting today who can’t seem to explain why Trump’s understatement of income to avoid federal tax obligations and simultaneous overstatement of income on loan paperwork to seek credit lines doesn’t constitute fraud.

Anonymous wrote:So Trump is like 75,000,000 other Americans who pay no income taxes.



As a CPA I can professionally tell everyone here that >99% of DCUMers have absolutely no idea how business or high wealth taxes work, yet will jump to whatever conclusions they see fit.

Look at amazon as an example. Every letter to shareholders they advocate for “maximizing the present value of future cash flows” (if you don’t know what that means you have no hope of understanding Trump's tax returns).

Ultimately it is a strategy to reinvest cash flows into future earning potential to avoid paying income taxes. Amazon as a company had negative net income but was still worth hundreds of billions of dollars due to generating massive future free cash flow.

At some level, if you have positive net income as a business, you don’t know what to do with your money and are happy to waste some on tax. That sums up trumps tax returns - he doesn’t want to waste any money paying taxes.

Reading New York Times attempt to analyze trumps tax returns is like reading a toddler try to interpret Benjamin Graham. NYT's hack job is pure cringe worthy. They aren’t even consistent on how they talk about depreciation and never even mention what free cash flow even is.

To all the democrats out there - this ain’t it chief. Of course this will never get brought to light with a free and fair counter argument published in the NYT, because discussing gritty aspects of the US tax code is a snooze fest. Gotta sell the hyperbole and outrageous headlines.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone saying this is all totally legal and normal (which is far from evidence and you know it), there is still a big problem here, which is that teachers and nurses and construction workers shouldn’t be paying ten times more in races every year than a purported billionaire. If Trump really cared about the American people, his tax law would have been focused on closing loopholes and easing the burden on middle income Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, rather than further enriching himself at their expense.

Cheer for him all you want, but don’t fool yourself for a minute that he cares about you. He thinks of you all as useful idiots, nothing more.

+1
The "accountants" on this thread are either too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Trump supporters.

Don't democrats value the opinion of experts? Imagine if someone said that climate scientists are too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Democratic supporters.

Sorry, are you saying Trump doesn't pay a tiny fraction in income taxes of what teachers, nurses and construction workers pay? Please give me your expert opinion. I'm just a lay person so I don't know if I can understand this fundamental point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an accountant I am not surprised by this number at all. He has lost a lot of money on a lot of businesses. Without more detail, the $750 has very little meaning. It's just being dropped to get people outraged

You are so wise, and yet: 1) the number does have meaning on its very face about how much he paid and 2) read the article for lots and lots more detail.

Also, it's the frequency with which this has happened. One year = not concerning at all. Two years = not a big deal. But 10-15 years in a row!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone saying this is all totally legal and normal (which is far from evidence and you know it), there is still a big problem here, which is that teachers and nurses and construction workers shouldn’t be paying ten times more in races every year than a purported billionaire. If Trump really cared about the American people, his tax law would have been focused on closing loopholes and easing the burden on middle income Americans who are struggling to make ends meet, rather than further enriching himself at their expense.

Cheer for him all you want, but don’t fool yourself for a minute that he cares about you. He thinks of you all as useful idiots, nothing more.

+1
The "accountants" on this thread are either too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Trump supporters.

Don't democrats value the opinion of experts? Imagine if someone said that climate scientists are too in the weeds to see the big picture, or are desperate Democratic supporters.

It would be weird if people were getting their information on climate science from anonymous posters on DCUM.

I don't think the PP's point was complaining about the anonymity of DCUM.