Romney's Taxes

[Number Six]

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/ ... x-on-100m/

I was watching David Cay Johnston this morning on CNN on the release of Romneys' taxes; and as he pointed out, what the Romneys did was "perfectly legal" just like his book: http://www.salon.com/2004/02/09/johnston_8/

The Sovereign Society is crying foul against the "smear" on Romney for his "legal" tax avoidance: http://sovereign-investor.com/2012/01/2 ... tt-romney/

Tax reform is way overdue to close out all the shelters people like Romney use to minimize taxes.

[Cpt Banjo]

Tax practitioners know these quotes from Judge Learned Hand by heart, but they bear repeating:

Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.
Gregory v. Helvering, 69 F.2d 809, 810-11 (2d Cir. 1934), aff'd, 293 U.S. 465 (1935).

Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging
one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and
all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes
are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of
morals is mere cant.
Commissioner v. Newman, 159 F.2d 848, 851 (2d Cir. 1947) (dissenting)

[JamesVincent]

So he paid an overall % of 13.9% on however many millions total he earned or (unearned) last year. I fail to see how, per the first article, that means an average worker making $54,000 per year pays more into the country for taxes then he does. The simple fact is Romney probably paid his accountant more then that average worker made and that average worker, most especially with any write-offs at all, probably paid zilch in taxes. People, once again, are stupid. Definitely not saying Im a Romney fan, but I get disgusted by such foolishness.

[JamesVincent]

So he paid an overall % of 13.9% on however many millions total he earned or (unearned) last year. I fail to see how, per the first article, that means an average worker making $54,000 per year pays more into the country for taxes then he does. The simple fact is Romney probably paid his accountant more then that average worker made and that average worker, most especially with any write-offs at all, probably paid zilch in taxes. People, once again, are stupid. Definitely not saying Im a Romney fan, but I get disgusted by such foolishness.

And how much did Mitt donate to charity or tithe to the Mormon Church? On a percentage basis (gross income), how does it compare to Newt, Paul, or Obama?

Well, according to them, Romney gave this much.

[JamesVincent]

Here is the answer to my question:

http://money.cnn.com/pf/taxes/storysupp ... ?hpt=hp_t2

Comparatively speaking, Newt is kind of a miserly skin-flint. Barry and Mitt give (percentage wise) on an equal basis, although with Mitt's tithing, he technically (on a percentage basis) gives more.

Enjoy

Actually the answer was in the paper I linked, broken down by donation, dollar by dollar, if you read it all the way through. For all three. And if you looked Gingrich actually didnt even give 3%, he gave 2.6%. But he didnt really even give that since the bulk of his personal contributions were to his church where his wife sings AND draws a stipend as part of the choir. So his net contribution to that church, according to them, actually went from $9k and change to $5k and change. The rest of his charity comes from his business, not his personal. So yeah... doesnt look like the Newt believes in the giving.

[Burzmali]

Here is the answer to my question:

http://money.cnn.com/pf/taxes/storysupp ... ?hpt=hp_t2

Comparatively speaking, Newt is kind of a miserly skin-flint. Barry and Mitt give (percentage wise) on an equal basis, although with Mitt's tithing, he technically (on a percentage basis) gives more.

Enjoy

Well, there is more than a little Quid pro quo with Romney's tithing, as a politician, that tithe is the cost he has to pay to get access to a significant source of campaign financing. Not that Obama and every other politician don't have similar payments under their belts, it's just easier to quantify in Romney's case.

[JamesVincent]

Here is the answer to my question:

http://money.cnn.com/pf/taxes/storysupp ... ?hpt=hp_t2

Comparatively speaking, Newt is kind of a miserly skin-flint. Barry and Mitt give (percentage wise) on an equal basis, although with Mitt's tithing, he technically (on a percentage basis) gives more.

Enjoy

Well, there is more than a little Quid pro quo with Romney's tithing, as a politician, that tithe is the cost he has to pay to get access to a significant source of campaign financing. Not that Obama and every other politician don't have similar payments under their belts, it's just easier to quantify in Romney's case.

Im pretty positive you dont become a Mormon just to become a politician. And I dont recall ever seeing anything saying he was anything but born and raised as one, correct me if Im wrong. So unless he was campaigning for President right out of the bag, so to speak, thats a pretty crappy statement.

[Burzmali]

Well, there is more than a little Quid pro quo with Romney's tithing, as a politician, that tithe is the cost he has to pay to get access to a significant source of campaign financing. Not that Obama and every other politician don't have similar payments under their belts, it's just easier to quantify in Romney's case.

Im pretty positive you dont become a Mormon just to become a politician. And I dont recall ever seeing anything saying he was anything but born and raised as one, correct me if Im wrong. So unless he was campaigning for President right out of the bag, so to speak, thats a pretty crappy statement.

I'm not accusing him of anything other than enlightened self-interest. In the realm of "charitable donations likely to generate significant returns", large donations to large, well-funded, religious organizations are pretty high on the list. Last I knew, the Mormon higher-ups didn't sit down with their members and go over their tax returns to determine the amount they should tithe.

[Burzmali]

No, the Mormons want all Mormons to literally decimate their income, by giving $1 out of every $10 made - as in tithing. And that is no matter what your job is. Also, as a young man, Mitt also went out on a "mission."

Does it give him access to money people? Being a national politician does that, not being Mormon.

I think I read where VP Biden donated almost $375 to charity.

Actually, looks like he didn't even make a full tithe, that's a bit of a herp derp maneuver for a Mormon politician. Makes sense that he was hesitant to release his returns.

[Number Six]

Compulsory tithing is taught by a lot of churches, some even say you must tithe on the "gross", it is "God's money", that you are actually "robbing God" in not giving Him his fair share, that when you starting doing that God must bless you, He is vowed by the covenant as the shameless Robert Tilton says. I buy the idea of how it is better to give to really needy charities, but not the idea of money flowing up to the filthy rich minister or tycoon.

The Mormon church is run like a corporation so it is conducive to corporate people. Do they care about actually doing something about helping the needy unconditionally in their communities? I haven't met many doing that. With the Mormon culture there seems to be a lack of creativity, a lack of concern about the damage our foreign wars have done to our economy and reputation. People like Mitt can talk about tax reform after he has made his millions, but what I see is a businessman who looked to expand his and his family's wealth and power at every turn.

[Randall]

No, the Mormons want all Mormons to literally decimate their income, by giving $1 out of every $10 made - as in tithing.

Actually, looks like he didn't even make a full tithe,

While some churches expect you to give 1/10th of your gross income, the LDS do not. They expect you to give 1/10th of your increase, they allow for deductions for food, shelter, medical care and other necessities. We can go crazy and debate what are necessities and what level of food and shelter, but there is no expectation to give 10% of every dollar earned.

[Number Six]

And I don't see much New Testament basis for the "tithe", it's a convenient principle that allows the churches to pressure their people into getting yet more money out of their people and virtually all of them preach on it. The Catholic church suggests 5% each to the church and the needy, a sounder New Testament principle. The Golden Rule is the core New Testament teaching.

I read that Randy Weaver was given the boot from the LDS church for not paying his taxes. At least they are on the ball on that issue.

[Burzmali]

... but what I see is a businessman who looked to expand his and his family's wealth and power at every turn.

It's called "the American way." And the list of people who tried and try to do the same is legion - from Andrew Jackson to Steve Jobs and all types betwixt and between.

From Benedict Arnold to Bernie Madoff...

[Red Cedar PM]

I am not a Romney fan, but thing that drives me nuts is that almost all of the discussion about Romney's effective tax rate and Obama's championing of the "Buffet Rule" fail to mention that all of the income in question that is being taxed at 15% has already been effectively taxed at a corporate rate of probably 35% (plus the state rate) which is among the highest of any developed country. If you want to raise the individual tax rate on this kind of income I don't have a problem with it if you also lower the corporate rate to be in line with every other developed country in the world and make the US much more globally competitive. In fact, the ideal situation would be to have the choice between a partnership and a corporation tax-neutral to minimize the economic distortion from business taxes.