January 24, 2012 in News

Romney’s tax rate 14%, returns show

By KASIE HUNT and JACK GILLUM Associated Press

Charles Dharapak photo

Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney speaks ahead of President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address, Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2012, at the National Gypsum Company in Tampa, Fla.
(Full-size photo)

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney paid about $3 million in federal income taxes in 2010, having earned more than seven times that from his investments. Those earnings, $21.7 million, put him among the wealthiest of American taxpayers. Romney’s campaign said Tuesday he followed all tax laws.

At the same time, Romney gave nearly $3 million to charity — about half of that amount to the Mormon Church — which helped lower his effective tax rate to a modest 14 percent, according to records his campaign released early Tuesday.

Romney’s income puts him in the top 0.006 percent of Americans, based on the most recent Internal Revenue Service data, from 2009. That year, only 8,274 filers reported income above $10 million.

His campaign advisers said the release of more than 500 pages of returns, schedules and worksheets was in “full compliance” with U.S. tax laws and was an effort to provide maximum transparency to the American public.

The documents were released as President Barack Obama prepared to deliver his State of the Union message, in which he is expected to talk about economic fairness. Asked during a round of television interviews Tuesday about Romney’s relatively modest tax rate, given that he’s a multimillionaire, White House adviser David Plouffe said: “We need to change our tax system. We need to change our tax code so that everybody is doing their fair share.”

Romney had refused to disclose any federal tax returns, but then hinted he would only offer a single year’s return in April. But mounting criticism from his rivals and a hard loss in last week’s South Carolina primary forced his hand.

For 2011, Romney will pay about $3.2 million with an effective tax rate of about 15.4 percent, the campaign said. Those returns haven’t yet been filed yet with the Internal Revenue Service. In total, he would pay more than $6.2 million in taxes on $45 million in income over the past two years, his campaign said.

“Gov. Romney has paid 100 percent of what he owes,” said Benjamin Ginsberg, the Romney campaign’s legal counsel. Ginsberg and other advisers insisted Romney did not use any aggressive tax strategies to help reduce or defer his tax income.

The advisers acknowledged that Romney continues to earn money from investments from Bain Capital, the Boston-based private equity firm the candidate founded and managed between 1984 and early 1999. Under an agreement with the firm when he left, Romney continued to earn “carried interest” on new Bain investments as a former partner in the firm even though he no longer ran the operation.

Romney earned $7.5 million in Bain earnings in 2010 and expects to make $5.5 million in 2010, Ginsberg said.

The former Massachusetts governor had been cast by his GOP opponents as a wealthy businessman who earned lucrative payouts from his investments while Bain slashed jobs in the private sector. Rival Newt Gingrich released his 2010 returns last Thursday, showing he paid almost $1 million in income taxes — a tax rate of about 31 percent.

Romney’s advisers acknowledged Tuesday that Romney and his wife, Ann, had a bank account in Switzerland as part of her trust. The account was worth $3 million and was held in the United Bank of Switzerland, said R. Bradford Malt, a Boston lawyer who makes investments for the Romneys and oversees their blind trust, which was set up to avoid any conflicts of interest in investments during his run for the presidency.

In 2009, UBS admitted assisting U.S. citizens in evading taxes, and agreed to pay a $780 billion penalty as part of a deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. Justice Department.

Malt said the account was closed for “diversification” in early 2010. He said he made the decision to close the Swiss account because it “just wasn’t worth it.” Malt sidestepped a question about whether he closed the account because it could be a political liability, saying it “might or might not be inconsistent with Gov. Romney’s political views.” Malt has sold off other accounts in recent years — including investments in firms that did business with Iran and China — because of possible political inconsistency or embarrassment with Romney’s political positions.

Malt also confirmed that some of Romney’s investments are routed through affiliate funds set up in the Cayman Islands. But he insisted there were no actual offshore accounts, and added that Romney paid the same amount of U.S. taxes using the Cayman affiliates as he would have if the investment funds were set up in the U.S.

Romney’s campaign confirmed the details of his tax information after several news organizations saw a preview of the documents. He had said he planned to release his returns in full Tuesday morning.

“You’ll see my income, how much taxes I’ve paid, how much I’ve paid to charity,” Romney said during Monday night’s debate in Tampa. “I pay all the taxes that are legally required and not a dollar more. I don’t think you want someone as the candidate for president who pays more taxes than he owes.”

Romney’s 2010 returns show the candidate is among the top 1 percent of taxpayers. The returns showed about $4.5 million in itemized deductions, including $1.5 million to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Romney’s charitable giving is above average, even for someone at his income level. In 2009, more than 37 million filers claimed charitable deductions averaging more than $4,000. Among those making more than $10 million, the average charitable deduction was about $1.7 million, according to the IRS.

Before the tax records were released, Romney’s old investments in two government-backed housing lenders stirred up new questions at the same time his campaign targeted Gingrich for his work for Freddie Mac.

Gingrich earned $1.6 million in consulting fees from Freddie Mac. Romney has as much as $500,000 invested in the U.S.-backed lender and its sister entity, Fannie Mae.

The fight over releasing the tax information highlighted an argument that Democrats are already starting to use against Romney — that he is out-of-touch with normal Americans. And it probably hurt him in the South Carolina primary, where he lost by 12 percentage points to Gingrich after spending several days resisting calls to release the returns.

In Monday’s debate, Romney would not answer questions from moderator Brian Williams of NBC about just what pieces of his tax returns could cause political headaches. But they will shine the spotlight on a fortune estimated at between $190 million and $250 million, and could raise questions about where he keeps his money and how he earns it.

It’s clear that Romney’s campaign is bracing for an onslaught of criticism of his personal fortune. His wife, Ann, has started talking about the returns during campaign appearances. She told supporters at a Florida rally Sunday: “I want to remind you where we know our riches are. Our riches are with our families.”

Most of Romney’s vast fortune is held in a blind trust that he doesn’t control. A portion is held in a retirement account.

95 comments on this story. Comments are now closed.

liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 24 at 9:33 a.m.
Yeah, this is a guy that will be able to relate to ordinary Americans. He is in the top 0.006% of wage earners in the country - DEAR GOD HE’S IN THE TOP 1% OF THE TOP 1%……who do you idiot conservatives really think he is going to look out for if he gets to the White House? You really think he is going to work hard to help you out and lower your taxes and create jobs for you? NO, look how he has treated the middle class and the poor his whole life while working at Bain, he didn’t create jobs, he FIRED people so he could make millions….what a wonderful man this guy is.
This picture pretty much tells me all I need to know about Romney.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/picture-of-the-day-mitt-romneys-money-shot/246658/
Sorry, I would rather go with a community organizer than a community destroyer.
RedCedar on January 24 at 9:42 a.m.
Why are you sorry?
D Statler on January 24 at 9:51 a.m.
The lesser of the 4 evils ? Ron Paul ;^) Can we get another contender please ?
DB1640 on January 24 at 9:57 a.m.
Looks like more propaganda to me. (a.k.a. class warfare)
The_Seer on January 24 at 10:00 a.m.
Remember that Romney and his capital gains loving ilk don’t pay payroll taxes on that income either. So while Joe Six Pack and his employer shell out 15.2% on every dime BEFORE paying 30% income tax, Romney and his boys whine about paying 14%.
It’s time to end this madness and return to tax rates that can fund a modern state. The reason we “are broke” and running enormous deficits is because of the tax rates in the U.S., not runaway spending, not Obamacare or Welfare Queens.
johnclarke on January 24 at 10:04 a.m.
exactly Seer, the capital gains rate is completely unfair. WHy on earth should that form of income be treated special?
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 24 at 10:08 a.m.
RedCedar, I am not sorry, I am sorry the conservatives continue voting for people like Romney who will do nothing to help them, and continuing voting against their best interests. The only people who should be voting for Romney and any other republican, are the fellow top 1% income earners, and I highly doubt anyone posting on here is a member of that club.
I, and many others, have asked this so many times with not one republican on here able to answer it……..what has the republican party done in the help the poor and middle class in the last 10 years? Hell, Go back as far as 30 years if you need help with that question repubilcant’s.
BlondeSquawker on January 24 at 10:09 a.m.
Did he pay his tithing to the Mormon church and does he get to write that off?
therailroader on January 24 at 10:12 a.m.
What needs revision is the TAX CODE. Seems like Romney is one of those 1% who can take advantage of all the schemes set in place in the current tax code. Simplying the tax code would reduce the need for IRS staff (part of that bloated government we all want to see reduced) as well as all the specialized accountants who fevishly work so hard to hide/protect income for their 1% lords (including all the big corporations for they are people, right?). Unfortunately, those in charge (the elected officials, those with IMMENSE wealth like the Koch brothers, and the minions called lobbyists who persuade our elected officials with big cash donations to push agendas favoring the UBER rich) won’t change what’s already in place becuase they all benefit so much by the existing laws.
With the world almost all connected, income disparity is/will become the world’s issue to solve. Occupy Wallstreet is our Arab Spring and it will not go away for the financial injustices that have been put in place since the Reagan days (both parties working together to screw the general population).
johnclarke on January 24 at 10:21 a.m.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Growth_and_Tax_Relief_Reconciliation_Act_of_2001
There you go folks. The reason why Mitt Romney pays 14% and I pay 25% as a middle class wage earner. Sounds fair doesn’t it?
Squawker, yes.
The returns showed about $4.5 million in itemized deductions, including $1.5 million to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.
Instead of send that money to the government (the people), he is sending it to the Mormons.
jdspokanewa on January 24 at 10:22 a.m.
BlondeSquawker, yes, tithing is a tax deduction and as the article states, he donated more than 10% to the LDS.
The_Seer on January 24 at 10:23 a.m.
The wealthy don’t need to use any “agressive tax strategies” to lower their rate of taxation. They’ve re-written the tax code so that is no longer required and convinced morons who’ll never make that level of income it’s also in their best interest.
Until we can get about half of U.S. citizens to understand they’ve been used as tools and dupes to establish and maintain what amounts to a caste system in the U.S., we can count on more of the same.
The_Seer on January 24 at 10:25 a.m.
jdspoke: The Mormon church needs to have its tax exempt status ripped, along with every other religious organization. They engage constantly in politics which would render their tax status null and void but for some reason this is the proverbial third rail of U.S. politics.
jdspokanewa on January 24 at 10:27 a.m.
I fully agree The_Seer, I don’t believe any church should receive tax exempt status, especially those that operate as a for-profit industry and those that use their pulpit to sway the political landscape in violation of federal law.
johnclarke on January 24 at 10:35 a.m.
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 10:23 a.m.
I don’t uinderstand why the fixation on Newt and Romney’s income and tax. It’s really none of anyone’s business
DOesn’t have anything to do with anything.
Libby tu…your first sentence….not to worry about “normal” since you aren’t.
Well, I see the slurs just continue. Moderators, I am of the opinion you should ban this person if they can’t be civil. Simply deleting the comments apparently does not work.
Yes, Daisy it clearly is “our” business. The conservatives have stacked the deck so the richer you are, the lower percentage you pay in taxes. I’m not sure if I’ve made that simple enough? Capital gains, stock dividends whatever - should be taxed at the same rate as income. Why is that unfair ? Why is Mitt Romney unwilling to do his fair share? Assuming that you actually have income, why are you unwilling to pay a fair percentage of 28%?
johnclarke on January 24 at 10:35 a.m.
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 10:30 a.m.
Obama gets a pass of everything because he’s black…wake up people… it
s the same theme of division… Alinsky to a “T”.
BAN THIS PERSON.
The_Seer on January 24 at 10:35 a.m.
Dazed: Class warfare has been ongoing for decades in the U.S. What you are worried about is that the ones getting their arses handed to them for the last forty years are finally waking up and understanding the raw deal they’ve been sold.
I think it is too late for anything to be done about it. That’s why Canada is looking better by the minute. Have fun in your Banana Republic that you helped ruin with greed and your inane fantasies of someday becoming just like Money Mitt.
What a joke.
valleyman on January 24 at 10:55 a.m.
You people need to get a grip. Obama is getting a pass from the media, but whether it’s because he’s black, or half-black, or just a liberal, really is immaterial. Dazzee doesn’t need to be banned for pointing out the inconsistency here.
Besides, since when is it an offense worthy of banishment to point out a person’s color in a completely factual manner? Is it any less bigoted, hateful, or dare I say “RACIST” for you to point out Romney and Newt are “rich and white?” This has been said time and time again.
If we are really living in a post-racial society, which I believe we are, stating color really shouldn’t have any bearing on anything.
The truth here is you liberals just enjoy being able to deflect any criticism pointed at Obama as being “racist,” or “bigoted” because it exempts you from actually having to face facts like there are more poor in America today than when Obama took over. There are more unemployed black Americans today than there were when Obama took over. There are more on food stamps today than when Obama took over. These are FACTS that can be looked up and verified, and are not talking points or “racial” slams on Obama.
Grow up, please…
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 10:58 a.m.
So…it’s ME that’s racist? I didn’t write the article and I didn’t do the video. I’m just pointing out the underlying tone.
Again though, why focus on money? Is it so sinful to make money? Obama’s guy have smuggled in class warfare by pointing the finger at the wealthy…..when he’s making millions himself.
People, I’m anything BUT racist. I’m pretty neutral. I think it’s good for you to understand ALL sides..not from a monied, black , white perspective. It’s just what’s going on nowadays.
When did all this begin? I don’t remember it being like this.
But ask yourselves why Obama gets a pass on his message…or why CBC gets a pass. THEY did it not Daisy.
Perspective is a good thing. I’m not setting this up…it’s what’s going on. See the video. Fair is fair…. And NO, I’m not antigay…live and let live is my motto when it comes to these things. I just report…and YOU decide how awful this presidential race is becoming at multiple levels. Sorry Lib… I just point out the facts. If that’s “BANABLE” well, so be it.
The built in hate isn’t anything I cherish. It’s obvious that when someone is singled out because he or she has lots of money and has invested it very well, there is no victim. It ‘s just something that’s been set up…You must see the hypocrisy from the Whitehouse don’t you? Seriously when Obama’s making over $5 million per year but continues to point his finger. well, something’s wrong. Fair is fair. Use your brains people….! If it’s a sin to be rich, well….you must ask yourselves why that is. Also though, it’s fair to ask why some get a free pass and some don’t.
Scoutster on January 24 at 10:58 a.m.
Romney did nothing illegal as near as I can tell.
(Nor Newt, although to say he didn’t lobby is like Clinton saying he didn’t have sex with that woman.)
Yes, the tax system sux and he should probably pay more, but to skewer him for doing what the tax system allows is putting the focus on the person, not policy.
FDR was quite wealthy, too. And JFK, and LBJ. And none of them “earned” it. (two were born to it and one married it)
BlondeSquawker on January 24 at 10:59 a.m.
Yes, BAN DAZEE for her racist tripe.
johnclarke on January 24 at 11:00 a.m.
Ban Daisy.
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 11:02 a.m.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/11/clinton-surpasses-75-million-in-speech-income-after-lucrative-2010/
To witness this and say nothing….well it’s a crime. WHen’s the last time you heard criticism of Bill Clinton…even though he’s outpaced Romney, Newt and most of you put together???
You see, it’s selective. Fair is fair guys…. read the above link…You should get the point. The common thread is that Dems are guilty of being monied as well. SO where’s the criticism? Only R’s? Why?
BlondeSquawker on January 24 at 11:03 a.m.
I, I am SO IN LOVE with MY PRESIDENT!!!
Style, talent, charisma. This man has it all!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6uHR90Sq6k
OBAMA ‘12
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 11:05 a.m.
or this…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/romney-paid-42-percent-of-2011-income-in-taxes-and-charity/2012/01/24/gIQAGe4qNQ_blog.html
The media is trying to wipe Romney out because?? Let’s not be the hypocrits. At lease know there are two sides to this story.
CougarGold on January 24 at 11:05 a.m.
You guys realize that the dollar that was earned by the company is taxed at 35.6% prior to any dividend distribution that is then further taxed at an additional 15%, right?
So for example, in effect, my investment profit of one dollar would be about $0.65 prior to my getting a dividend that is further taxed 15% to where my original dollar of profit is a net $0.55 after tax. The result is that my original dollar of profit is taxed at about 45%, not 15%. It’s just that it’s taxed in a two-step process.
And Scoutster is right; if Romney follows the tax code, why is everyone so upset with him? It’s the preceding tax laws that you should be mad at. He just followed what the government has in place as a tax policy.
jdspokanewa on January 24 at 11:06 a.m.
Dazzeetrader11, do you have Bill Clinton’s tax information showing that he pays 14%?
You’re mistaking the anger as if we’re upset that someone makes money in this country, what angers us are those who make their money by shredding companies, outsourcing jobs and to add insult to injury, they pay less than 15% tax on their “income.”
BlondeSquawker on January 24 at 11:08 a.m.
Dazee, Dazee…..can’t even keep a geriatric computer awake. Yaawn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XnY42YJ1AY&feature=related
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 11:08 a.m.
You can’t argue with the message Libby…or Clarkie. SO the solution is kill the messenger? Hardly adult in concept.
At least be fair….Obama’s won’t be. CBC obviously isn’t. And it’s appears the Dem left isn’t. SOmebody must point out the obvious….none of this criticism of Newt or Romney is even cogent. But you swallow it up anyway. Liberalism is indeed a brain disorder.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 24 at 11:11 a.m.
Your message is crap and wrong Dazzee…. there, that sums up everyones argument against you.
Now go away, you don’t even live in Spokane, stop posting here, bigots are not welcome in Washington.
BlondeSquawker on January 24 at 11:11 a.m.
Dazee…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XnY42YJ1AY&feature=related
jdspokanewa on January 24 at 11:11 a.m.
Dazzeetrader11, do you have anything to offer besides name calling and liberal bashing?
johnclarke on January 24 at 11:12 a.m.
CougarGold on January 24 at 11:05 a.m.
You guys realize that the dollar that was earned by the company is taxed at 35.6% prior to any dividend distribution that is then further taxed at an additional 15%, right?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/business/280-big-public-firms-paid-little-us-tax-study-finds.html
Wrong, wrong, wrong. How many times do we have to cover this ground?
No one blames Romney for following the tax code. I blame the people that made the tax code.
CougarGold on January 24 at 11:22 a.m.
JC - Of the tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of corporations in the U.S., the article you reference cherry-picks those its point is trying to make. The vast majority of U.S. companies, albeit not the biggest illustrated there, pay their taxes at the corporate rate. So, not wrong, wrong, wrong. My own company, when I had it, paid the corporate rate then followed that up with my paying Cap Gains on any dividends I got. That was on top of the personal income tax I paid on my salary and bonuses. My story is the typical scenario for business owners, not that of the fraction of business that is savvy enough to work within the tax law and avoid corporate tax.
Just as everyone wants to pick on people who make their living off dividends, which includes millions of simple retirees, it’s wrong to hand pick a handful of corporations and say that all corporations dodge taxes. It’s simple stereotyping and makes for a bad argument.
oneanddone on January 24 at 11:27 a.m.
Geez. Talk about your playground mentality. In any event, it does no good to try to “ban” anyone. It takes 5 seconds to re-enroll.
The worst of this whole thing with Romney and capital gains is that Republicans are trying to zero out the tax on that. So, if the Republicans get their way then guys like Romney (and MANY others) will pay nothing. Keep that in mind when you talk about a flat tax or who to vote for.
jdspokanewa on January 24 at 11:28 a.m.
CougarGold, Romney gets to enjoy a luxury most of us do not, he gets to pay a small percentage of tax for working, even though it’s called “capital gains.” That’s the point.
But, as Willard himself says “Corporations are people my friend,” so I guess if WIllard is the corporation, he’s being over-taxed?
Coffee on January 24 at 11:32 a.m.
And I am sure all this will change if we just re-elect Obama for four more years.
CougarGold on January 24 at 11:41 a.m.
jdspokanewa -
“But, as Willard himself says “Corporations are people my friend,” so I guess if WIllard is the corporation, he’s being over-taxed?”
In my case, we were the corporation as it is for all corporations. They are a group of people who share ownership in a company, nothing more. As an owner, you are effectively paying your portion of the corporate tax. Then, if you receive a dividend, you pay that tax personally. So yes, it can be argued that you’re overtaxed as the effective tax rate you paid is approximately 45% unless you’re an owner of one of the fractional percentage that has avoided paying U.S. taxes.
nslopeofw on January 24 at 11:43 a.m.
LIRWL-
Your “community organizer” has gone into the millionaire ranks in the last three years, as well. He is no better at judging the rest of us than romney.
PS Romney is NOT a conservative.
misjustice on January 24 at 11:47 a.m.
Dazzee croaked, “Libby tu…your first sentence….not to worry about “normal” since you aren’t.’
MODERATORS???? It continues to attack Liberal In Right Wind Land due to his sexual orientation and I AM SICK OF IT!
nslopeofw on January 24 at 11:47 a.m.
BAN Obama!
jdspokanewa on January 24 at 11:48 a.m.
CougarGold, you make it sound as if you and Willard “Mitt” Romney are in the same class and you’re not.
You stated that you paid corporate tax, then paid yourself (salary I’m assuming which falls under wage, not capital gains), THEN you give yourself a cut of the profits which is classified as capital gains. It sounds to me as though you weren’t hurting all too badly from this scenario but you were probably paying in quite a bit in income tax as well as capital gains taxes.
Willard Romney makes his money based off profit, not from a wage (or if he is paid a wage it is very minor compared to his “non-wage” capital gains). Also take into consideration that Romney does not build anything, he does not create jobs, he’s a vulture capitalist, one that causes hardships within our economy all for a profit for the very few at the top of the food chain.
nslopeofw on January 24 at 11:49 a.m.
Misjustice-
I’m sick of LIRWL calling TEA partiers TEAbaggers, so perhaps our resident gay man could tone it down as well? Does he get a free pass for being gay? Or are you just a hypocrite?
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 11:50 a.m.
Just keeping the playing field level guys. Don’t be taken in though, there are sins on both sides….if it’s a sin to make lots of money. I don’t think so.
One of my mentors (remember I used to be a liberal Dem) told me years ago…a little story… years ago I was being promoted into a job at another University….I complained that the place was corrupt because they had too much money in the loop.
“How could they ever be objective??” I wondered. Well he though about it…and then said “the only reason they get anything done was because they were driven by money”…and he was right. I took the job and ran a very productive section….things I could have never done at a money strapped place. Was the data or research ever corrupted by money?
NO.. but why? Because everyone was doing so well financially that they worked harder. It’s a motivator like nothing I’ve even seen. And the work was spectacular at JPL….intertwined with medical instiutions, university and industry. Sure there were terrific ideas at other places but they couldn’t do anything about it for lack of funding. And boy did our guys so some good work. …never could have been done without money. SO when your uncle Harry get’s sick and need some work done, lots of what you’ll get is based on the work done, thank JPL and the money that brought breakthroughs.
So the question remains…why go after some guy because he’s wealthy?…when he’s productive…? THIS is what I’ll never understand. worry more about Soros that Mitt or Newt.
misjustice on January 24 at 11:56 a.m.
Willard mispoke. He didn’t mean “corporations are people, my friends”; he meant “my friends are corporations, people!”
Look, I don’t think that Mittens did anything illegal. I’m glad that he released his 2010 taxes; it gives us regular smucks a little window into how the “other half” lives. And while it may not be illegal it certainly makes one wonder about all the other Romney-like folks that choose to park their money in the Cayman Islands, in Swiss Bank Accounts, and other tax havens rather than re-investing it back into this nation; the nation which made it possible for them to become so wealthy.
Poor Mittens, he can’t help that he was born with a silver foot in his mouth!
; )
dataxman on January 24 at 11:57 a.m.
There really are some pathetic petty people in the world. Romney paid the every tax legally required. If you are complaining about the tax rate he pays then you need to talk to the lawmakers who pass the laws that taxed that income at that rate. Take a look at Obama’s return - he took numerous deductions that the average person does not take - because they don’t have the tax scenario that Obama had. Does that make Obama a crook?
As for the no SS paid on investing income - so what? That income does not go into calculating his retirement benefits either. If that is the road you want to go down then fine - be prepared to pay it on your savings account interest, when you make $1 selling your Microsoft shares and when GE pays you your dividend. Also be prepared for our SS costs to increase.
The fact that him paying this rate says a lot more about you than anything else. You have chosen to be blissfully ignorant about the tax code. This is not new and the preferential tax rate on capital gains goes back to the 1930’s.
The sad part is he is being pilloried for paying more in tax in two years than the lot of you will pay in your entire lifetime. Bunch of flippin’ ingrates…
nslopeofw on January 24 at 11:59 a.m.
This is why conservatives dont like to argue with liberals. The libs can be as nasty as they like, but if one conservative says anything the libs dont like, or is as nasty as the libs are talking, its WAAAAAAAAAA,,,Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaan, wawa.
You people need to read the venom in LIRWL’s posts before you judge Daizee (the one you all call a racist, drunk old woman.
CougarGold on January 24 at 12:00 p.m.
jdspokanewa - Both cases are correct, to a point. The first paragraph was my situation until I sold. The second paragraph is true in that, in retirement, my income was solely cap gain dividends and dividends from tax-free bonds. So, my income tax following the sale of my company was minimal. Now I’ve got a wage income (I got bored and went back to work) as well as cap gains from my investments. But the money I invested was derived from prior income and proceeds from the sale so it’s not a question of how much in any particular year but the time frame you want to compare.
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 24 at 12:00 p.m.
nslopeofw, about 2-3 weeks ago I said I would stop using the term “teabagger” since the Tea Party isn’t as relevant anymore and I have stuck to my word and now only say republicans, republicants, conservatives or righties . But, in my defense, I never outright attacked someone because of their sexuality, race or anything else like some posters on here are doing, I was using a term the Tea Party themselves came up with.
Try telling your friends on the right tone down their hate now.
Can we also stop this part of this thread and stick to the topic the article is about now? Thanks.
SMARTGUY on January 24 at 12:01 p.m.
Obama may be a millionaire, but he paid over 35% in taxes last year, not 15% look it up!
liberal_in_right_wing_land on January 24 at 12:02 p.m.
nslopeofw, I only attacked Dazzee after her repeated attacks on me, thank god you can go through past posts from members on here and see that…….
HOWEVER…..MOVING ON………….
Wow, Mitt sure has a low tax rate……
johnclarke on January 24 at 12:04 p.m.
CougarGold on January 24 at 11:22 a.m.
JC - Of the tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of corporations in the U.S., the article you reference cherry-picks those its point is trying to make. The vast majority of U.S. companies, albeit not the biggest illustrated there, pay their taxes at the corporate rate
Seems like something requiring evidence, wouldn’t you say? I provided evidence of huge corporations that pay little or no taxes. How is that cherry picking? It’s a complete list. You are making general statements, aka opinions. I don’t really care what your corporation paid - I care about the ones that don’t pay. What does it matter if “some” pay? How is that fair?
nslopeofw on January 24 at 12:04 p.m.
Sorry lib, i wasnt aware of that. I apologize, brother. You can call me anything you like, ;-).
You are right, about the race or sexual thing, i just sometimes think we all go a bit overboard. I believe humor about things that are controversial is a better way to go. But some may not like that as well. I do teach my kids tolerance, and believe it myself. Again, sorry for not catching the non teabagger thing.
jdspokanewa on January 24 at 12:05 p.m.
dataxman, I think what you’re saying is pretty much what we’re saying as well. Willard has done nothing illegal, immoral yes and that can be debated but not illegal.
The tax structure is set up to give big advantages to those who play with money instead of earning it as a wage and there is no “fairness” there.
jddavis on January 24 at 12:07 p.m.
Of course corporations are people; you can’t tax a well organized pile of wood, bricks, and glass.
There seems to be a big void of knowledge concerning investment income and regular old “working” income. Capitol Gains Tax is different than the Income Tax taken out of your pay check.
Will someone who is spouting off about how much money Romney, Newt, Obama, and other make point out where they are in violation of ANY tax law? If you don’t like their tax rates on income, capitol gains, etc, rally your elected representative to change it. Otherwise, your whinning shows jealousy and/or entitlement mindset.
johnclarke on January 24 at 12:07 p.m.
dataxman on January 24 at 11:57 a.m.
There really are some pathetic petty people in the world. Romney paid the every tax legally required. If you are complaining about the tax rate he pays then you need to talk to the lawmakers who pass the laws that taxed that income at that rate.
Um, I do believe that is the point - no? The problem is most certainly with the tax code. Now I’m just counting the seconds until someone starts complaining that “47% don’t pay income taxes”. Again, this is the point. The tax code, right?
johnclarke on January 24 at 12:08 p.m.
jddavis on January 24 at 12:07 p.m.
Of course corporations are people; you can’t tax a well organized pile of wood, bricks, and glass.
If corporations are people, why does this list of “people” not pay taxes?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/business/280-big-public-firms-paid-little-us-tax-study-finds.html
dataxman on January 24 at 12:09 p.m.
smartguy - It is not how much you make but how you make it. Every wonder how the Kennedy’s stayed so rich despite none of them working? Cap gains and a off-shore tax shelter. Congress is not going to change a tax code that benefits the majority of them - from both parties…
CougarGold on January 24 at 12:10 p.m.
JC - Geez, check with the IRS or a local CPA firm. It’s pretty clear the vast majority of U.S. Corporations do their business in the U.S. and that they therefore pay the taxes as deemed required by law. I’m not wasting time proving the transparently evident and if you truly believe the opposite; that the majority of firms DON’T pay taxes, don’t you think it would have brought about major tax reform before? I’d feel like a real idiot if our company was the only one paying taxes in this country, since we did. I’d be further upset with our CPA firm who didn’t show us how to not pay taxes, if it were an option.
You’re using quirky logic to prove an abstract point.
jddavis on January 24 at 12:13 p.m.
For 2010, Obamas’ paid 26% and Biden’s paid 23% income tax rate.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/18/obama-taxes-income_n_850649.html
CougarGold on January 24 at 12:15 p.m.
smartguy -
“Obama may be a millionaire, but he paid over 35% in taxes last year, not 15% look it up!”
As I noted in another post, that’s true but is only a snapshot for the current year and is new money so gets taxed early. I’d be willing to bet that, once he takes his post-tax dollars, invests, and gets dividend income, he’ll be paying 15% on that income in the future. That’s how the Tax Code works and he will partake as his monetary profile matures.
jddavis on January 24 at 12:16 p.m.
Come on JC! They do!
If you own 1 share of McDonald’s, and it pays 5% dividends, you pay tax on that 5% you made in dividends…when you realize the gain (Capitol Gains Tax).
If you own 1 share of McDonald’s, you are part of that “corporation”.
If you own 1 share of Exxon-Mobile, you are “Big Oil”.
dataxman on January 24 at 12:19 p.m.
jc - no - I blame the ignorant people who voted for the people that gave us the tax code we now have. We want a tax code that punishes people we don’t like (think AMT, Clinton surtax, etc) and then are appalled 10 years later when the stats come out and we realize the smart people (not the ones in Congress) figured out a (legal) way around the new tax laws. So another set of laws are passed to punish the rich and so forth and so on. The tax code is a convoluted mess that can’t be reformed because one group doesn’t want to lose a loophole they have (mortgage interest, property tax) even if means another group will lose theirs (carried interest, R&D credits). So we have the status quo
Instead of getting your panties in a bunch over what rate someone pays worry about your own taxes. If Mitt had paid 25% more would your life have been better? If you say yes that that says a lot about you - and none of it good…
peacemonger on January 24 at 12:23 p.m.
This article makes me sick! The tax code is soooo unfair in this country and needs to be re-done to help the middle class. I work hard for my money and yet I have to pay a higher percentage than Romney? It REALLY ticks me off!
WHS on January 24 at 12:24 p.m.
Personally, I wouldn’t care if Mitt made 244 million… His wealth is not the issue, but his hypocrisy is. Some of you say he is being singled out, well sorry gang but that is just B.S. Mitt has singled himself out by bringing this subject up, himself. Plus, in case some of you forgot, he is running for President of America, the most powerful man in the world! In fact, his campaign slogan is all about morality and not spending more than we take in… Yet, here he is, using off shore tax shelters and taking advantage of every loop hole there is to decrease his own burden, then he has the gall to propose even lower taxes for the wealthy (upwards of half a million).
This is the problem with the current Republican party. The hypocrisy is just out of control.
Mitt Romney, tries to pass himself of as an “unemployed”, average joe American, who just struggling to get by, no different than the rest of America… A man who thinks $374,000 is “not very much”, and compared to a 24 million and a 15% tax bracket, well he’s right.
Newt Gingrich, who is trying to pass himself as the moral, christian, righteous, family values candidate. Although I am still trying to figure just how many of Gods Commandments he has actually broken.
Rick Santorum, who wants to fight for America, just so long as you are a strict Catholic. A man who thinks victims of rape need to just make the best of it and wants to federally regulate what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms.
WHS
johnclarke on January 24 at 12:26 p.m.
jddavis on January 24 at 12:16 p.m.
Come on JC! They do!
Dude, you are combining topics. My point was corporate taxes, not what people pay on dividends. This is quite obvious, and if you want to argue like a child, open a day care.
dataxman on January 24 at 12:19 p.m.
jc - no - I blame the ignorant people who voted for the people that gave us the tax code we now have.
So, I noted that you made my point for me. Does this mean that we agree? The mysterious part is why you try to turn it into a personal attack? What’s up with that? Are you not able to discuss this like an adult?
WE AGREE. George Bush’s tax code needs to go.
dataxman on January 24 at 12:27 p.m.
peacemonger - I doubt you pay income tax at a higher rate than Mitt.
dataxman on January 24 at 12:30 p.m.
jc - it is not Bush’s tax code that is the problem - but as usual any attempt to attack a ‘R’ can’t go buy. I would say that Obama’s tax code needs to go, since he is the last President to sign it (after it was passed by a House and Senate controlled by the Democrat party) - but I digress…
Eliminating the Obama/Bush tax breaks means Mitt would have paid 20%. Are you saying that had he paid 20% you would have been fine with that and all would have been right in your world?
mikeln on January 24 at 12:42 p.m.
Like I’ve said before, no one is worth the kind of money these people seem to think they are worth. Did he cure cancer? Did he create world peace? Did he feed the hungry children of the world? I would say it’s safe to say he didn’t. What he did was get 24 million in exchange for nothing, nadda. Untill we get it together and realize how stupid it is to compensate these frauds with this kind of money we will be the fools they see us as.
jddavis on January 24 at 12:43 p.m.
A bit touchy today JC?
Look at it this way then—you invest $1000 in McDonald’s. The company increases in value, make a profit, etc. Your original $1000 is now worth $1100, you won’t realize any gain until you sell.
Meanwhile, that $100 increase in your investment is part of the overall value increase of the company. You elect not to cash out, should you be taxed on that $100 anyway?
The company sees positive growth in the industry, particularly it’s market share. They “invest” $100M of their $500M profit in new stores and equipment, should their profit be taxed on $400m or $500M? But what about the taxes they paid as part of that $100M investment?
Or should the company be taxed on it’s book value, or just value increase from the last tax period?
Let me know how things are at your daycare.
peacemonger on January 24 at 12:46 p.m.
dataxman, What gives you any grounds to doubt what my tax rate is? That is called cyber bullying and you ought to be banned!
dataxman on January 24 at 12:47 p.m.
mikeln - unless you are a shareholder in Bain capital you aren’t compensating these people. Bain is a private company. A private company with privately owned assets. Assets that they can do with as they please. You may not like it but you opinion doesn’t matter as it is a private company…
woamike on January 24 at 12:50 p.m.
“Doubting” what one says is “cyber bullying”????
That is precious.
dataxman on January 24 at 12:51 p.m.
peacemonger - I notice you didn’t say I was wrong…
Take the amount of tax you paid on your taxable income (line 44 on your 2010 1040) and divide it by your AGI (line 37) and tell us what you get. I will bet you a Whammy, fries and a shake it is not over 15%
johnclarke on January 24 at 12:54 p.m.
dataxman on January 24 at 12:30 p.m.
jc - it is not Bush’s tax code that is the problem - but as usual any attempt to attack a ‘R’ can’t go buy. I would say that Obama’s tax code needs to go, since he is the last President to sign it (after it was passed by a House and Senate controlled by the Democrat party) - but I digress…
No, you don’t digress. You attempt to change the subject and blame someone other than the guilty party.
Eliminating the Obama/Bush tax breaks means Mitt would have paid 20%. Are you saying that had he paid 20% you would have been fine with that and all would have been right in your world?
OMG, now they are the “Obama/Bush tax breaks” ?
No. That would not have been ok.
jddavis on January 24 at 12:43 p.m.
A bit touchy today JC?
Yes, I am a bit touchy and tired of your right wing nonsense. You are twisting the topic. When a person is paid a dividend, that has nothing to do with the “value” of the stock. It’s pure profit and should be taxed accordingly, not at 15%.
mikeln on January 24 at 12:56 p.m.
I wasn’t talking about bain I am talking about compensation in general. The world has gone mad when people are paid this kind of money for doing so little to improve the lot of mankind. When we all should be working towards a better future for our children we seem to be working toward the destruction of that future. Again, no one is worth this kind of money, no one.
jddavis on January 24 at 1:02 p.m.
JC—What rate should “Capitol Gains Tax” be? Is / should it be dependent on your working income?
Essentially JC, what tax rate should someone pay who risks their money (already taxed at least once) when investing in a corporation/company when the risk actually pays off? If I invest $10K and you invest $100K in the same corporation, our investments increase at the same rate, and we sell and realize the same % increase, should we pay the same rate?
I don’t know what you claim to be right wing nonsense is when talking about taxes and money. Your money spends the same as mine and everyone elses. You are correct in saying that our tax code needs major revision.
dataxman on January 24 at 1:03 p.m.
jc - not changing the subject - the Bush tax cut extensions were passed by a Democrat controlled House, Senate and signed into law by a Democrat President - right?
Had they expired they would have gone back to the Clinton rate of 21.9%. Isn’t this the time of milk and honey that democrats want to take us back to?
So what rate do you propose for long term capital gains?
peacemonger on January 24 at 1:05 p.m.
dataxman, I pay a considerably higher rate.
pmbrown49 on January 24 at 1:06 p.m.
Bottomline is that Romney still paid $3 million in taxes.
And our Federal Government still wastes that amount of money in about 5 minutes every day.
The_Seer on January 24 at 1:24 p.m.
Bottom line is that Romney still MADE over twenty million dollars, didn’t create a single job and ends up paying no social security taxes on all of that income.
None.
Zero.
Zip.
Zilch.
Nada.
pmbrowne: Why do you slather with Pavlovian predictability each time an opportunity arises to defend a social class that wouldn’t cross the street to spit on you should you be ablaze.
You are a class traitor. You are a class coward. Why???
Shadedmuse on January 24 at 1:24 p.m.
This guy is not fit to be President, he is the what is wrong with the U.S, corperate greed of the top 2 percent and wallstreet corps.
4 more years Baby and with Newts help we will get 4 more years of the greatest president ever, Obama!!!!!!!!!
4 more years 4 more years to clean up Bush-cheney mess like Bin laden the turn around of the auto sector Iraq is done, DOnt ask dont tell is done. now we need to work on aFGANISTAN gitmo and Domoa the unemployment rate is dropping and the Bush ression is over.
The_Seer on January 24 at 1:26 p.m.
datataxman: I said you were wrong. Wrong about Hitler not being a democratically elected leader. You never responded. We all know why.
Germanophiles Unite!
The_Seer on January 24 at 1:28 p.m.
http://billmoyers.com/episode/crony-capitalism/
This show breaks it all down. From Reagan’s former budget director, Stockman.
jddavis on January 24 at 1:29 p.m.
Seer—you don’t pay SS taxes on Capitol gains…right?
Why is it Romneys or anyone elses responsibility to create jobs from their investment income(s)?
It could be argued that the money Romney and other wealthy people invest in corporations do, directly and indirectly, create jobs.
I bet Romney’s gardner and pool guy are glad to get a paycheck. ;>)
CougarGold on January 24 at 1:34 p.m.
JC -
“When a person is paid a dividend, that has nothing to do with the “value” of the stock. It’s pure profit and should be taxed accordingly, not at 15%.”
The dividend is pure profit but only AFTER already having been taxed, with the rare exceptions of the 280 or so corporations that found ways to avoid the corporate rate. In the vast majority of cases, the dividend is profit distributed after having been taxed. To be more obscure, I could state that ‘the dividends are profits distributed after all federal tax obligations have been met’ but I would guess you’d skewer me about those that don’t pay taxes so I didn’t state it that way. But still, it would be a true statement. The pure profit has been taxed prior to distribution so your statement is flawed in that regard.
The_Seer on January 24 at 1:36 p.m.
jddavis wrote: “I bet Romney’s gardner and pool guy are glad to get a paycheck.”
You mean the ones here illegally from Mexico??
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/280564/background-romneys-hire-illegal-immigrants-katrina-trinko
You are right, I don’t pay any payroll taxes on capital gains but for some reason my income from annuities and trusts is, along with the full rate of income tax.
The_Seer on January 24 at 1:37 p.m.
cougargold: GE paid out billions in dividends, paid no income tax for 2010 earnings and received several billion dollars in tax credit.
Go back to being a class traitor and leave the intellectual heavy lifting to those who are capable of independent and cogent thought.
jddavis on January 24 at 1:38 p.m.
Yep Seer, those are the ones!
I too pay full rate income taxes on 1099-R income, just as silly as paying on SS income.
dataxman on January 24 at 1:39 p.m.
peacemonger - then you are in the top 20% of wage earners in the US - congratulations - I was wrong and owe you lunch @ Dicks…
Seer - no, not wrong…
In the presidential election held on March 13, 1932, there were four candidates: the incumbent, Field Marshall Paul von Hindenburg, Hitler, and two minor candidates, Ernst Thaelmann and Theodore Duesterberg. The results were:
Hindenburg 49.6 percent
Hitler 30.1 percent
Thaelmann 13.2 percent
Duesterberg 6.8 percent
At the risk of belaboring the obvious, almost 70 percent of the German people voted against Hitler, causing his supporter Joseph Goebbels, who would later become Hitler’s minister of propaganda, to lament in his journal, “We’re beaten; terrible outlook. Party circles badly depressed and dejected.”
Since Hindenberg had not received a majority of the vote, however, a runoff election had to be held among the top three vote-getters. On April 19, 1932, the runoff results were:
Hindenburg 53.0 percent
Hitler 36.8 percent
Thaelmann 10.2 percent
Thus, even though Hitler’s vote total had risen, he still had been decisively rejected by the German people.
On June 1, 1932, Hindenberg appointed Franz von Papen as chancellor of Germany, whom Shirer described as an “unexpected and ludicrous figure.” Papen immediately dissolved the Reichstag (the national congress) and called for new elections, the third legislative election in five months.
Hitler and his fellow members of the National Socialist (Nazi) Party, who were determined to bring down the republic and establish dictatorial rule in Germany, did everything they could to create chaos in the streets, including initiating political violence and murder. The situation got so bad that martial law was proclaimed in Berlin.
Even though Hitler had badly lost the presidential election, he was drawing ever-larger crowds during the congressional election. As Shirer points out,
In one day, July 27, he spoke to 60,000 persons in Brandenburg, to nearly as many in Potsdam, and that evening to 120,000 massed in the giant Grunewald Stadium in Berlin while outside an additional 100,000 heard his voice by loudspeaker.
Hitler’s rise to power
The July 31, 1932, election produced a major victory for Hitler’s National Socialist Party. The party won 230 seats in the Reichstag, making it Germany’s largest political party, but it still fell short of a majority in the 608-member body.
On the basis of that victory, Hitler demanded that President Hindenburg appoint him chancellor and place him in complete control of the state. Otto von Meissner, who worked for Hindenburg, later testified at Nuremberg,
Hindenburg replied that because of the tense situation he could not in good conscience risk transferring the power of government to a new party such as the National Socialists, which did not command a majority and which was intolerant, noisy and undisciplined.
Political deadlocks in the Reichstag soon brought a new election, this one in November 6, 1932. In that election, the Nazis lost two million votes and 34 seats. Thus, even though the National Socialist Party was still the largest political party, it had clearly lost ground among the voters.
Attempting to remedy the chaos and the deadlocks, Hindenburg fired Papen and appointed an army general named Kurt von Schleicher as the new German chancellor. Unable to secure a majority coalition in the Reichstag, however, Schleicher finally tendered his resignation to Hindenburg, 57 days after he had been appointed.
On January 30, 1933, President Hindenburg appointed Adolf Hitler chancellor of Germany. Although the National Socialists never captured more than 37 percent of the national vote, and even though they still held a minority of cabinet posts and fewer than 50 percent of the seats in the Reichstag, Hitler and the Nazis set out to to consolidate their power. With Hitler as chancellor, that proved to be a fairly easy task.
The_Seer on January 24 at 1:46 p.m.
hindenburg was elected to office and made the appointment of Hitler as an elected official, thus making Hitler’s rise to power part of the democratic process. Your argumentation would have all appointments fall into the realm of dicatorial decisions when they clearly aren’t.
CougarGold on January 24 at 1:56 p.m.
seer - First, this will be my only point of discussion with you. I believe you are the biggest hypocrite on this forum, following your infantile diatribe regarding Jim Paton. I will not engage any further with you beyond this point:
“cougargold: GE paid out billions in dividends, paid no income tax for 2010 earnings and received several billion dollars in tax credit.
Go back to being a class traitor and leave the intellectual heavy lifting to those who are capable of independent and cogent thought.”
As pointed out to JohnClarke, GE is one of a fractional few corporations who paid no taxes. The vast majority of companies paid taxes. Mitt Romney/Bain don’t own GE (beyond maybe some level of common stock) and therefore GE is irrelevant to the topic at hand. The vast majority of companies in the U.S. pay federal taxes, including income as well as FICA. Consequently, dividends paid out by those companies are ‘after-tax’ dollars. They are then taxed at 15% to those who receive the dividends; in essence, double taxation. The net is a 45% tax on every dollar of profit earned by the company and distributed in the form of dividend.
As for independent and cogent thought, I don’t even know where to begin with you other than to again note that this is the only engagement with you I will be sharing. You are unquestionably, in my mind, the most despicable clown to grace these forums. Good day, hypocrite.
Dazzeetrader11 on January 24 at 2:00 p.m.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/under-obama-price-gas-has-jumped-83-percent-ground-beef-24-percent-bacon-22-percent
He’s a fraud. Get some productive people in the WH. Socialism won’t work. This isn’t BUSH friends, it’s all Obama and his program of weakening the dollar and dependence on his government.
Back to Newt though….he paid 31% . Romney, in absolute dollars, paid millions…more than Obama made. Flat tax anyone?
So the minority warfare continues. Especiallly important is datataxman’s post. This isn’t the first time a hateful minority obtained control.
Bain hired Romney to make BAIN money…not you guys or the downtrodden, etc. He did his job. SO what’s the REAL rub? Him and Newt are R’s and they’re successful. Resent them all you want.
Obama, on the other hand (your savior?) has done nothing to Wall St or the Bankers. They make more than ever. Somehow though, in your minds, he’s done what you can’t do. Nonsense….he’s a fraud who’s trying to bring America to it’s knees. Won’t be long for him….not long. But, on the bright side, he’ll slither away with money like Bill and Hillary have. Will you turn on him then? Likely not…he’ll walk away all happy and you will salute him…for what? Look around you…are you REALLY better off?…..not with what he’s got in store for you. But it’s all legal….we’re being fleeced and you guys are enjoying it.
nslopeofw on January 24 at 2:15 p.m.
Romney donation rate versus the dear leader Obama:
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/candidate-romney-more-generous-obama-biden/334331
dataxman on January 24 at 2:17 p.m.
Seer - being part of a democratic process is quite different than being democratically elected. The German population did not vote for Hitler to be Chancellor - just like no person ever voted for Ford to be President…