Trump's Tax Returns Have Been Released.

[naf140230]

I wonder what everyone thinks about the release of Trump's tax returns by the New York Times.

[Eric the Green]

Tell us more; what did they say? Source?

OK, I went to "the google" and found it

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/pol....html?_r=0

So his reported losses in 1995 allowed him to avoid paying any taxes from 1992 to 2010. I guess we learned a little more, but we still haven't seen any returns from the years since 2010. What is he hiding from THOSE years? His dependence on Russian investments? His failure to donate to charity? More losses? Net wealth less than he claims? More failure to pay any taxes, that makes him smart?

[Mikebert]

(10-02-2016, 12:24 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(10-02-2016, 12:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Tell us more; what did they say? Source?

Here. This is something I just saw. Do not know how legit it is. Trump's Tax Return

It appears to be from 1995.  We already know he paid no taxes then and had small income suggesting small net worth then.  He did release a revenue statement for a more recent year that suggested an income in the several hundred million range.  A Bloomberg analysis of this data suggested a net worth of about $3 billion.  If he is earning only $50 M on $3 B of assets he is a really shitty businessman. 

But then how did he turn a $14 million initial stake into a $900 B loss (this is an asset since he can use it to avoid future taxes) and that into what he has now?  This means he had to get higher-than-shitty returns on his money and so MUST have generating substantial income--unless he has been using so much leverage that he actually has very little equity in any of his properties. In this case, if he loses he may file for bankruptcy next year (unless his campaign can repaid all the money he lent to it) So if this does not happen then you have to assume he has paid some income taxes.

The leverage thing may be the key.  The money he borrowed in 1975 would be worth $100-250M, adjusted for asset inflation (this money would be used to buy assets not consumer goods so the CPI is the wrong index to use for inflation-adjustment). If Trump is really heavily leveraged his net worth (equity) made be no higher than this figure which means his total return over 40 years has been zip.  He is actually no richer than  If he had just dumped that $14 million be borrowed from his dad in an index fund. He wouldn't ever have to paid it back because the debt would be part of his father's estate's assets which he would inherit. He could have just taken that debt as his share of the estate in 1999. If he release his taxes, it would not take much time for financial sleuths to reveal this and there goes the entire reason for his candidacy.  It would reveal that this run is just another great con.  But suppose the wins, the ultimate "big con".

[Warren Dew]

(10-02-2016, 07:41 AM)Mikebert Wrote:

(10-02-2016, 12:24 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(10-02-2016, 12:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Tell us more; what did they say? Source?

Here. This is something I just saw. Do not know how legit it is. Trump's Tax Return

It appears to be from 1995.  We already know he paid no taxes then and had small income suggesting small net worth then.  He did release a revenue statement for a more recent year that suggested an income in the several hundred million range.  A Bloomberg analysis of this data suggested a net worth of about $3 billion.  If he is earning only $50 M on $3 B of assets he is a really shitty businessman. 

Assuming for the moment the tax return is real, the income is taxable income.  Any billionaire worth his salt knows how to keep the vast majority of his increase in capital gains from becoming taxable income - that's how Buffett manages an effective tax rate of less than a tenth of one percent.

Also notice that whenever a politician comes up with a "tax the rich" scheme, it's mostly about increasing tax rates on people who actually earn their money - millionaires and down.  They never talk about eliminating foundations and other schemes that billionaires use to keep their money from ever becoming 'income' for tax purposes in the first place.

[pbrower2a]

(10-02-2016, 10:10 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-02-2016, 07:41 AM)Mikebert Wrote:

(10-02-2016, 12:24 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(10-02-2016, 12:21 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Tell us more; what did they say? Source?

Here. This is something I just saw. Do not know how legit it is. Trump's Tax Return

It appears to be from 1995.  We already know he paid no taxes then and had small income suggesting small net worth then.  He did release a revenue statement for a more recent year that suggested an income in the several hundred million range.  A Bloomberg analysis of this data suggested a net worth of about $3 billion.  If he is earning only $50 M on $3 B of assets he is a really shitty businessman. 

Assuming for the moment the tax return is real, the income is taxable income.  Any billionaire worth his salt knows how to keep the vast majority of his increase in capital gains from becoming taxable income - that's how Buffett manages an effective tax rate of less than a tenth of one percent.

Also notice that whenever a politician comes up with a "tax the rich" scheme, it's mostly about increasing tax rates on people who actually earn their money - millionaires and down.  They never talk about eliminating foundations and other schemes that billionaires use to keep their money from ever becoming 'income' for tax purposes in the first place.

It is impossible to avoid income taxes on wages and salaries. The IRS gets its taxes on wage and salary income largely through withholding. The rich have their ways of avoiding taxes, largely through keeping dividends low, being taxed only when the asset of increasing value is sold. A merger in which JKL Corporation takes over MNO corporation usually involves shares of MNO being bought with shares of JKL Corporation. No cash needs go directly to owners of MNO Corporation, so there may be no taxable exchange.

The tax laws favor Warren Buffett's buy-and-hold strategy, one of the more effective ways in which to grow asset values and delay payment of taxes.

In theory, corporate stock may be used to fund foundations. Supposedly the donors cannot derive benefit from the operation of those foundations.  But foundations may have management connected by family ties to the former ownership of assets endowed to the foundation. Another way to evade taxes is to inflate deductible expenses as an owner does expensive activities with huge elements of leisure or indulgence. In theory the owners might have limousines, hunting lodges, or other costly indulgences supplied by the company.