Trump's taxes leaked

[Ronson]

So you don't think he lied to the IRD about having massive business losses that meant he didn't need to pay tax? Do you then think he lied about his business successes to the public? It can't really be both.

It can be neither, considering NYT's track record.

Either on the whole his businesses made money, meaning he should have paid taxes, or they on the whole lost money, meaning he wasn't good at business.

There doesn't appear to be any evidence at all that this actually occurred. We have Trump saying he donated his salary, multiple times. We do not appear to have any receipts whatsoever of the government receiving this money.

The money trail is quite clear. I don't know where you looked. Trump's donations to various federal departments (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ey/5410134002/)

2017

• Q1 National Parks Service
• Q2 Department of Education
• Q3 Health and Human Services
• Q4 Department of Transportation

2018

• Q1 Department of Veterans Affairs
• Q2 Small Business Administration
• Q3 National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
• Q4 Department of Homeland Security

2019

• Q1 Department of Agriculture
• Q2 U.S. Surgeon General’s Office
• Q3 Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health
• Q4 Department of Health and Human Services

He pretends to donate his salary to specific government departments for specific issues, however by federal statute what actually happens to donated monies is they go into a generalized fund in Treasury, not to specific items, so at least that part of the story is a lie (or lack of knowledge) on Trump's part. Treasury has failed to respond to requests for information about whether Trump's donations were received by them. If Trump had indeed donated the money it seems unlikely his own government officials would block the release of an acknowledgement that the money from him had been received, so it seems most likely that Trump never donated any money and that his government officials are then hiding this fact for him.

You sure make a lot of assumptions. If Trump wasn't donating his salary to the departments he claims he has, don't you think NYT and Pelosi and Schumer and Biden would be all over him? You bet he has receipts for the donations so he doesn't pay taxes on a salary he never kept.

Trump has a long history of lying about donating money. The "charitable" foundation that bore his name, the Trump Foundation, was ordered shut last year by a judge on the grounds it was a scam and didn't actually donate money to charity and Trump was fined $2m and banned from running charities. There seems no reason to believe his latest lies about donating his salary to charity, as he's never been truthful about charity money in the past.

You read all that in the New York Times?

[LiconaFan97]

First, considering the source, I have strong doubts about the report's accuracy.

Secondly, if he legally paid only a few hundred dollars (and that seems unlikely) then he has a great accountant and the tax structure is broken. But nothing illegal.

Thirdly, people often forget that billionaires don't keep paying taxes on money they've already paid taxes on. And if the earned interest goes into tax shelters, then that's perfectly legal too.

But seeing as Trump donates his $400,000 salary back into the fed coffers, one can hardly make too big of a stink about this dubious NYT report. After four years as president, Trump will have donated $1.6 million toward the government.

If you don't think the NYT is sticking their neck way out on this one if it weren't rock solid I really have to wonder how long you actually spend in the news business. To go after a sitting president, 35 days out from the election on something so incendiary for a distinguished paper (as of 2018 125 Pulitzers)... use your head.

There are two issues with these returns. One is him paying incredibly, incredibly low taxes through dubious means e.g. deducting his hair care expenses as a business expense. The other is that the taxes reveal his woeful management of his businesses. In aggregate they lose money year after year after year. Not the mark of a successful or even competent businessman. Actually a third. It shows his claim that he's constantly under audit so he can't release his taxes to rest. The ongoing lawsuit he's referring to is in regards to a $72M tax refund he claimed in 2010. The other years aren't under audit.

[LiconaFan97]

You read all that in the New York Times?

I don't want to get between you and Starlight but it's public record that he was fined $2M due to misuse of charitable funds and his kids had to undergo mandatory training. Here's a BBC link which I assume you consider trustworthy.

[Starlight]

The money trail is quite clear.

You link to a lot of claims by Trump and his press staff that he's making lots of donations of his presidential salary to specific departments. You don't appear to have any evidence whatsoever apart from Trump-and-his-people's-say-so that these donations actually occurred and that money was actually transferred.

Factually speaking, such donations can't actually occur, because as I noted, Congress, and not random charitable individuals who feel like writing checks to the US government, constitutionally has the power of the purse and decides how to fund the US government. Individuals such as Trump cannot make donations to specific government agencies for specific causes unless Congress authorizes it, which they haven't. Hence the list of alleged donation recipients is a lie on Trump's part. What happens if individuals write checks to the government is they go into an account with Treasury.

Let's imagine a wild world of my vivid imagination, in which Trump often lies. Hard to believe. But humour me. Let's say I'm an unduly skeptical person. Let's say I think Trump has a bad record with charity money. Let's say I think he lies often about money. So let's say I think that Trump's statements about donating his salary might be lies. Can you then show me, a piece of concrete evidence, that doesn't come from Trump, his press people, or his direct appointees, that shows the US government actually received money donated by Trump? I'll accept FOIA request responses, Treasury receipts or accounts, any written document that formally certifies that the US government did receive money donated by Trump. Fire away, I'm all ears (or eyes). Give me some actual evidence beyond "Trump and his press people said so and they totally have a reputation for never lying".

[Gondwanaland]

So you don't think he lied to the IRD about having massive business losses that meant he didn't need to pay tax?

Do you have evidence that he did? No?

[Gondwanaland]

If you don't think the NYT is sticking their neck way out on this one if it weren't rock solid I really have to wonder how long you actually spend in the news business. To go after a sitting president, 35 days out from the election on something so incendiary for a distinguished paper (as of 2018 125 Pulitzers)... use your head.

That might have been the case years ago. NYT of today is nothing more than a joke of a publication, that has no integrity.

[Ronson]

If you don't think the NYT is sticking their neck way out on this one if it weren't rock solid I really have to wonder how long you actually spend in the news business.

About 4 years as a reporter.

To go after a sitting president, 35 days out from the election on something so incendiary for a distinguished paper (as of 2018 125 Pulitzers)... use your head.

The NYT got Pulitzers for fake news (like the debunked Trump/Putin baloney), just like Obama got a Peace Prize for ... warming a seat. Prizes given by Leftists to Leftists don't mean much. For a sampling

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=list+of+fa...2%3A%22a%22%7D

There are two issues with these returns. One is him paying incredibly, incredibly low taxes through dubious means e.g. deducting his hair care expenses as a business expense. The other is that the taxes reveal his woeful management of his businesses. In aggregate they lose money year after year after year. Not the mark of a successful or even competent businessman. Actually a third. It shows his claim that he's constantly under audit so he can't release his taxes to rest. The ongoing lawsuit he's referring to is in regards to a $72M tax refund he claimed in 2010. The other years aren't under audit.

I am less inclined to trust your source.

[Starlight]

Interesting to compare Trump's payments with the tax returns released by the Dem candidates this cycle..

From Twitter:

Federal income taxes paid in 2017 (jointly with spouse):
Joe Biden - $3,742,974
Kamala Harris - $516,469
Bernie Sanders - $343,882
Elizabeth Warren - $268,484

Donald Trump - $750

[LiconaFan97]

I see. I admit I read things a little quickly. He might be wrong then.

Ok, so Shuny was probably referring to this line from the article

All of the information The Times obtained was provided by sources with legal access to it.

So, sounds like it wasn't illegally obtained.

[LiconaFan97]

The NYT got Pulitzers for fake news (like the debunked Trump/Putin baloney), just like Obama got a Peace Prize for ... warming a seat. Prizes given by Leftists to Leftists don't mean much. For a sampling

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=list+of+fa...2%3A%22a%22%7D

Again, if you think a reputable award like a Pulitzer is just given out for "fake news" you just don't know what you're talking about. At minimum the award would be retracted if problems with the story were uncovered. To do otherwise is an insult to all legitimate winners.

I am less inclined to trust your source.

Yet you expect me to trust The Federalist or "frontpagemag.com" (two sources from your "link") on which NYT articles are fake news? Find me something solid and credible and not a source which loudly proclaims at the top "Inside Every Progressive Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out." I'm not exactly a progressive but surely you can agree that we can't take much that such a news source proclaims at face value. Find me a solid refutation of any story that they won a Pulitzer for. It should not be hard. That would be headline news among all of their competitors, even ones I trust implicitly.

[Starlight]

All of the information The Times obtained was provided by sources with legal access to it.

So, sounds like it wasn't illegally obtained.

Just because the sources had legal access doesn't mean it was legal for them to supply NYT with them though. e.g. the IRD workers doing the tax audit have legal access. Certainly not legal for them to give them to the IRD. On the other hand, if e.g. Melania has decided she doesn't want her husband to have a second term in office because she doesn't enjoy being First Lady and thinks it's bad for their children, and has gone to the NYT with her and Trump's joint tax filings, then that's fully legal I would think. The most likely source is probably Michael Cohen, given how many years he served as Trump's lawyer and confidant and how he's turned on Trump lately. The legality of him leaking such information is probably complicated.

[LiconaFan97]

Just because the sources had legal access doesn't mean it was legal for them to supply NYT with them though. e.g. the IRD workers doing the tax audit have legal access. Certainly not legal for them to give them to the IRD. On the other hand, if e.g. Melania has decided she doesn't want her husband to have a second term in office because she doesn't enjoy being First Lady and thinks it's bad for their children, and has gone to the NYT with her and Trump's joint tax filings, then that's fully legal I would think. The most likely source is probably Michael Cohen, given how many years he served as Trump's lawyer and confidant and how he's turned on Trump lately. The legality of him leaking such information is probably complicated.

Fair enough.

[rogue06]

Again, if you think a reputable award like a Pulitzer is just given out for "fake news" you just don't know what you're talking about. At minimum the award would be retracted if problems with the story were uncovered. To do otherwise is an insult to all legitimate winners..

One would think that would be the case and it used to be so, but all that got thrown out the window when the MSM decided to lead the TDS jihad. I mean after Mueller eviscerated the collusion delusion myth both in his report and testimony did the MSM retract any of their stories claiming it was a fact? Not just no they actually started congratulating each other on the great job they did covering it ignoring the never-ending series of dud "bombshells" they published/broadcast that turned out to be false.

[Leonhard]

I actually suspect Trump was playing "4-D chess" in this particular case. He was fighting against it to make it seem like he was hiding something to put the left into a tizzy and on a wild goose chase. Then when it's revealed to be a nothingburger, it just exposes the witch hunting expedition the left has been on for four years.

At this point I don't think Trump is intentionally doing anything like this. He's consistently disregarding what the media or anyone else thinks of him, that benefits because the media can't help but talk about him. However I don't think he's intentionally causing this stuff. It's just who he is.

I don't think he wants a public audit simply because it more or less deflates the notion that's he's a brilliant businessman which was repeated ad nauseum.

The tax avoidance I don't think will bite him though. I imagine a lot of people wish they could do the same thing and will actually admire him for it. Outright tax evasion will, but that's for the IRS to decide.

[Leonhard]

First, considering the source, I have strong doubts about the report's accuracy.

Secondly, if he legally paid only a few hundred dollars (and that seems unlikely) then he has a great accountant and the tax structure is broken. But nothing illegal.

Thirdly, people often forget that billionaires don't keep paying taxes on money they've already paid taxes on. And if the earned interest goes into tax shelters, then that's perfectly legal too.

But seeing as Trump donates his $400,000 salary back into the fed coffers, one can hardly make too big of a stink about this dubious NYT report. After four years as president, Trump will have donated $1.6 million toward the government.

Yeah, but that's a bit of a scam if he's using that to say that he's generous. He's consistently exploited his position as president to pull in money for his companies by hosting events exclusively at them. That's a revenue stream several times larger than that. And if you ask me that's a conflict of interest.

At any rate whoever buys into the idea that he's super generous towards the government I've got an Eiffel tower to sell.