It's a rather amazing thing to watch the discussion of the report in the New York Times on one of Donald Trump's tax returns from more than 20 years ago. The Times illegally published the information from one of Trump's returns in the mid 1990s. That is a violation of federal law and a felony. The return shows that in that particular year, Trump reported a major loss of around $900 million, so he paid no taxes that year. The Times then reports that the tax return shows that Trump fully complied with the tax laws. That means that the Times broke the law to report that Trump followed the law.
But take it one step further. For the Times and the Clinton people, it's a big deal that Trump paid no taxes after suffering the huge loss. They also say that he may have paid no taxes for the following year or two because the loss was so large. American are supposed to care what Trump paid as taxes twenty years ago, but there's no reason for that. He followed the law. That's what people are supposed to do (although Hillary may have some difficulty understanding that herself.) Even the Times must accept that it is not a big deal to pay no taxes if none are owing. Just two years ago, the New York Times paid no taxes. The Times made a profit but used some accounting moves to avoid having to pay tax. Will the Times now denounce itself? Will Hillary disavow the support she gets every day from the Times?
But the Times is not alone. According to news reports, Warren Buffet lost over two billion dollars in 2014 and paid no taxes either. Will Hillary now denounce Buffet, one of her big supporters? Of course not.
Then there's Hillary Clinton herself. In 2015, she and Bill gave so-called charity by transferring three million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. There were no other real charitable gifts made. By giving themselves that three million in the foundation, Bill and Hillary saved more than a million in taxes. The money did not go towards charitable activities; it is still sitting in the foundation to the extent that it was not used to pay expenses for -- you guessed it -- Bill and Hillary.
But take it one step further. For the Times and the Clinton people, it's a big deal that Trump paid no taxes after suffering the huge loss. They also say that he may have paid no taxes for the following year or two because the loss was so large. American are supposed to care what Trump paid as taxes twenty years ago, but there's no reason for that. He followed the law. That's what people are supposed to do (although Hillary may have some difficulty understanding that herself.) Even the Times must accept that it is not a big deal to pay no taxes if none are owing. Just two years ago, the New York Times paid no taxes. The Times made a profit but used some accounting moves to avoid having to pay tax. Will the Times now denounce itself? Will Hillary disavow the support she gets every day from the Times?
But the Times is not alone. According to news reports, Warren Buffet lost over two billion dollars in 2014 and paid no taxes either. Will Hillary now denounce Buffet, one of her big supporters? Of course not.
Then there's Hillary Clinton herself. In 2015, she and Bill gave so-called charity by transferring three million dollars to the Clinton Foundation. There were no other real charitable gifts made. By giving themselves that three million in the foundation, Bill and Hillary saved more than a million in taxes. The money did not go towards charitable activities; it is still sitting in the foundation to the extent that it was not used to pay expenses for -- you guessed it -- Bill and Hillary.
No comments:
Post a Comment