2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumTax returns and how the plot may thicken
I just watched Erin Burnett reason through the refusal to release the returns.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/erin-burnett-romney-tax-returns-stupid_n_1679027.html
So according to Erin he either: 1) took a lot of tax shelters; 2) did something illegal; or 3) is stupid.
Erin claims that Willard isn't stupid. I'm not so sure about that myself, but I'll assume she's right. She also says that he probably didn't do anything illegal since the IRS would have caught up with him, and I'm pretty sure that Willard didn't do these returns himself. I think it's a fair assumption that he didn't do anything illegal but not because the IRS would have caught him.
It is true, as Erin points out, that the tax deductions are there for people to use them and it is also true that some of these deductions are good. We want them.
Erin then points out that on his 2010 return he's showing that he paid 16% of his money to charity. She then suggests that Willard ought to come out with that because if you add the 16% to the 13% he paid, then Willard is paying a reasonable percentage. And, Erin says, Willard can then posture as being the charitable guy and thus swipe the high ground.
I doubt it's that easy. I'm sure a lot of that 16% is tithing to the Mormon Church and that gets really interesting since only about 1% of the Mormon Church's revenue goes to actual charity. If it were really as easy as Erin suggests, and if she's right (and I'm wrong) about Romney's intelligence then why would he need Erin to figure this out for him? Is he lying in wait in order to pull something off like President Obama did to Donald Trump with the birth certificate?
How contrived and obnoxious would that look, at this point?
I have to assume there is a can of worms somewhere in those returns. Actually I think there are a number of cans of worms. Sorry Erin but if there was an easy answer for Romney, like yours, we would have seen it already.
Cary
(11,746 posts)Cary
(11,746 posts)This could get very interesting.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)in the 2009 voluntary disclosure round. In other words, he was forced to come clean on tax evasion - that's my purely speculative reasoning for why he can't disclose. The speculative claim goes thusly: he filed an amended return in 2009 along with a letter, as per the standard voluntary disclosure procedures, and there was a shitload of money that he paid back taxes and penalties on. I really don't see any other reason for him to stonewall on the returns in this way. He's taking a beating, but the beating that he takes if it's revealed that he sought amnesty for out-and-out offshore tax evasion is altogether of another order.
It also makes it hard for downticket GOPers to flog the "illegal alien" arguments, and positions Obama to promote amnesties on that front as well. It's hard for a racist Tea baggy nutjob to scream about the "illegals" already having broken the law and now seeking amnesty if the guy at the top of your ticket has done more or less the same.
Cary
(11,746 posts)There is a whole industry on offshore trusts. I know because as an estate planning and tax attorney I was tangentially involved. I am sure he paid big money to a big accounting firm and a big law firm.
He may have been involved in a VEBA or something of that nature.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)got caught up in the UBS settlement. They thought the Swiss banking rules were sacrosanct. They were wrong. It wasn't Mom and Pops with $30,000 sitting in UBS accounts that came on home for amnesty when UBS declared it would reveal clients to the feds. It was people exactly like Mitt Romney, tax and estate lawyers notwithstanding.
Cary
(11,746 posts)I just doubt it, is all.
Get back to me if I turn out to be wrong. I will be more than happy to let you gloat!