Romney Inflated 2011 Taxes

General Buck Turgidson said:
Because it would have been obvious to anyone who actually looked at the tax return and instead of hiding it and then looking like a fool, he decided to get out in front of it. That's probably the right play, but it's hilarious in any event.

Also, too, Romney basically setting a floor for his own effective tax rate (at least in returns he has released publicly) is an implicit concession that the Buffet Rule to set a minimum acceptable income tax rate for very rich people, has merit.


Edit: And he didn't defer income. He just didn't take his full charitable deduction. Of course, if he looses the election he can file an amended return and take advantage of the full deduction.
Click to expand...

or even if he does not lose the election

by the way, did he not say that anyone that pays one dollar more than he has to should not be president?
 
LMAO... this is too funny guys! He pays a low % because he has 'charitable contributions' which defer a large chunk of his tax liability.. so he elects to not claim all his charitable contributions and doesn't take the tax break on them, and you holler that he has somehow deceived us? Looks to me like he paid MORE than his "fair share" of taxes.
 
Dixie said:
LMAO... this is too funny guys! He pays a low % because he has 'charitable contributions' which defer a large chunk of his tax liability.. so he elects to not claim all his charitable contributions and doesn't take the tax break on them, and you holler that he has somehow deceived us? Looks to me like he paid MORE than his "fair share" of taxes.
Click to expand...

I notice that the libtards miss a few things like Dingy Harry Reid getting PWND. Remember when Dingy said Romney paid no federal taxes for 10 years? He had a friend right?

PWC confirms that Romney paid an average effective rate of 20%.

All the fucking douchebag libtards keep whining that these deductions are only available to "the rich". Well tell me where in the tax code is any tax law specifically written "only for the top 1%"?

Notice the whiny douchebag libtards completely gloss over the fact that Romney paid over $1 million in federal taxes and gave over $4 million to charity.

Romney just punked these bitches bug time and they don't even know it. They look petty and bitchy like their little pussies hurt from being pounded by Romney.

BOOM!!!!!!
 
Nov. 7, 2012.

Romney files an amended 2011 return to reclaim those deductions and get his fucking money back. (yes, this is legal and it is most like what will happen)

He ends up only paying 9% and fucking the country that didn't elect him.

He gets the last laugh after all.


When people like Mitt Romney only pay 9-13% that is a REGRESSIVE TAX POLICY. That is trickle UP economics.
 
Threedee said:
Mitt is running on a platform of closing loopholes for those making greater than $250k. His own tax situation basically plays into his own platform.
Click to expand...
Do you really believe he's going to do that? Are you really that niave? Oh sure he'll make sure you can't deduct the interest on your mortgage or your student loans but do you think he'd really end the loopholes for Inventory property sales? Do you think he'd end deffered overseas taxes? Do you think he'd end accelerated depreciation for equipment and machines? Do you think he'd end deductions for domestic manufacturing? Do you?
 
Romney pays over $1,000,000 a year in taxes and the greedy fucking libtards don't think that is enough.

How much more of that money do you deadbeat libs want? I guess douchebag writers/artists want Romney to support them so they can sit around and think about thier craft.

Why do libtardiots covet thy neighbors possessions?

Instead of coveting his possessions maybe you should think about working harder.

God Bless Mitt Romney and his success. He isn't my favorite politician, but man does he know how to earn a buck.
 
Socrtease said:
Flat tax, no loop holes, no deductions, first 35k tax free. The rich would hate it more than the poor.
Click to expand...
BULLSHIT! The only fair tax is a progressive tax. The rich would love it cause it shifts the burden of taxation onto the middle and working classes. Probably the worst idea floating out there. Any politician running for office dumb enough to advocate a flat tax deserves to lose.
 
Remember when multimillionaire Mittzie swore he'd give the people no more tax info?

He can't seem to stick to any position for long.


 
Mott the Hoople said:
Do you really believe he's going to do that? Are you really that niave? Oh sure he'll make sure you can't deduct the interest on your mortgage or your student loans but do you think he'd really end the loopholes for Inventory property sales? Do you think he'd end deffered overseas taxes? Do you think he'd end accelerated depreciation for equipment and machines? Do you think he'd end deductions for domestic manufacturing? Do you?
Click to expand...

Yes. The GOP platform has been, that, in lieu of raising effective rates, you draw the revenue from the wealthy by closing the various loopholes.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
BULLSHIT! The only fair tax is a progressive tax. The rich would love it cause it shifts the burden of taxation onto the middle and working classes. Probably the worst idea floating out there. Any politician running for office dumb enough to advocate a flat tax deserves to lose.
Click to expand...

:stup2:
 
Mott the Hoople said:
BULLSHIT! The only fair tax is a progressive tax. The rich would love it cause it shifts the burden of taxation onto the middle and working classes. Probably the worst idea floating out there. Any politician running for office dumb enough to advocate a flat tax deserves to lose.
Click to expand...

The first question is what is the goal of the tax system. If it is raising revenue then it is clear that a progressive tax code does not work.

The Founding Fathers opposed a direct tax for a reason. It is immoral.

If you want the fairest tax of all, it is abolishing all income taxes and moving to a consumption tax
 
They are obligated to pay a smaller rate, depending on the proposal, but it's the elimination of the deductions that pays off. What's more important to the left - higher rates or higher dollars paid? (Apparently it's rates, btw, because those seem more politically expedient, as the unwashed masses don't understand the other side of the coin)
 
Regarding Mott's question about deductions vs. loopholes, the terms are typically applied to those areas which all middle class taxpayers typically have access too, and those areas which are generally exclusive to the rich in order to avoid paying on whatever effective rates hit them in the upper brackets.

So, a mortage interest deduction is usually referred to as a deduction. A lower rate which happens to kick in because a sum of money happened to be transferred from one area to another, for no really good reason, would be termed a loophole.
 
Threedee said:
Yes. The GOP platform has been, that, in lieu of raising effective rates, you draw the revenue from the wealthy by closing the various loopholes.
Click to expand...
That's not the question. The question is "Are you really that niave to believe they would actually try and do that?"
 
Rune said:
It is true though. The rich pay less under every flat tax scheme yet floated.
Click to expand...
and the middle and working classes would pay more. When you add on payroll taxes, State Taxes, Local Taxes, fees and assesmet, sin taxes, sales taxes, then flat taxes become extremely regressive. There's no aregument that regresive taxation can be taken to far but those who control 75% of the revenue and incone should pay 75% of the taxes. That's fair. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron who doesn't know what their best interest are or are very wealthy.
 
FactsRStubborn said:
The first question is what is the goal of the tax system. If it is raising revenue then it is clear that a progressive tax code does not work.

The Founding Fathers opposed a direct tax for a reason. It is immoral.

If you want the fairest tax of all, it is abolishing all income taxes and moving to a consumption tax
Click to expand...
Doesn't work? OK, cite me some facts to back that up and not just right wing ideology. That's one of the dumbest comments I've ever heard on JPP!
 
Threedee said:
Regarding Mott's question about deductions vs. loopholes, the terms are typically applied to those areas which all middle class taxpayers typically have access too, and those areas which are generally exclusive to the rich in order to avoid paying on whatever effective rates hit them in the upper brackets.

So, a mortage interest deduction is usually referred to as a deduction. A lower rate which happens to kick in because a sum of money happened to be transferred from one area to another, for no really good reason, would be termed a loophole.
Click to expand...
Yea unhuh...cite some specifics. You know this is just like ending government programs to cut costs. Everyones all for that until you start citing specifics.
 
Threedee said:
Regarding Mott's question about deductions vs. loopholes, the terms are typically applied to those areas which all middle class taxpayers typically have access too, and those areas which are generally exclusive to the rich in order to avoid paying on whatever effective rates hit them in the upper brackets.

So, a mortage interest deduction is usually referred to as a deduction. A lower rate which happens to kick in because a sum of money happened to be transferred from one area to another, for no really good reason, would be termed a loophole.
Click to expand...

The bottom line is that under every flat tax yet proposed, the rich end up paying less and the poor/middle class pay more. Your semantics do not change that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top