Trump’s Taxes Are the Best Case Yet for Putting Him in Prison

signalmankenneth

Verified User
Don’t let the cynics who know little about our tax system trick you into thinking there was nothing all that new or important in the six years of Donald Trump’s taxes released Friday by the House Ways and Means Committee.

In fact, even if some of it was previously teased by the committee, the dump includes a cornucopia of information that affects your wallet—including powerful evidence of criminal tax evasion.

Among other things, Trump’s tax returns make a strong case for restoring the law that until 1924 made all income tax returns public. Newspapers back then ran long lists showing the income of and taxes paid by the wealthiest Americans.

Knowing that your income, deductions, and tax paid will be publicly available can do far more to encourage honest tax-paying than audits, which are increasingly rare and increasingly superficial.

Not even 500 of the nearly 25,000 households reporting incomes of $10 million or more in 2019 were audited. That’s 2 percent—just 1 in 50. Only 66 audits were completed.

People like Trump who earn money from legal sources can cheat like crazy on their tax returns with almost nothing to fear. That’s because fewer than 600 people at all income levels are convicted of tax fraud in a typical year.

That makes the odds of conviction about 1 in 275,000 taxpayers. But the odds for business owners are much better (which is to say less), because most people convicted of tax crimes are drug dealers, politicians who took bribes, or people who paid bribes.

The IRS, as funded by Congress, spent far more money auditing the working poor than the 24,457 households with incomes of $10 million and up in 2019. But don’t get angry at the IRS. They are just the tax police, enforcing the law as they are instructed by Congress. If Congress tells the IRS to focus on high-income tax cheating, it will.

A little-known reason the IRS rarely audits someone like Trump, even if there are indications of brazen fraud, is that if an audit will not raise any revenue immediately, it looks bad on IRS performance reports.

Consider a rich business owner who fabricates deductions but who would still owe zero tax in the audited year even if those deductions were denied. That means an audit that will not generate any tax revenue. That’s also what Trump apparently did in 26 sole proprietor, or Schedule C, filings in the six years of released tax returns.

Denying the immediate deductions may mean more taxes in future years, but the way the IRS measures audit performance, it doesn’t take future taxes into account. As a result, many working and retired IRS auditors have told me over the years, the IRS typically decides to audit other filers who are more likely to generate taxes immediately, allowing multi-year tax cheats to slip away

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-taxes-best-case-yet-042001819.html

FlOMtJZXwAEUvj2.jpg

 
OK - Let's also release the tax returns of all our congressmen and judges.

None of them have the power of the presidency. Trump's financial entanglements really do matter. He was banking in 6 countries. Bannon said Trump's biggest problem was money laundering. There is a reason we have had presidential candidates release their taxes. I would assume that is tough for you to understand.
 
[FONT=&]Don’t let the cynics who know little about our tax system trick you into thinking there was nothing all that new or important in the six years of Donald Trump’s taxes released Friday by the House Ways and Means Committee.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]In fact, even if some of it was previously teased by the committee, the dump includes a cornucopia of information that affects your wallet—including powerful evidence of criminal tax evasion.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]Among other things, Trump’s tax returns make a strong case for restoring the law that until 1924 made all income tax returns public. Newspapers back then ran long lists showing the income of and taxes paid by the wealthiest Americans.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]Knowing that your income, deductions, and tax paid will be publicly available can do far more to encourage honest tax-paying than audits, which are increasingly rare and increasingly superficial.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]Not even 500 of the nearly 25,000 households reporting incomes of $10 million or more in 2019 were audited. That’s 2 percent—just 1 in 50. Only 66 audits were completed.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]People like Trump who earn money from legal sources can cheat like crazy on their tax returns with almost nothing to fear. That’s because fewer than 600 people at all income levels are convicted of tax fraud in a typical year.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]That makes the odds of conviction about 1 in 275,000 taxpayers. But the odds for business owners are much better (which is to say less), because most people convicted of tax crimes are drug dealers, politicians who took bribes, or people who paid bribes.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]The IRS, as funded by Congress, spent far more money auditing the working poor than the 24,457 households with incomes of $10 million and up in 2019. But don’t get angry at the IRS. They are just the tax police, enforcing the law as they are instructed by Congress. If Congress tells the IRS to focus on high-income tax cheating, it will.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]A little-known reason the IRS rarely audits someone like Trump, even if there are indications of brazen fraud, is that if an audit will not raise any revenue immediately, it looks bad on IRS performance reports.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]Consider a rich business owner who fabricates deductions but who would still owe zero tax in the audited year even if those deductions were denied. That means an audit that will not generate any tax revenue. That’s also what Trump apparently did in 26 sole proprietor, or Schedule C, filings in the six years of released tax returns.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&]Denying the immediate deductions may mean more taxes in future years, but the way the IRS measures audit performance, it doesn’t take future taxes into account. As a result, many working and retired IRS auditors have told me over the years, the IRS typically decides to audit other filers who are more likely to generate taxes immediately, allowing multi-year tax cheats to slip away

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-taxes-best-case-yet-042001819.html

[/FONT]
FlOMtJZXwAEUvj2.jpg
[FONT=&]
[/FONT]

Nothing but a laughable stream of lies. If there was criminal tax evasion, the IRS would already know about it.

But here is what is criminal; lying to the courts to obtain someone's personal taxes, then releasing them to the public in violation of our laws. Fascinating how lying leftist losers like you seem to be okay with real law breaking. :palm:
 
My belief is if you chose to serve the public, you need to be totally transparent. If you do t want people knowing your business, don’t run for office.

No one cares about YOUR beliefs. I am talking the law simpleton. Now run along with your laughable anecdotal BS.
 
My belief is if you chose to serve the public, you need to be totally transparent. If you don’t want people knowing your business, don’t run for office.

Most people believe that. It's part of the gig.

And we can see why. We don't want public officials compromised by their investments, and other considerations. Trump had no experience in politics - and his whole initial campaign was centered around being a great businessman & all the money he made. If someone was in a job interview and that was the value they were offering, the people hiring that person would certainly have a right to see proof of that.
 
We included some stiff term limits too. Give it a few years and see if we can make this a model for the nation overall.

I do not like term limits. Committee assignments and chairmanship are largely a tenure thing. Kicking your pols out after 2 terms hurts your state's power. We have the best term limits. If you do not like your congressman, vote him out next time. But a rule that says "stop me from voting for my politician again, I cannot help myself" is ridiculous.
 
I do not like term limits. Committee assignments and chairmanship are largely a tenure thing. Kicking your pols out after 2 terms hurts your state's power. We have the best term limits. If you do not like your congressman, vote him out next time. But a rule that says "stop me from voting for my politician again, I cannot help myself" is ridiculous.

Interesting take. Well, it helped us get rid of some pretty marginal pols by terming them out. It also is a counter against gerrymandering. We took care of that in Michigan too, and now have districts drawn up by a nonpartisan, independent commission.

Public service was meant to be a short-term thing, not a lifetime appointment to the feeding trough.
 
Interesting take. Well, it helped us get rid of some pretty marginal pols by terming them out. It also is a counter against gerrymandering. We took care of that in Michigan too, and now have districts drawn up by a nonpartisan, independent commission.

Public service was meant to be a short-term thing, not a lifetime appointment to the feeding trough.

What do you base that claim on? America was an agrarian society and farmers could not be full-time politicians. That time has long passed. People can be full-time politicians. It is not bad to have experienced people in politics. replacing them with neophytes is not a good idea. Training periods exist in every job. The new employees are worth a lot less until they get the hang of how things are done.I am in Michigan too and the redistricting was slow. We should have charged U of Ms math dept with finding as fair a districting as possible. It is a math/geography problem. Note, the Dems have some power and they fight to get fair redistricting. The Reds fought to gerrymander their asses off. Fair was not part of their mindset.
 
What do you base that claim on? America was an agrarian society and farmers could not be full-time politicians. That time has long passed. People can be full-time politicians. It is not bad to have experienced people in politics. replacing them with neophytes is not a good idea. Training periods exist in every job. The new employees are worth a lot less until they get the hang of how things are done.I am in Michigan too and the redistricting was slow. We should have charged U of Ms math dept with finding as fair a districting as possible. It is a math/geography problem. Note, the Dems have some power and they fight to get fair redistricting. The Reds fought to gerrymander their asses off. Fair was not part of their mindset.
I think 6 terms is enough to pass on the expertise for a House member and 4 terms for a Senator.
 
Jailing Trump for his taxes is a nice idea but the article makes a lousy argument for doing so. Most all it as about reforming tax laws Trump used to his advantage rather than reasons for prosecuting him. There is only the observation that Trump is required by law to have evidence for his deductions, something we all knew - no assertion he lacked the evidence.
 
Back
Top