One grifter...right now the corruption in the welfare, medicaid, social security is legendary......it was bad then and it is worse now.....
Actually, it really isn't.
Just How Wrong Is Conventional Wisdom About Government Fraud - The Atlantic
It’s not easy to get agreement on actual fraud levels in government programs. Unsurprisingly, liberals say they’re low, while conservatives insist they’re astronomically high. In truth, it varies from program to program.
One government report says fraud accounts for less than 2 percent of unemployment insurance payments. It’s seemingly impossible to find statistics on “welfare” (i.e.,
TANF) fraud, but the best guess is that it’s about the same.
A similar story emerges with everyone’s favorite punching bag, food stamps (or, as they’re known today, SNAP). Earlier this year, Senator John Thune of South Dakota and Rep. Marlin Stutzman of Indiana, both Republicans,
introduced legislation to save $30 billion over 10 years from SNAP, purportedly by “eliminating loopholes, waste, fraud, and abuse.” Once you dig into
their fact sheet, however, none of the savings actually come from fraud, but rather from cutting funding and tightening benefits. That’s probably because fraud levels in SNAP appear to be as low as with the other “pure welfare” programs we just touched on: “Payment error” rates -- money sent in incorrect amounts and/or to the wrong people -- have
declined from near 10 percent a decade ago to 3 to 4 percent today, most of it due, again, to government error, not active fraud.
Meanwhile, you have big major corporations getting all sorts of tax breaks and you are ooooh, soooo fine with that.
Mitt Romney claimed a $77,000 tax deduction on his dancing horse, Rafalca, which is more than Most American household make.
The actual tax deduction the Romney's received for the half a million dollar valued Olympic quality dancer was like $50, JS
Tax Analysts -- Is the Tax Law Subsidizing Ann Romney s Horse
"Ann Romney incurred $77,731 of expenses related to Rob Rom in 2012. The Romneys did not deduct $77,731 of horse-related expenses. The passive loss rules don't let them do that. They deducted $49, the proportionate amount covered by passive income.
The publicity given the matter so far makes it appear that the LLC owns only one horse. We don't know how large Ann Romney's equity interest is, but the partnership agreement requires her to pay for two-thirds of Rafalca's expenses.
That would imply that Rafalca costs nearly $10,000 per month for upkeep, training, and flying around the world to shows. Sounds like a lot, but it is within the usual range of expenses for such a horse. Rafalca went to London on a chartered jet.
One website estimated a partial breakdown for the $77,731 figure: housing ($29,000 -- the price the Ebelings charge customers), food ($1,200 -- might be low), clothing ($10,000), medical care ($2,000 -- also might be low), and transport to shows ($15,000). (See
http://current.com/groups/news-blog/93813208_raising-romneys-horse-vs-an-american-family-which-costs-more.htm.)
Clothing? Rafalca has T-shirts and hats that are sold to her fans, with some proceeds being given to the PATH International therapeutic riding program. Publicity has given the horse a following, but $10,000 would buy a lot of T-shirts. Clothing might include the farrier.
Enacted as an important part of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, section 469 walls off passive activities from the investor's other income, including investment income. Intended to combat tax sheltering of ordinary earned income, the passive activity loss rules are a true schedular system, modeled on the British rules for investment income.
Passive losses are a net number. The taxpayer's passive income and losses from all passive activities are lumped together on Form 8582, then losses are allowed proportionally to offset passive income.
The Romneys were only permitted to deduct $49 of the $77,731 expense attributed to Rafalca. The math required is a function of the statutory term "passive activity loss," which is a net number. Section 469(j)(4) empowers the Treasury to require allocation of the passive activity loss across all the taxpayer's passive activities on a pro rata basis.
First, the $77,731 must be divided by the Romneys' total losses of $2,276,385. That produces the passive loss ratio of 0.034.
Second, the passive loss ratio of 0.034 is multiplied by the unallowed losses on the front of Form 8582. For the Romneys, this amount is $2,274,956, consisting of passive income of $2,170 netted against current losses of $1,102,776, and carryover losses of $1,174,350. When $2,274,956 is multiplied by 0.034, the result is $77,682.
Third, $77,682 is subtracted from $77,731. The difference is $49. That amount is what the Romneys are permitted to deduct. So the taxpayers bought Rafalca a bag of oats or some morning vitamins.
Passive losses, however, may be carried forward and used to offset gain on the sale of the entire investment to an unrelated person in a taxable transaction (section 469(g)(1)(A)). So if Ann Romney sells her LLC equity interest to an outsider, or Rafalca is sold and the LLC liquidated, the Romneys can use the remaining $77,682 loss.
For the passive loss rules to apply to limit the use of the Romneys' losses, the costs of the care and feeding of Rafalca have to be section 162 business expenses in the first place, not section 183 hobby losses."