How Likely Is It That Romney Paid No Taxes?

[Mr.Nick]

Also maybe Romney doesn't want to release his tax returns because those returns will show what companies he invests in and he doesn't want the ***** progressives going to those said businesses and destroying them...

Ever think about that violent progressives??

Of course you ******* disgusting nuts would show up to one of his businesses he invests in and vandalize it... It's what you do - you're violent *****..

 

[bripat9643]

Considering the son of Boss schemes, deemed abusive by the IRS, that Romney set up, I find it very plausible that Mittens avoided paying taxes for 10 years.

I find i thighly likely that you suffered severe brain damage during birth.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Considering the son of Boss schemes, deemed abusive by the IRS, that Romney set up, I find it very plausible that Mittens avoided paying taxes for 10 years.

Could Romney’s Effective Tax Rate Really Be Zero? | TPMDC

By alleging that Mitt Romney effectively paid no federal taxes for 10 years, Harry Reid’s welcomed conservative scorn and managed to keep a story that’s unflattering to the GOP presidential candidate in the news.

...

Other experts largely agree.

“t struck me as plausible,” said NYU tax expert Daniel Shaviro, who’s been a leading analyst of Romney’s public financial information. “The reason people have been saying he must have paid something is that they’ve figured he must have (as in 2010) had some dividend and interest income plus other ordinary (rather than capital gains) stuff such as speaker fees. Zeroing all that out, if he had such income every year, would have required tax shelter losses that would very likely be deemed (by the IRS and many legal experts) as abusive.”

Shaviro also notes that if, using his IRA, Romney had avoided realizing capital gains on Bain shares, it would have helped him accomplish what’s known as “loss harvesting.” That’s when investors sell off financial losers to cancel out capital gains they’ve realized elsewhere in their portfolio. The lower one’s capital gains in any given year, the easier it is to harvest that loss.

We know Romney harvested losses because he carried forward a substantial capital loss in 2010. “[H]aving less capital gains to begin with via the Bain strategy from the TPM blog post would obviously make it easier to get to zero RE the capital gains,” Shaviro adds.

It's very likely he didn't pay taxes or even got money back.

But I find it hard to believe it's for more then a few years. 10 years is a bit of a stretch.

So maybe Romney lied to the Bain investor, to con him into believing that Romney was some kind of tax genius, and would find creative ways of sheltering the guy's money. This was the era of creative accounting, and Romney was complicit in that. But considering that Romney essentially sold his interest in Bain, and avoided taxes, by making it look like a retirement rollover into his $400 million IRA, I wouldn't put anything past him.

 

[BillyV]

Factor in his off-shore accounts, his $400 million IRA, his ability to create meaningless paper transactions, and his history at Marriott of signing off on a Son of BOSS writeoff (later dissallowed by the IRS audit), his ability to make up partnerships where he can write-off $77,000 on revenue of $211 for essentially his wife's horseback riding, and it becomes very plausible. Mitt is clearly not above using tax shams. He has a clear history of it.

Looking over the only complete return available, from 2010, I'd say it very likely that there would be several deductions disallowed if he has that tax year audited.

Really? Which ones that you looked at in his 2010 tax return seemed disallowable to you? Be specific.

I saw nothing significant that would be disallowed. As for his "$77,000 write-off", he was only allowed $49 in 2010; it remains to be seen whether that partnership interest is determined to be a hobby, but if it is I'll be surprised.

I would note that he had a $5 million long-term capital loss carryover from 2009; this is an indication that he had more losses than gains in 2009 and would bolster the argument that he paid little or no tax in 2009 (which, by the way, would be legitimate if all his income was from capital gains, though no doubt politically damaging).

Incorrect. The write off was for $77,731 less the revenue of $211.

I'd have a hard time believing that the IRS would view this as a serious business.

Ummm, no. The loss was $77,000; the amount allowed for 2010 was $49 ( I attached the proper page from Schedule E). The loss was limited due to the passive activity rules. He may get to deduct it in a later year, but for 2010 he got less than $50. You have to follow it all the way to the final number. As for it being a serious business, it's an Olympic horse. You don't think they'll make some money on stud fees or in other competitions, or at least be able to sell it for a quarter million or more?

In any case, that's not "several deductions disallowed." What are the rest?

 

[Conservadude]

Considering the son of Boss schemes, deemed abusive by the IRS, that Romney set up, I find it very plausible that Mittens avoided paying taxes for 10 years.

Could Romney’s Effective Tax Rate Really Be Zero? | TPMDC

By alleging that Mitt Romney effectively paid no federal taxes for 10 years, Harry Reid’s welcomed conservative scorn and managed to keep a story that’s unflattering to the GOP presidential candidate in the news.

...

Other experts largely agree.

“t struck me as plausible,” said NYU tax expert Daniel Shaviro, who’s been a leading analyst of Romney’s public financial information. “The reason people have been saying he must have paid something is that they’ve figured he must have (as in 2010) had some dividend and interest income plus other ordinary (rather than capital gains) stuff such as speaker fees. Zeroing all that out, if he had such income every year, would have required tax shelter losses that would very likely be deemed (by the IRS and many legal experts) as abusive.”

Shaviro also notes that if, using his IRA, Romney had avoided realizing capital gains on Bain shares, it would have helped him accomplish what’s known as “loss harvesting.” That’s when investors sell off financial losers to cancel out capital gains they’ve realized elsewhere in their portfolio. The lower one’s capital gains in any given year, the easier it is to harvest that loss.

We know Romney harvested losses because he carried forward a substantial capital loss in 2010. “[H]aving less capital gains to begin with via the Bain strategy from the TPM blog post would obviously make it easier to get to zero RE the capital gains,” Shaviro adds.

Since Obama won't just put an end to speculation and release his College records.. I will just assume that he never went to college. K?

 

[Lakhota]

There are many theories, including the possibility that Romney participated in the 2009 IRS tax amnesty program:

10 Theories About What Mitt Romney's Really Hiding in Those Tax Returns | Alternet

Did Romney Participate in IRS Tax Amnesty Program in 2009? | Daily Agenda

 

[Big Black Dog]

You can bet your bottom dollar that Obama's IRS thugs have taken a look at Romney's taxes for quite a few years back. If there was any discrepancy in any of his past filings, the IRS would have blown the whistle by now and it would be broadcast on all the major news channels. It's all you would hear about. Right now, a lot of noise is being made about Romney's taxes simply because Obama doesn't have a record that he can run for re-election on and his only chance is to try to make Romney look small so nobody will look closely at his own miserable past records.

 

[Wiseacre]

The Obama Admin has been leaking information on everything else, if they had the goods on Romney I think it would've been exposed by now. These guys have no morals at all about breaking the law or risking national security. And they sure as hell don't care about individual privacy if it means getting re-elected.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Considering the son of Boss schemes, deemed abusive by the IRS, that Romney set up, I find it very plausible that Mittens avoided paying taxes for 10 years.

Could Romney’s Effective Tax Rate Really Be Zero? | TPMDC

By alleging that Mitt Romney effectively paid no federal taxes for 10 years, Harry Reid’s welcomed conservative scorn and managed to keep a story that’s unflattering to the GOP presidential candidate in the news.

...

Other experts largely agree.

“t struck me as plausible,” said NYU tax expert Daniel Shaviro, who’s been a leading analyst of Romney’s public financial information. “The reason people have been saying he must have paid something is that they’ve figured he must have (as in 2010) had some dividend and interest income plus other ordinary (rather than capital gains) stuff such as speaker fees. Zeroing all that out, if he had such income every year, would have required tax shelter losses that would very likely be deemed (by the IRS and many legal experts) as abusive.”

Shaviro also notes that if, using his IRA, Romney had avoided realizing capital gains on Bain shares, it would have helped him accomplish what’s known as “loss harvesting.” That’s when investors sell off financial losers to cancel out capital gains they’ve realized elsewhere in their portfolio. The lower one’s capital gains in any given year, the easier it is to harvest that loss.

We know Romney harvested losses because he carried forward a substantial capital loss in 2010. “[H]aving less capital gains to begin with via the Bain strategy from the TPM blog post would obviously make it easier to get to zero RE the capital gains,” Shaviro adds.

Since Obama won't just put an end to speculation and release his College records.. I will just assume that he never went to college. K?

You can assume he's a Kenyan born Muslim for all I care.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Really? Which ones that you looked at in his 2010 tax return seemed disallowable to you? Be specific.

I saw nothing significant that would be disallowed. As for his "$77,000 write-off", he was only allowed $49 in 2010; it remains to be seen whether that partnership interest is determined to be a hobby, but if it is I'll be surprised.

I would note that he had a $5 million long-term capital loss carryover from 2009; this is an indication that he had more losses than gains in 2009 and would bolster the argument that he paid little or no tax in 2009 (which, by the way, would be legitimate if all his income was from capital gains, though no doubt politically damaging).

Incorrect. The write off was for $77,731 less the revenue of $211.

I'd have a hard time believing that the IRS would view this as a serious business.

Ummm, no. The loss was $77,000; the amount allowed for 2010 was $49 ( I attached the proper page from Schedule E). The loss was limited due to the passive activity rules. He may get to deduct it in a later year, but for 2010 he got less than $50. You have to follow it all the way to the final number. As for it being a serious business, it's an Olympic horse. You don't think they'll make some money on stud fees or in other competitions, or at least be able to sell it for a quarter million or more?

In any case, that's not "several deductions disallowed." What are the rest?

The $49 figure was a supplemental to what Mitt reported on form 8582, which was from the worksheet I provided.

 

[BillyV]

Incorrect. The write off was for $77,731 less the revenue of $211.

I'd have a hard time believing that the IRS would view this as a serious business.

Ummm, no. The loss was $77,000; the amount allowed for 2010 was $49 ( I attached the proper page from Schedule E). The loss was limited due to the passive activity rules. He may get to deduct it in a later year, but for 2010 he got less than $50. You have to follow it all the way to the final number. As for it being a serious business, it's an Olympic horse. You don't think they'll make some money on stud fees or in other competitions, or at least be able to sell it for a quarter million or more?

In any case, that's not "several deductions disallowed." What are the rest?

The $49 figure was a supplemental to what Mitt reported on form 8582, which was from the worksheet I provided.

Nice try. Form 8582 is the form where passive income and losses are accumulated. You see, passive losses can only be deducted against passive income. Mitt had only $2,170 of passive income and $2.3 million in passive losses (as shown on your Supplement to 8582), so he can only deduct the $2,170 in total; the rest carries forward to future years until there's enough passive income. That $2,170 loss gets allocated to the 5 activities shown; hence, the $49 allocated to Rob Rom Enterprises to be deducted in 2010. So in summary, he got a grand total of $49 of total income reduction for 2010 from that activity, and a tax break of about $15.

As for the $49 figure being "supplemental to what Mitt reported", what does that even mean?