Bombshell Or Something: Trump Might Possibly Could Have Avoided Paying Taxes For 18 Years

At the end of the day, the question this brings up is “will anyone beyond the anti-business left give a damn?” Here’s the NY Times going hysteric

“Trump Tax Records Obtained by The Times Reveal He Could Have Avoided Paying Taxes for Nearly Two Decades.”

Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show.

The 1995 tax records, never before disclosed, reveal the extraordinary tax benefits that Mr. Trump, the Republican presidential nominee, derived from the financial wreckage he left behind in the early 1990s through mismanagement of three Atlantic City casinos, his ill-fated foray into the airline business and his ill-timed purchase of the Plaza Hotel in Manhattan.

Trending: The 15 Best Conservative News Sites On The Internet

Tax experts hired by The Times to analyze Mr. Trump’s 1995 records said that tax rules especially advantageous to wealthy filers would have allowed Mr. Trump to use his $916 million loss to cancel out an equivalent amount of taxable income over an 18-year period.

If the part where he didn’t pay taxes afterwards is true, then, so what? He followed the laws. Mr. Trump didn’t pass the law. Would you not follow the laws, take advantage of the laws? Of course you would. Democrats who constantly call for higher taxes, for everyone paying their “fair share,” they themselves take advantage of all the “loopholes”, as the put it, in the tax law to reduce their tax liability.

Virtually everyone takes advantage of the tax code to reduce their tax liability. Nearly 45% will had a net zero federal tax liability in 2016, up from 42% in 2013.

Did the Clinton’s and Obama’s not do all they can to avoid paying their fair share? Obama’s effective rate was 18.7% for his 2015 returns. If you had a loss, you can take advantage of the tax code, too. You can take advantage of mortgage deductions. Is that fair to people without a home mortgage? Deductions for children. Is that fair to people to people who don’t have children?

We’ll have to see if this even makes a difference in the least to the polls. Will anyone beyond the Democrat base care?

And, is this worse than what Hillary has done? Smearing and attempting to destroy the women who credibly accused her husband of sexual misconduct and rape? The loss of 4 Americans due to the mismanagement of Obama’s Libyan adventure? Her email scandal, exposing national security material to anyone who wanted to easily hack her server? Her conflicts of interest between her job as Secretary of State and the Clinton Foundation? Her speeches to Wall Street, which she won’t release? The “Muslim Brotherhood Princess”, Huma Abedin, serving as her chief go to person?

Let’s not forget Bill using the IRS as his personal Gestapo during his time as president. Think Hillary won’t do the same? How about keeping enemy files via the FBI? Sale of high-tech secrets to China? Seriously, there is so much material, it’s hard to know where to start with the Clinton’s.

Will Trump strike back using any of the material? It’s October 2nd, and he’s barely touched any of it. Instead, he likes to get into spats with former Ms. Universe winners rather than going after Hillary.

There is one interesting thing to consider about the report, as Patterico writes at Red State

My guess: Hillary Clinton found out about this before the debate. Regarding the timing, the story says only that the Times obtained the records “last month.” If Hillary was tipped off, that could explain her comment at the debate speculating that the records, if revealed, would show that Trump had paid no income taxes for several years — an accusation that Trump seemed to confirm when he replied: “That makes me smart.”

Would anyone be surprised if there was collusion between the NY Times and the Hillary campaign?

Anyhow, of course the media is having a field day with this report. Few had the same degree of apoplexy when Hillary left 4 Americans to die in Benghazi nor over her whole email issue, which would have seen other people not named Clinton put on trial.

Oh, BTW, I wonder if the NY Times will take advantage of the same tax laws to avoid paying taxation for years due to their “slight loss” of $500,000 during the 2nd quarter of 2016?

More: Via Hot Air, we learn that the NY Times not only paid $0 taxes in 2014, they got a refund

More recently, for tax year 2014, The New York Times paid no taxesand got an income tax refund of $3.5 million even though they had a pre-tax profit of $29.9 million in 2014. In other words, their post-tax profit was higher than their pre-tax profit. The explanation in their 2014 annual report is, “The effective tax rate for 2014 was favorably affected by approximately $21.1 million for the reversal of reserves for uncertain tax positions due to the lapse of applicable statutes of limitations.” If you don’t think it took fancy accountants and tax lawyers to make that happen, read the statement again.

Huh.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

You Might Like

Leave a Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!

Send this to a friend