Reid: Bain Investor Told Me That Mitt Romney 'Didn't Pay Any Taxes For 10 Years'

[AmericanNation]

Romney has released his return from last year and will release his return from this latest year (like he said he would).  Imagine the hesitation at giving a mob of people, calling you a witch, what they're asking for.  If he gave them 20 returns they would go crazy about him making money and paying the appropriate amount of taxes on it.  "15% capital gains is less than your income rate!!!!!  arghhhh!!!!!  he's a witch!!!" 
Harry Reid and Obama both have illegal land deals in their past so I expect that to come up soon.  Mitt Romney made a lot of money, paid a lot of taxes, and bought his own land.  Harry Reid and BO, not so much.       

[pbrower2a]

Liberals are just grasping at any issue that takes voters minds off the economy; and make Romney seem like an evil wall street capitalist shark. 

I'll tell you what is in Romney's tax returns, probably the same stuff that was in the past 2 years!  Since 2008, he has been a private citizen without a full time job.  His income is derived from speeches and investments.  Should he disclose every investment he's made in his lifetime?  Maybe or maybe not. 

He's been involved with a lot of businesses; and some of those takeovers have been controversial.  Liberals are just trying to grab onto anything controversial that would make Romney look bad based on his past investments, and business operations. 

He probably has paid less in Income tax because he hasn't had a full time job since 2002.  Most of his taxes are capital gains.  It might seem lower than the average middle class worker, but that is the nature of the industry he was working in.  Romney retired from full-time work in 2002, so why would he have to pay taxes if he had very limited income tax? 

If his business ethics leave something to be desired, then he does not deserve to be President. Such is even more important than taxes.

Oh, we're talking about politicians deserving to be president, are we?

What a fun activity. If Obama deserves to be re-elected, deciding on the criteria must be like playing a game of Mad Libs.

No. Manifestations of suspect ethics in business dealings, can be disqualifications for the Highest Office of the Land.  John Corzine is through as a political figure.

[pepper11]

McCain released two years of returns. Why didn't you all bust an uproar back then? Not one person cared. No one. This is a made up issue  because Obama has nothing to run on.

[old timey villain]

What's with this meme that Obama is making up issues because he can't run on the real issues or that he has nothing to run on??

Healthcare reform (upheld in the Supreme Court no less)
Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal
Killing of Osama Bin Laden
Successful end to war in Iraq
Successful operation in Libya

And this may sound crazy, but I really believe that Obama could run solely on the economy and win. Most voters still blame Bush for the bad economy than Obama. He can tout the 4 million jobs created, an unemployment rate that has dropped 2 percentage points from its highs, and remind voters where we were when he was elected and took office and compare that to where we are now- not great but much much better. And better yet, remind voters that Romney's economic plan is nothing new or effective.

Obama is not running from his record on the economy because he doesn't need to. And he's brought up these other attacks not because he needs a smoke screen, it's because Romney is a terrible candidate who has skeletons in his closet. Any candidate would bring these things up in any race because they're effective attacks.

[AmericanNation]

What's with this meme that Obama is making up issues because he can't run on the real issues or that he has nothing to run on??

Healthcare reform (upheld in the Supreme Court no less)
Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal
Killing of Osama Bin Laden
Successful end to war in Iraq
Successful operation in Libya

And this may sound crazy, but I really believe that Obama could run solely on the economy and win. Most voters still blame Bush for the bad economy than Obama. He can tout the 4 million jobs created, an unemployment rate that has dropped 2 percentage points from its highs, and remind voters where we were when he was elected and took office and compare that to where we are now- not great but much much better. And better yet, remind voters that Romney's economic plan is nothing new or effective.

Obama is not running from his record on the economy because he doesn't need to. And he's brought up these other attacks not because he needs a smoke screen, it's because Romney is a terrible candidate who has skeletons in his closet. Any candidate would bring these things up in any race because they're effective attacks.

Polling was done on that recently.  More people blame Obama than Bush, but neither is close to a majority. 

[minionofmidas]

If Reid's clams are false, wouldn't McCain and Schmidt be the two most credible people to strike them down? They saw Romney's tax returns back in 2008 when he was vetted for VP. What are they saying about all this?

McCain has refused to comment.. why doesn't he just come out and say that Reid is lying or has a BS source?

For all we know, McCain is Reid's source.

For all we know, the reason Romney was not chosen as McCain's running mate is that McCain did not get to see these tax returns at the time.

[stegosaurus]

If Reid's clams are false, wouldn't McCain and Schmidt be the two most credible people to strike them down? They saw Romney's tax returns back in 2008 when he was vetted for VP. What are they saying about all this?

McCain has refused to comment.. why doesn't he just come out and say that Reid is lying or has a BS source?

For all we know, McCain is Reid's source.

For all we know, the reason Romney was not chosen as McCain's running mate is that McCain did not get to see these tax returns at the time.

A) McCain saw 23 years worth of Romney's tax returns.

B) Those behind the McCain's campaign and VP vetting process, and John McCain himself,  have said that there was nothing foul or 'disqualifying' in Romney's tax returns.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/mitt-romney-tax-returns_n_1680765.html

Ironically, that's one credible source (in that they actually had access to Romney's tax returns) on the record for Romney's case. Contrast that with Reid's anonymous source who, should they even exist, would not have access to Romney's personal tax information and the writing is on the wall.

[milhouse24]

The more I think about, the more personally disgusting the actions of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid appear. 

It is outright lying to wildly claim that Romney "did not pay any taxes for ten years" or imply that Romney was dishonest in his tax filings. 

Romney may have had a low tax rate based on his capital gains/retirement accounts.  But Reid is implying a more sinister accusation that Romney is cheating the US government and a tax dodger. 

It is just personally disgusting for the Senate leader to lie without any proof that another US Citizen is purposely evading taxes.  It doesn't matter if you are accusing your neighbor, your boss, or a presidential candidate about tax evasion without any solid proof. 

Harry Reid's statements are worst than gutter politics because he is claiming the IRS is not doing its job, and that Romney did not pay his required american taxes. 

I think that there will be an Ethics Violation for Harry Reid, but I don't think he cares at this point in his life.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/four-pinocchios-for-harry-reids-claim-about-mitt-romneys-taxes/2012/08/06/c31a1402-e007-11e1-8fc5-a7dcf1fc161d_blog.html

[Likely Voter]

Once again this isn't about Harry Reid. And also it is quite possible that Romney could have paid less than he did in 2011 through legal means. The fact that Romney continues to refuse to reveal the returns opens him to the charge that there is something there that isn't in his 2010/11 returns, otherwise why not reveal? He is already being hit for the techniques he used to lower his taxes in those years so if it is more of the same then all he can do is benefit by getting rid of the 'what is he hiding?' attack.

It is worth noting that Romney has a history with skating on the edge (and going over the line) with the IRS, at least on the business side. Here is an article from Bloomberg earlier this year

You must be logged in to read this quote.

and there is much more at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-22/romney-as-auditing-chairman-saw-marriott-son-of-boss-tax-shelter-defy-irs.html

[Brittain33]

B) Those behind the McCain's campaign and VP vetting process, and John McCain himself,  have said that there was nothing foul or 'disqualifying' in Romney's tax returns.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/mitt-romney-tax-returns_n_1680765.html

In the words of Christine Keeler, "he would say that, wouldn't he?"

Seriously, do you think McCain and Schmidt have an incentive to say anything but "they checked out just fine," whether it's true or not?

[Torie]

Once again this isn't about Harry Reid. And also it is quite possible that Romney could have paid less than he did in 2011 through legal means. The fact that Romney continues to refuse to reveal the returns opens him to the charge that there is something there that isn't in his 2010/11 returns, otherwise why not reveal? He is already being hit for the techniques he used to lower his taxes in those years so if it is more of the same then all he can do is benefit by getting rid of the 'what is he hiding?' attack.

It is worth noting that Romney has a history with skating on the edge (and going over the line) with the IRS, at least on the business side. Here is an article from Bloomberg earlier this year

You must be logged in to read this quote.

and there is much more at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-22/romney-as-auditing-chairman-saw-marriott-son-of-boss-tax-shelter-defy-irs.html

The tax code in its application in some of these complex tax avoidance transactions, has a grey zone. Just what constitutes a sufficient level of economic substance is not as exact as the speed of light, and sometimes generates litigation that can generate boatloads of attorneys fees. That is one reason why we think the Tax Code is far superior to the Bible. It's a work of art, and we love it.

I probably have billed about a fifth of my lifetime legal fees over tax code disputes, one involving gold swaps done in a Singapore foreign subsidiary, where the subsidiary was enjoying a 10 year tax free holiday in Singapore to induce the oil service firm to build their plant there, and thus was awash in cash (about 100 million or so), which gold swaps were designed to convert interest to something that was not Subpart F income so it would not be subject to tax in the US (we won that one, which caused the Tax Code to be amended to shut it down after the IRS lost). Another involved capital gain recognition or the lack thereof when real estate was taken out of subchapter S corp, and on that one we won too, causing the IRS to drop its national plan to go after that particular kind of transaction (that involved getting 30 year old briefs out of an IRS storage facility in the middle of a mountain in West Virginia, which that porker Sen Robert Byrd had caused to be put there of course (thank God the records had not yet been destroyed, because the attorney handling the matter unfortunately had been dead for about 15 years, and unavailable to hit up for the docs).  We needed the briefs because  the tax court opinion had an inadequate statement of facts - it turned out the facts made the case a "spotted horse," working for us, and agains the IRS, so the IRS was just totally F'ed, and had to fold).

So there is nothing dishonorable about this. It's as American as apple pie. And aren't you jealous that I get to deal with such fascinating stuff?  

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

McCain released two years of returns. Why didn't you all bust an uproar back then? Not one person cared. No one. This is a made up issue  because Obama has nothing to run on.

Romney had be prodded hard in the primaries to release the one year he has released and promise to release his 2011 return when it is finished.  (That the return isn't done yet should be an obvious sign that the tax code needs simplifying, but I digress.)  Also Mitt is vulnerable because of the example of his father George, who released twelve years when he ran for President.

[stegosaurus]

B) Those behind the McCain's campaign and VP vetting process, and John McCain himself,  have said that there was nothing foul or 'disqualifying' in Romney's tax returns.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/mitt-romney-tax-returns_n_1680765.html

In the words of Christine Keeler, "he would say that, wouldn't he?"

Seriously, do you think McCain and Schmidt have an incentive to say anything but "they checked out just fine," whether it's true or not?

Considering the alleged personal animosity between Romney and McCain, I don't see the motivation for McCain to flat deny this. If there was something there, McCain would 'no comment'. Instead, he insists that Palin was simply a better choice at the time; which I think is intended as a slight - but that I can't be sure of.

[Likely Voter]

Once again this isn't about Harry Reid. And also it is quite possible that Romney could have paid less than he did in 2011 through legal means. The fact that Romney continues to refuse to reveal the returns opens him to the charge that there is something there that isn't in his 2010/11 returns, otherwise why not reveal? He is already being hit for the techniques he used to lower his taxes in those years so if it is more of the same then all he can do is benefit by getting rid of the 'what is he hiding?' attack.

It is worth noting that Romney has a history with skating on the edge (and going over the line) with the IRS, at least on the business side. Here is an article from Bloomberg earlier this year

You must be logged in to read this quote.

and there is much more at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-22/romney-as-auditing-chairman-saw-marriott-son-of-boss-tax-shelter-defy-irs.html

The tax code in its application in some of these complex tax avoidance transactions, has a grey zone. Just what constitutes a sufficient level of economic substance is not as exact as the speed of light, and sometimes generates litigation that can generate boatloads of attorneys fees. That is one reason why we think the Tax Code is far superior to the Bible. It's a work of art, and we love it.

I probably have billed about a fifth of my lifetime legal fees over tax code disputes, one involving gold swaps done in a Singapore foreign subsidiary, where the subsidiary was enjoying a 10 year tax free holiday in Singapore to induce the oil service firm to build their plant there, and thus was awash in cash (about 100 million or so), which gold swaps were designed to convert interest to something that was not Subpart F income so it would not be subject to tax in the US (we won that one, which caused the Tax Code to be amended to shut it down after the IRS lost). Another involved capital gain recognition or the lack thereof when real estate was taken out of subchapter S corp, and on that one we won too, causing the IRS to drop its national plan to go after that particular kind of transaction (that involved getting 30 year old briefs out of an IRS storage facility in the middle of a mountain in West Virginia, which that porker Sen Robert Byrd had caused to be put there of course (thank God the records had not yet been destroyed, because the attorney handling the matter unfortunately had been dead for about 15 years, and unavailable to hit up for the docs).  We needed the briefs because  the tax court opinion had an inadequate statement of facts - it turned out the facts made the case a "spotted horse," working for us, and agains the IRS, so the IRS was just totally F'ed, and had to fold).

So there is nothing dishonorable about this. It's as American as apple pie. And aren't you jealous that I get to deal with such fascinating stuff?  

Again this is the court of public opinion, so i think Romney losing a tax fight in court and having what the company was doing be called “fictitious,” “artificial,” “spectral,” an “illusion” and a “scheme” is not insignificant and cant be waved off. But my point is that Romney is clearly very very aggressive in getting tax breaks.

Here is another report from the LATimes just yesterday about how the Romney's fought for every penny on their property taxes:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-romney-property-tax-20120806,0,4428951,full.story


Again I doubt Romney has done anything illegal. But what this all does is continue to paint him as an ultra-rich guy who is using the system to fullest to avoid taxes. If he wants to humanize himself and make himself relatable to Mr. and Mrs. taxpaying middle class American, all of this stuff doesn't help and most likely is why he is under water in terms of personal ratings.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In the words of Christine Keeler, "he would say that, wouldn't he?"

Mandy Rice-Davies, actually. But it was in the trial. And it's a great quote.

[Torie]

I won't subject you to my anecdotes about property tax appeals. God, I do love those - particularly those with lots of numbers here, there and everywhere, such as commercial properties, on land lease or something, so you get to fight about discount rates and the like. It's wonderful!  

Anyhoo, mansions are tough to value, because they tend to be sui generis, with few or no comps, and the market for them is so thin to boot. Plus if Mittens built the house, he may well have more dough into it, than it is worth. And maybe he indeed just overpaid for it. That can happen. Heck zillow thinks I underpaid for the property below. My purchase is represented by the dollar sign in the green circle.



How am I doing so far in trying to get Mittens' butt out of the wringer here?

[Likely Voter]

I am not arguing that Romney did anything that is illegal or unethical, it is just that his tax activities highlight his ultra-wealth and his working of the system to get himself a better deal.

Do you think this makes middle class Americans like him more?

[Torie]

I am not arguing that Romney did anything that is illegal or unethical, it is just that his tax activities highlight his ultra-wealth and his working of the system to get himself a better deal.

Do you think this makes middle class Americans like him more?

Oh it may hurt him a tad. But working the system within the law is what America is all about. I don't think most Americans would hold that against him. That is what they would do if they were in his position - almost all of them. And I don't think most are opebo types, who dislike people (at least on a political level) simply because they are rich. They kind of admire rich people, at least those who earned their dough legally.

[stegosaurus]

I am not arguing that Romney did anything that is illegal or unethical, it is just that his tax activities highlight his ultra-wealth and his working of the system to get himself a better deal.

Do you think this makes middle class Americans like him more?

Oh it may hurt him a tad. But working the system within the law is what America is all about. I don't think most Americans would hold that against him. That is what they would do if they were in his position - almost all of them.

This.

Romney pays the bare minimum amount of taxes that the government will allow him. I don't know a single person who doesn't use the tax code to get the lowest possible rate. Tax Preparation is an industry of its own because of the universal desire to ensure the lowest possible tax rate.

Furthermore, if we are admitting that there is no evidence of wrong doing in Mitt Romney's tax filings, why do we still need to see them? If you want Romney's returns so that you can make attack ad out of Romney's perfectly legal tax rate, then you aren't alone; but it shouldn't come as much of a shock that Team Romney isn't playing ball.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

But working the system within the law is what America is all about.

This is the kind of thing I always wish actual politicians would say. Because it would make for hilarious adverts.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

How am I doing so far in trying to get Mittens' butt out of the wringer here?

Better than he is.  He seems content to just let it be wrung.

[Sbane]

I am not arguing that Romney did anything that is illegal or unethical, it is just that his tax activities highlight his ultra-wealth and his working of the system to get himself a better deal.

Do you think this makes middle class Americans like him more?

Oh it may hurt him a tad. But working the system within the law is what America is all about. I don't think most Americans would hold that against him. That is what they would do if they were in his position - almost all of them. And I don't think most are opebo types, who dislike people (at least on a political level) simply because they are rich. They kind of admire rich people, at least those who earned their dough legally.

The problem comes in October when he has to go on the national stage and explain why people like him should be given more tax cuts while spending on medicare and social security is cut. Of course he won't say that will he? Maybe just spout out some platitudes about how government sucks and perhaps attack welfare queens.

[Torie]

I am not arguing that Romney did anything that is illegal or unethical, it is just that his tax activities highlight his ultra-wealth and his working of the system to get himself a better deal.

Do you think this makes middle class Americans like him more?

Oh it may hurt him a tad. But working the system within the law is what America is all about. I don't think most Americans would hold that against him. That is what they would do if they were in his position - almost all of them. And I don't think most are opebo types, who dislike people (at least on a political level) simply because they are rich. They kind of admire rich people, at least those who earned their dough legally.

The problem comes in October when he has to go on the national stage and explain why people like him should be given more tax cuts while spending on medicare and social security is cut. Of course he won't say that will he? Maybe just spout out some platitudes about how government sucks and perhaps attack welfare queens.

Mittens denies that he wants to decrease taxes on the rich beyond preserving the Bush tax cuts. I still need to read that study that TheDeadFlagBlues linked for me that I printed out (20 pages), that the Dems are having orgasms over. It seems less about Mittens' plan, than that the Mittens numbers are simply not possible. It should be a fun read to see if it has any little assumptions in it that load the dice.

[Bull Moose Base]

I still think there is likely some truth to this.  If Romney's missing tax returns merely showed Romney paying as little in taxes as the one year he released, he would have played victim and release them.  Why didn't he?

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I still think there is likely some truth to this.  If Romney's missing tax returns merely showed Romney paying as little in taxes as the one year he released, he would have played victim and release them.  Why didn't he?

Frankly, he has a history from ten years ago of doing a fairly good job of playing the victim without releasing them.