You are confusing an argument of legality with an argument of morality. I did not argue that anything Trump did legally with his taxes was "good" or "right" in a moral sense, just that he has a right to do it and so do you. Raging and moralizing at people over what they do with their money is a waste of time and quite unpopular with the electorate. Bottle up all that energy and use it to change the laws.
I haven't gotten through reading the whole NYT piece yet and haven't read the Forbes piece yet but I'm not sure if much of what Trump did is legal. While it is legal to take advantage of deductions and depreciation it does sound like Trump did it in ways that strain legality if not outrightly break it. Using his family as consultants when they weren't independent definitely sounds illegal.
Also this just confirms my biggest concern about Trump all along and what I still felt he should be impeached for. He is a walking emoluments clause violation.
in meantime stop using law to mask shady. from a president no less. bestiality is legal in some states but i think enough of you to not f*uck my poodle. you arent getting it and I doubt you will say much and arent addressing that "hiding income" and "fake consulting" is indeed illegal. illegal!! no one here is dumb enough to not take the deduction and I myself have chosen to fly as straight as i can with the tax man. and thats legally AND morally. weird that the two have no interconnection but thats you and your thinking. this is all that fish oil and melatonin you mainline .its geeking you up. my tax attorneys give an option and will advise against getting audits being aggressive and lying. Ive been through this and even the dumbest jack off here knows about taking deductions on frigging turbo tax. you are so slick that the left just doesnt get it and world so dumb compared to the vast knowledge of the idea of minimizing your tax liability. no sh*it!! again that is built into turbo tax. no one has heard of that smh
They can't prosecute right now, he's president and is fighting to say that he has immunity from any prosecution. Congress would impeach him on it...but, it's pointless at this time. Once he's out of office, the IRS audit will likely finish and the SDNY cases in regards to evading taxes will go forward. There will also likely be more charges as they continue to pour over his tax records. You keep pointing fingers at the left not being able to prosecute him when it's the right that won't allow him to be prosecuted.
My finger pointing has nothing to do with the prosecution of Trump. I am singling out the left because every single time a case of wildly unethical/immoral (but legal) tax manipulation comes to light, the left rages and rages at the tax paying entity and doesn't give even a moment's thought as to who created these laws and what we should do to replace them.
just to be accurate. under his presidency, the BIGGEST tax cut (for the Uber rich) was implemented. case in point, the alternative minimum tax was elimninated
But...the article brings up many points where it may not be legal. I get what you're saying, and in many cases, you are right...but, this one may not fit that category. I will say that the left has begun to start talking about how to fix some of the inequities. The wealth tax is getting a lot of play...however, I would like to see something done to fix a lot of the loopholes. I remember Paul Ryan saying that his goal was to get tax returns down to a postcard when they passed the tax cuts in 2017, but he didn't succeed on that front.
If it turns out Trump did something illegal (shocker) then he will face the consequences and I am not defending that in any way. My point is that in many, many cases you can replace "Trump" with "insert random rich person or corporation here" and the story is largely the same... shockingly low tax burdens and lots of impotent rage by the left about it directed squarely at the wrong target. When it comes to taxes, this is one point where conservatives may actually be on to something. A simple tax code is much more difficult to rig or circumvent. It's hard to imagine it, and as 'regressive' as a flat tax may be, but if we implemented one we would likely see a huge boost in revenue simply because the top earners could no longer avoid it. Same with a VAT. Now what we do with that extra money determines whether the tax ends up truly being regressive or progressive.
the bigger picture includes a comparison of his income tax returns, his many loan applications and property tax returns. chances are that Trump understated his income on income tax returns overstated his income / value of his assets / properties on loan applications and his financial disclosure that was submitted to the NFL, when Trump tried to make a bid for the Buffalo Bills understated the value of his assets / properties It is illegal to intentionally provide false info on loan applications. The income tax return will be used as evidence that he had intentionally provided false info. That is why NY’s AG is so interested in obtaining Trump’s income tax returnd
