Dem Lawmakers Want Answers About Romney’s Enormous IRA

[Primemuscle]

let me guess you guys cover for the rich because someday you hope to be rich just like them fu@king pipe dream,your going to be middle class or a little above yet you let them do shit that if not illegal is pretty shady in hopes of being like them someday  

If you honestly believe it is only the rich who get away with doing some creative accounting when it comes to paying their taxes, then you are naive.

[Primemuscle]

hahaha weak sauce blackass, you must think that by the govt taxing the rich you will some how become better off.

how about we dont think the anybody or the govt should be telling others what to do with their hard earned money.

Also if you think that taxing the rich is going to solve anything fiscally in our country your an idiot.

Sooner or later the taxes on the middle class will be raised as they already are by both sides.

So why not force the govt to get their shit straight before bitching and moaning about rich ppl finding LEGAL ways to keep more of their money?

Do you realize what you've said here is contradictory.

Who said all rich folks worked hard for their money? Some simply inherit it. Some just get lucky. Truth be told most people rich or poor work for their money. In fact the poorer you are the harder you probably work, unless you are living off handouts.

From what you are saying here, it would appear you think the middle-class should have the heaviest tax burden. Why shouldn't everyone pay the same percent tax-wise? Why should Romney pay less than 14% in income tax while you pay 35 or 40% assuming you are middle-class.


I don't think we should enact laws that require the rich to disproportionately pay a higher percentage in taxes anymore than we should lower the percentage for the poor. In my opinion, everyone should pay the same percentage and be allowed the same deductions. And when it comes to deductions, they should be more restrictive than they are now.

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

It's simple, if there is a $5,000 limit on what one can contribute annually to an IRA in pre-tax dollars, the chances of someday (in Romney's case, about twenty years later) having $100,000,000 in one's IRA is zip unless you're doing some creative tax evasion. For most of us regular folks who pay our taxes,  and who contibute $5,000 annually for most of our working lives, it results in modest IRA accounts which definitely leave us in the middle-class at retirement, if even that well off.

Not exactly....if he rolled over his shares of stock into the IRA, it could easily reach 100 million...especially since he's the founder. 


However, the problem is that it makes him look very bad because while its a legal way to avoid paying taxes on revenue, he's taking advantage of a program that was never meant for him to use in that way....an IRA account is suppose to be used for retirement....not for a tax shelter.  Add this on top of the Swiss bank account, Cayman Islands, and not releasing his tax records.....its killing him

[Straw Man]

Not exactly....if he rolled over his shares of stock into the IRA, it could easily reach 100 million...especially since he's the founder. 


However, the problem is that it makes him look very bad because while its a legal way to avoid paying taxes on revenue, he's taking advantage of a program that was never meant for him to use in that way....an IRA account is suppose to be used for retirement....not for a tax shelter.  Add this on top of the Swiss bank account, Cayman Islands, and not releasing his tax records.....its killing him

not easily at all - but theoretically possible, especially if he has the foresight to put assets that had a very low book value.

this article does a good job of explaining the mechanics of how he could have done it but it would have still been an amazing feat


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-15/the-secret-behind-romney-s-magical-ira.html

[Primemuscle]

Not exactly....if he rolled over his shares of stock into the IRA, it could easily reach 100 million...especially since he's the founder. 


However, the problem is that it makes him look very bad because while its a legal way to avoid paying taxes on revenue, he's taking advantage of a program that was never meant for him to use in that way....an IRA account is suppose to be used for retirement....not for a tax shelter.  Add this on top of the Swiss bank account, Cayman Islands, and not releasing his tax records.....its killing him

Today in the Oregonian there was a Politifact article regarding Romney's proposed tax cuts. Guess what, the only folks getting the benefit of a tax cut are those making over $200,000 a year and the benefits are even better if you make $1,000,000 a year or better. However using his plan, most of us poor suckers will actually pay more in income tax. For people making between $50,000 and $75,000 the additional tax bite can be as much as $2,000 a year. Yikes.

The numbers never worked out. No matter how hard the Tax Policy Center labored to make Romney's promises add up, every simulation ended the same way: with a tax increase on the middle class. The tax cuts Romney is offering to the rich are simply larger than the size of the (non-investment) deductions and loopholes that exist for the rich. That's why it's "mathematically impossible" for Romney's plan to produce anything but a tax increase on the middle class.

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/romneys-tax-plan-an-impossible-dream/091ecf9b16c6c14142905a2791b9f87b

Mitt Romney would cut millionaires’ taxes....

They determined that people who earn $1 million or more in taxable income would see an average net tax decrease of $87,117. They’d save $175,961 from Romney's tax cut, but lose $88,444 in deductions.
 
"They would still get a tax cut," said Adam Looney, one of the authors. "The dollar value of the tax cuts is just way bigger than the mortgage interest and other deductions. There’s no way to implement this plan in a way that doesn’t result in a pretty big tax cut for that group (those making more than $1 million)."

 People who earn between $500,000 and $1 million would see a cut of about $17,000, and taxes for people with incomes between $200,000 and $500,000 would decrease by about $1,800, the study found.
 
But to make Romney's plan revenue neutral, deductions would also have to be removed for people with incomes below $200,000, and the effects of that would be significant, the study found. In fact, the elimination of the deductions would mean outright tax increases for everyone with incomes below $200,000. People with taxable income between $50,000 and $75,000, for example, would see an average net tax increase of $641. They’d save $984 from Romney's rate cut, but lose $2,672 in write-offs.

 The authors specifically noted that taxpayers with children whose income is below $200,000 would see their taxes go up by an average of $2,041 -- the figure highlighted in Obama’s ad.

 The reason for the increase is that the most popular tax breaks heavily benefit middle- and lower-income families, the 95 percent of the population earning less than $200,000 who carry mortgage debt and use employer-provided health insurance.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/03/barack-obama/obama-romney-would-cut-millionaires-taxes/