Trump’s taxes

[SuperMatt]

I did not.

There was an article somewhere that I can't find now about how they do it. It was more of an example than anything, but it was something like this:

Zuckerberg would pledge his FB stock against loans he took. Since it is a loan, it is tax free. Say he takes $20M/yr in loans. He is 37, so over the next 50 years, that is $1B in loans. Plus another $1.5BM or so in interest. So he now owes $2.5B. He is worth $132B. So he dies and his estate must settle his debts. Since he is now dead, his estate can sell his FB stock at current value to pay off his debt and still not incur any taxes.

To kind of give an idea of the difference between 1M and 1B, here is an example most people can relate to. One million seconds is just over 11.5 days. One billion seconds is over 31.7 years.

And it is all 100% legal.

Why do you think Trump’s tax cut which promised to close loopholes failed to close well-known ones such as these? Did he not know about them? Did his tax cut make it easier for the rich to use such loopholes? These questions are VERY interesting to me, and I don’t think I’m the only one. Zuckerberg and Bezos can lobby, but if the President personally signs a bill designed to enrich people in his financial position, that’s a pretty f-ing big deal. All the more reason that seeing his taxes is interesting…

 

[Herdfan]

Why do you think Trump’s tax cut which promised to close loopholes failed to close well-known ones such as these?

I can't say those are loopholes. What could be closed to prevent it? I mean I guess Congress could pass a law against borrowing against your assets, but lots of people do that, not just the super rich.

 

[SuperMatt]

I can't say those are loopholes. What could be closed to prevent it? I mean I guess Congress could pass a law against borrowing against your assets, but lots of people do that, not just the super rich.

Just let billionaires avoid ever paying tax again. Nothing can be done.

 

[fooferdoggie]

Just let billionaires avoid ever paying tax again. Nothing can be done.

thats the case already.

 

[SuperMatt]

thats the case already.

With many thanks to the Trump tax cuts. Amazon paid $0 in taxes the 2 years after it was passed. Why do I have a feeling that Trump and his various companies saw similar benefits? How bad will wealth inequality get before BOTH parties start to care about it?

 

[Roller]

As distasteful as it may be to some, taking advantage of tax regulations to reduce the amount owed isn't legally problematic. But lowering the declared value of assets just to avoid paying taxes, as Trump et al reportedly did, is.

 

[JayMysteri0]

With many thanks to the Trump tax cuts. Amazon paid $0 in taxes the 2 years after it was passed. Why do I have a feeling that Trump and his various companies saw similar benefits? How bad will wealth inequality get before BOTH parties start to care about it?

The biggest doubt & issue that came with 45 was the question of whether or not legislation 45 eagerly pushed for, was really for his own or his companies benefit. With some having no issue with such things, isn't it any wonder some would be indifferent with major corporations getting away with not paying taxes at all. Then turning around bursting blood vessels at the idea that the less fortunate might be eating too well on gov't assistance. The mental gymnastics some will employ to take a blind eye at the graft of the well off, then demonize the less well off as they are told to do never ceases to amaze me.

 

[SuperMatt]

As distasteful as it may be to some, taking advantage of tax regulations to reduce the amount owed isn't legally problematic. But lowering the declared value of assets just to avoid paying taxes, as Trump et al reportedly did, is.

It’s morally problematic. The laws are written specifically to benefit the wealthy. Politicians are bought and paid for by billionaires. There was an attempt to control this with campaign finance laws, but the Supreme Court took a dump on that by deciding two things that are NOWHERE in the constitution:

1. Money = Speech
2. Corporation = Person

 

[Herdfan]

As distasteful as it may be to some, taking advantage of tax regulations to reduce the amount owed isn't legally problematic. But lowering the declared value of assets just to avoid paying taxes, as Trump et al reportedly did, is.

Please explain this. You don't pay income taxes on assets.

 

[Pumbaa]

Please explain this. You don't pay income taxes on assets.

Perhaps income taxes are not the only kind of taxes out there?

 

[Herdfan]

Perhaps income taxes are not the only kind of taxes out there?

True.

But I haven't seen anyone clamoring about his property tax returns (which are public record), only his income tax returns.

 

[SuperMatt]

Please explain this. You don't pay income taxes on assets.

You do if you sell them… and if you sell at a loss, you can take a business loss. There is also depreciation in real estate - huge “losses” that you can take every year. Trump has said that he loves depreciation.

Read the article linked earlier in the thread to understand more ways Trump used business losses or asset losses to avoid taxes. He took huge losses in the 90s and then carried those losses over for the next 18 years. Of course, a lot of the losses were of loaned money, or money of companies or LLCs, not personally his money… but he claimed it on his taxes.

You can also donate assets and massively inflate their value on your tax forms for big write-offs. How about Trump park? He bought land for $2.75 million. Then he couldn’t get any development deals on it, so he donated the park, and claimed the donation was worth $26.1 million. Ta-da! Looks like I don’t owe any taxes this year!

Post in thread 'Trump’s taxes'
https://talkedabout.com/threads/trump’s-taxes.415/post-55513

Another thing to note in that article: Trump used things he claimed as losses to end up claiming zero income. But then he got hit by something called the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) some years. Why is that of note? Hmm, let‘s look at something from the Trump tax cut:

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) reduced the fraction of taxpayers who owed the AMT from 3% in 2017 to 0.1% in 2018, including from 27% to 0.4% of those earning $200,000 to $500,000, from 61.9% to 2% of those earning $500,000 and $1,000,000.

Did he personally benefit from the Trump tax cuts? He sure doesn’t want anybody to know. Also, if these returns become public, if they match the NY Times story, they will confirm it and also confirm that Trump lied when he denied it.