Trump's tax returns

The lawsuit, like the impeachment and the Russia investigation are all 100% politically motivated. None of them care if he is guilty . They just attack because they are scared of him.

 

There are certain requirements that banks put in place that require financial statements to meet covenants of the loans. One of those is a copy of personal tax returns for 3-5 years, certified personal financial statements, business tax returns for 3-5 years, interim business financial statements, and the bank will run credit reports to substantiate the financial position declared.

If Trump was able to meet all the bank's covenants the chances of running a second set of books for either/or, is highly unlikely.

 

So we got 25 years of Clinton tax returns?

Trump uses loop holes to avoid paying taxes and plays fishy games with the taxman? Of course he does just as anyone would. Would you voluntarily pay more in taxes if you didn't have to? Of course you wouldn't. What does this say about your own moral fitness?

 

There are a lot of ways to get around those requirements. Ask Manafort for some of them.
But actually the NY question is about the hush money payments and how they were claimed on Trump's state taxes.

 

While there 'may be ways to get around them', no bank would survive an audit by regulators, especially if the loans were large, secured or not.

Hush money deducted on income tax returns? If so, I would really like to see that.... which would highlight the incompetency of the taxing authority, dontcha think?

 

How do you think Spanky reported the Stormy payments.
1- Porn star bribe
2- Legal expense
3- Donation

Who is going to dispute the valuation put on the property?

 

Supreme court temporarily blocks access to Dirty Donalds tax records.

 

I think he likely didn't. As much of a twit as he may be, I don't believe he's stupid.

Any of the above categories could and would be audited, and I would say that Trump's tax returns have been scrutinized more than once. Most Accounting firms require signed disclaimers as to the veracity of information provided to them before they will do the tax returns, and that's just for a small to middling size individual. By believing there are two sets of books, or that he (his CPA) would claim the supposed 'hush money', gives him a little more credit than most of the DNC would allow.

For donations of that level, one needs to provide some sort of method of evaluation. While Melania's wardrobe is quite the thing, I doubt she gave it to goodwill.

 

Hmm, I don't know. They gave Trump's accountant immunity in the Stormy case. Must have been a reason for that.
As far as the property valuation, I think Cohen covered that in his testimony.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/27/coh...h-statements-at-hearing-how-to-read-them.html

 

Property valuation does fluctuate. As an example, a house that was bought at $100,000 18 months ago, is now worth $150,000 based on comps, since the markets picked up. However, subject modifications such as the neighbors cleaned up their yard, the utility company finally finished running underground lines, but the people across the street now have a clunker rusting out in their driveway. These things would be subjective to the property, regardless of what comps may run in the area.

When it comes to Brand valuation, perception of a brand (either positive or negative) can be based on a number of factors. Take Subway and the Jared Fogle mess. Though Subway wasn't involved in his predilections, the Brand was tainted for a time span. While sales temporarily dipped, when the media snow storm wore down, the Brand value rose back up to previous levels. Brand valuation can be speculative, or it can be tied directly to the value of the market response.

 

Loopholes created by the wealthy and for the wealthy.

 

But if they happen at the same time (up & down) it can be a problem.

 

Not following..... IF you mean that there are positives and negatives at the same time, then one might overcome the other, but the net effect will usually be negative. Perception is a strong factor in assessing valuation, and we all know that negative is louder that positive.

 

That is correct as reported from multiple sources including his personal lawyer in sworn testimony. The Donald made a habit of undervaluing his properties for tax purposes including income generated and over valuating the same properties on loan applications. This is an another example on how the uber rich, not only the Donald, have the game rigged in their favor. If I tried that BS I'd probably be doing 5-10 in a big house somewhere.

 

I think this sums it up.

 

I don't get your take, My thought was that people who make 30,000 grand should not have to pay income tax. Why the hell should they, they barely make enough to eat neve mind pay a tax. You make it seem like the income tax was meant to be used to raise taxes from everyone, it is not. It is designed to raise taxes only on the top 25% of Americans, with the middle 40 percent paying about about 12% of the income tax bill. It is designed to turn the screws on people with Trump like income. When people like him don't pay the share that she system is designed for more of the weight falls on the middle class.

 

Trump does not own the USA so he has to pay taxes.

 

yes, congress first, back to age 10.

 

that couldnt be more wrong. that version is Bernie's version.

 

Well tell me how it is wrong. The income tax was designed to only tax the very rich. I think less than 10% of the population had to pay income tax when it was passed. The general population was not taxed by income until WW2

 

that explains why Bernie likes the old way then, he was around during wwII.

I have no problem if poor people pay their fair share of taxes. they dont pay anything close to their fair share. I'm ok with the current system but I would support changes that would mean they contribute more towards their fair share. even a little bit.

 

Why the hell should poor people pay income taxes? they already pay SS, Medicare, sales and excise taxes which are already very regressive in nature. Tto ask a family of 4 making 30,000 grand a year to pay income taxes is ridiculous. just say you ask them to pay 10% or 3000 a year, that means you think that 500 of those families should be hit so that 1 guy making 2mill can have a drop of 29 to 21 percent tax.

 

why make them pay any tax then.

ps. I never mentioned mr. 2 million. tax him too.

just asking for people to pay their fair share. I hear that phrase all the time, sounds good to me.

 

You've seen Bonespurs' returns?

 

there is no "fair" when you only make 30,000 grand and you have kids.