What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Why are President Trump's Tax Returns Important? (1 Viewer)

Steve Tasker said:
The advantage in this situation being that if you invested in real estate rather than a non-depreciable asset - an investment in corporate stock, for example - you get the depreciation over the life of the asset, but decrease your cost basis for when you sell.  Say you buy a rental property for $100,  hold it for 14 years, you've been able to deduct approx $50 of depreciation.  You sell the property for $150, you have a tax gain of $150 - [$100 - $50] = $100 gain.  If you invest $100 in corporate stock, hold it for 14 years, and sell it for $150, you have a tax gain of $150 - $100 = $50.  End of the day, you have $50 of income in both scenarios, but in one case you got 14 years' of deductions and then more gain on the back-end.  So there's an obvious time-value-of-money benefit.
Click to expand...
Question:

Ignoring the 1031 exchange and multiplying these numbers by $1M to talk realistic numbers for invoking the estate tax. Also understanding that the step-up basis plays a role as far as capital gains taxes. Say the owner dies at the end of year 14. So he bought the property for $100M, took $50M in depreciation over the 14 years, and the property is valued at $150M when he dies. In this very simplified example, how much does the estate pay in taxes if they sell the real estate?

Rant

Part of what drives me nuts with Trump (and all super rich folks doing this, so really my issue is with the tax code I guess) is how they can live such a lavish lifestyle and pay virtually nothing in federal income tax (ok, $750).  I mean, you need to actually have income to live that lifestyle (or have inherited a ton), but the accounting rules wipe that out. Meanwhile, my family makes mid $200k and pays probably $30k+ in federal income tax. What a load of crap. And then to brag about how rich you are while cutting your taxes further and causing my taxes to go up (SALT cap). Get out of here. 

 
FBG26 said:
Question:

Ignoring the 1031 exchange and multiplying these numbers by $1M to talk realistic numbers for invoking the estate tax. Also understanding that the step-up basis plays a role as far as capital gains taxes. Say the owner dies at the end of year 14. So he bought the property for $100M, took $50M in depreciation over the 14 years, and the property is valued at $150M when he dies. In this very simplified example, how much does the estate pay in taxes if they sell the real estate?
Click to expand...
I will preface this by saying that I am not an expert in estate and gift tax.  There are probably other people in this forum better suited to answer than I am; we all have our niche areas that we know well - this is not an area that I know well.

Here is a table of tax brackets for someone's "taxable estate" - as you can see the tax brackets hit the max 40% pretty quickly.  You'd presumably start at the $150M value in determining the gross estate, less allowable expenses.  The estate tax would be imposed at the date of death, and the estate (or beneficiaries) would receive the property at a stepped-up basis, like you indicated.

All that said, anyone not named Prince who is worth anywhere near that amount of money has much more complicated estate planning.  If a client calls with estate tax questions, and their net worth is even a quarter of that, I'm telling them they need an attorney who specializes in this stuff.  There are entire law firms and accounting firms who cater only to the ultra-wealthy. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I see the "who holds the debt" question repeated a lot. What am I missing here? Is "capital ladder" or "deutsche bank" (among others) not a sufficient enough answer to these questions? 

Is there some unlisted random back room loan that the NY times article broke that I somehow missed? 

 
The Commish said:
You're aware their list is public knowledge right?
Click to expand...
Not really sure what your point is.      Aware of the Federalist Society?    Sure     Aware they maintain a public list and a public stance on who they as an organization feel would be valid candidates to be on the SC?    Sure, as do other orgs.     For the most part, those outside the legal community, or outside the Beltway pay little attention to these lists, however.   What the Federalist society does isn't front page news in Peoria, though.   Ever. 

My point wasn't about actions of the Federalist Society.

My point was that in the '16 pre-election noise, the Trump campaign convinced their candidate to embrace not only a list of names on the list, but to champion it, speak about it in public, push it into the public discourse, and get it out in front of the mass media outlets so they yammered on about it endlessly and magnified the impact of the move.     This action had a number of consequences:

  • had somewhat of a calming effect on the traditionalist Republican establishment that had spent much of the primaries bashing Trump or attempting to find ways to sabotage his nomination at the '16 RNC  (Ted Cruz went from simmering and bitter towards Trump and withholding support to full throated endorsement of Trump in the General election, for instance)
  • likely moved a big block of traditional R voters for whom the SC was a significant issue, pro-life was a significant issue off the fence and into the Trump camp, such as Evangelicals
  • nailed a previously subtle talking point onto the election bulletin board in a much more prominent position . . .the SC nomination function is a massively important role in selecting a President, since the nomination action is his and his alone.
  • Set a precedent that likely will persist for a long time, possibly indefinitely.    It's obviously a factor here in the '20 election and will be for many more to come.
The shark move was putting a spotlight onto the list, and putting it into play as a major element for a big portion of the electorate.

 
So is Trump doing anything outside of what wealthy folks do all the time?  He's writing off losses, etc.......seems like the left is making it out as some travesty, and the right basically what is said above.....I honestly haven't looked at the details, other than the headlines are he basically didn't pay taxes or whatever.......I'm sure it's just that simple too....🙄

 
Manster said:
So is Trump doing anything outside of what wealthy folks do all the time?  He's writing off losses, etc.......seems like the left is making it out as some travesty, and the right basically what is said above.....I honestly haven't looked at the details, other than the headlines are he basically didn't pay taxes or whatever.......I'm sure it's just that simple too....🙄
Click to expand...
IME as a tax professional, yes.

 
GoBirds said:
:goodposting: x100

Nice to see posts like this speaking the truth, not talking points. Very good points. My return is well over 100 pages, can you imagine his? The media is already trying to false claim interest expenses and loss carry forwards are a bad thing which they aren’t if you follow our laws....imagine all the false info they would spread with their lack of knowledge, poor integrity, and the full returns. Spare me. 
Click to expand...
Agree 100%

Each time the media has turned to a Tax Attorney or a Tax Accountant, they calmly respond with the same information as Getzlaf15 has.    Real Estate as a business endeavor substantially eliminates or reduces income tax liability, and this has been the case for decades.     If you want to zero in on this topic, you need to turn to Congress, who has authored real estate friendly tax codes for years.   

Here is an example of CBS wanting this to be an anxiety fest, and the Tax Attorney they talk with tells them it's normal and expected:   CBS

Here is an example of PBS interviewing tax experts who simply shrug and indicate that is what they see with all R/E businesses:   PBS

 
Biden really messed this story up badly for the media/Democrats last night. They should have known President Trump would say like any normal person that he wants to pay less taxes, and even thanked Biden for his 47 years in Washington writing laws to make this happen. It was just a disaster for Biden.

 
spodog said:
Agree 100%

Each time the media has turned to a Tax Attorney or a Tax Accountant, they calmly respond with the same information as Getzlaf15 has.    Real Estate as a business endeavor substantially eliminates or reduces income tax liability, and this has been the case for decades.     If you want to zero in on this topic, you need to turn to Congress, who has authored real estate friendly tax codes for years.   

Here is an example of CBS wanting this to be an anxiety fest, and the Tax Attorney they talk with tells them it's normal and expected:   CBS

Here is an example of PBS interviewing tax experts who simply shrug and indicate that is what they see with all R/E businesses:   PBS
Click to expand...
If anything it just further exposes the extreme media bias and misinformation campaign they are pushing. 

 
Hawkeye21 said:
What exactly has he done though?  I dislike Trump but I'm not sure I see any illegal activity when it comes to him paying taxes.
Click to expand...
As I’ve enumerated a few times, the treatment of Seven Springs as a business entity (it’s a family compound per the Trump Org website) isn’t merely an “aggressive” stance, it’s blatant tax evasion & fraud. The NYT matched up a few consultant payments to Ivanka (close to $800K), but it’s likely that extends across every Trump project. When they queried folks on the other side of the ledger it was clear there were no consultants on the projects, but Trump Org routinely charges 20% to unspecified consulting fees.

I’ve also posted about the Trump Accountants. Spahr Lacher & Berk / Misener / Mazars USA (series of acquisitions of the parent firm but in NY the same CPA partners) are meaningless to the vast majority of people trying to understand Trump’s business dealings. IDK what to compare this to, but it’s a bit like this. Most blue bloods in NYC have a strong preference for big law / white shoe firms like say Skadden Arps. Trump has used Better Call Saul for 50 years.

The details may not be clear to most. The $750 resonated with people and seems to be the thing that people latch onto. I get that. The masses are not going to pay attention or grasp anything complex; if it’s not spoon fed in digestible bite sizes, people are just going to shrug and say “that’s probably what all rich people do.”

That is quite far from the truth, however. But my view is probably skewed by the fact that my experience was limited to working with ethical clients.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Todem said:
The real issue at hand is not the taxes.....it is the sheer amount of debt and who he owes it to. 

All that needs to be disclosed to the American Public. A clear appearance of a conflict of interest in terms of foreign policy exists here. If people can’t understand that then I do not know what to say. 
Click to expand...
All of this, by law, is disclosed, to the American Public by every candidate running for the office.    Here is the OGE form 278e filed for Trump in May of '16 during the 2016 election cycle.

Basically, the form details 55 pages of combined assets worth around $2.9B or so and one page of liabilities itemizing 16 different debts of various types across his business entities.  This debt is around the $600M - $650M range, most of appears to be secured against assets (Golf courses, properties, etc).

This is about a 21% Debt to Asset ratio.   On aggregate, household debt to asset for the U.S population as a whole runs at around 22% - 24% per Federal Reserve data.  

So this data was disclosed, just as it was for Hillary, as required by law, and certified by the FEC in '16.     

You don't find this information in a tax return, regardless of who is filing.    

Oh, and who are these shadowy, mysterious lenders that the media wants you to believe are lurking out there?    Bank of New York Mellon, Deutschebank, Investors Savings Bank, Merrill Lynch.     Just read the forms. 

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Some of you guys really need to turn off the Television for a while.       

 
Last edited by a moderator:
KarmaPolice said:
Do you consider Trump anti-American since he has shown lack of respect for the military and vets multiple times? 
Click to expand...
Yes but the latest were media lies and untrue - and most of them are and the media doesn't mention all the great things Trump has done for the military

see, Biden's use tax codes too 

https://tulsaworld.com/business/investment/personal-finance/bidens-tax-returns-show-why-his-payroll-tax-plan-may-not-save-social-security/article_244559bf-a685-5b3e-9976-2bd72720134b.html

See, the Bidens created S-corporations and routed much of the money they earned through them. While their corporations paid them a salary of around $750,000, they classified another $13.3 million of their income as corporate profits. This money ultimately belongs to them and they can access it through distributions, which aren't subject to payroll taxes.

By employing this technique, the Bidens didn't save themselves any money on Social Security taxes under the current rules, since their salaries were already higher than the wage base limit. But payroll taxes that fund Medicare are assessed on all earned income.

That means they avoided paying Medicare taxes on the $13.3 million they took as distributions instead of receiving it in wages. And if Biden's plan to assess payroll taxes on income above $400,000 had been in effect at the time, they wouldn't have paid a single dollar of the extra tax on any of that money either.

 
toshiba said:
But Kavanaugh wasn't on the list. 
Click to expand...
Neil Gorsuch was on the original list released in May of 2016, which contained 20 names.   Gorsuch was nominated in January of '17.

Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, along with 3 others, were added to the list in November of 2017.   Kavanaugh was nominated July 9, 2018.

Barrett was nominated last week.

link

 
sho nuff said:
Which still does not equal good at business.  You are reaching...badly.
Click to expand...
He's actually not wrong on this one.  One the things Trump is fantastic at as a business person is branding.  Branding can be incredibly important in business and Trump has made it a major focus.  It's my opinion that one of the biggest reasons he ran for President was to promote his brand even more, and it worked.

 
BobbyLayne said:
As I’ve enumerated a few times, the treatment of Seven Springs as a business entity (it’s a family compound per the Trump Org website) isn’t merely an “aggressive” stance, it’s blatant tax evasion & fraud. The NYT matched up a few consultant payments to Ivanka (close to $800K), but it’s likely that extends across every Trump project. When they queried folks on the other side of the ledger it was clear there were no consultants on the projects, but Trump Org routinely charges 20% to unspecified consulting fees.
Click to expand...
Legitimate question for you on this, as I admittedly know little about Seven Springs specifically. 

I do know many individuals and couples, however, including myself, who maintain a lake house, a cabin in the mountains or some type of resort property.   In almost every case, they utilize the property for personal use a small portion of the year, and rent it out to others the majority of the time.    I would expect that the expenses associated with maintaining the property, the depreciation expenses, the R/E taxes, insurance, etc end up as business expenses in whatever entity they hold the deed to the property with.     Might be pro-rated per tax laws, but some portion are business expenses regardless. 

Isn't Seven Springs simply a magnified example of this same circumstance?    I can't imagine any of the Trump family actually claims Seven Springs as their primary residence, so isn't it a commercial property owned by a closely held family business entity, that incurs expenses to operate just like my own vacation rental property is? 

 
Stealthycat said:
Yes but the latest were media lies and untrue - and most of them are and the media doesn't mention all the great things Trump has done for the military

see, Biden's use tax codes too 

https://tulsaworld.com/business/investment/personal-finance/bidens-tax-returns-show-why-his-payroll-tax-plan-may-not-save-social-security/article_244559bf-a685-5b3e-9976-2bd72720134b.html

See, the Bidens created S-corporations and routed much of the money they earned through them. While their corporations paid them a salary of around $750,000, they classified another $13.3 million of their income as corporate profits. This money ultimately belongs to them and they can access it through distributions, which aren't subject to payroll taxes.

By employing this technique, the Bidens didn't save themselves any money on Social Security taxes under the current rules, since their salaries were already higher than the wage base limit. But payroll taxes that fund Medicare are assessed on all earned income.

That means they avoided paying Medicare taxes on the $13.3 million they took as distributions instead of receiving it in wages. And if Biden's plan to assess payroll taxes on income above $400,000 had been in effect at the time, they wouldn't have paid a single dollar of the extra tax on any of that money either.
Click to expand...
Warning - sarcasm ahead.

LOL.   Don't you dare disclose these secrets with logic and analysis.   <eye roll> 

The bigger laugh would be if someone did a similar drill down on Bernie's financials.     At least Biden coyly avoids the topic or changes the topic when brought up.     Bernie lives the hypocritical lie on his sleeve every day. 

 
sho nuff said:
Which still does not equal good at business.  You are reaching...badly.
Click to expand...
From the Washington Post:

Trump’s real estate holdings are scattered around the world. For his international projects, he has done a majority of his work through licensing — where a developer who is liable for the actual cost and responsibility of the contract uses Trump’s name for their hotels. This allows Trump to spread his brand and image worldwide without actually being liable for the project, while a local real estate contractor can boost the value and image of their property.

And it works.
Click to expand...
That's not only good, that's a Shrewd Businessman.

tonydead said:
It turns out his numbers were pretty accurate as shown in the links provided.  Do you have any links that back up your claims?  
Click to expand...
Please provide links and examples of all your claims as previously requested.  TIA. 

 
Hawkeye21 said:
He's actually not wrong on this one.  One the things Trump is fantastic at as a business person is branding.  Branding can be incredibly important in business and Trump has made it a major focus.  It's my opinion that one of the biggest reasons he ran for President was to promote his brand even more, and it worked.
Click to expand...
I agree with that...he is good at branding and marketing his name and promoting.

Which does not address the point I made, nor the point of the articles an reports on his businesses at all.  At best, it was a deflection.

 
spodog said:
Legitimate question for you on this, as I admittedly know little about Seven Springs specifically. 

I do know many individuals and couples, however, including myself, who maintain a lake house, a cabin in the mountains or some type of resort property.   In almost every case, they utilize the property for personal use a small portion of the year, and rent it out to others the majority of the time.    I would expect that the expenses associated with maintaining the property, the depreciation expenses, the R/E taxes, insurance, etc end up as business expenses in whatever entity they hold the deed to the property with.     Might be pro-rated per tax laws, but some portion are business expenses regardless. 

Isn't Seven Springs simply a magnified example of this same circumstance?    I can't imagine any of the Trump family actually claims Seven Springs as their primary residence, so isn't it a commercial property owned by a closely held family business entity, that incurs expenses to operate just like my own vacation rental property is? 
Click to expand...
Legit question: can you claim the mortgage and operating costs of a vacation home as a business expense of you never rent it out?

 
tonydead said:
From the Washington Post:

That's not only good, that's a Shrewd Businessman.

Please provide links and examples of all your claims as previously requested.  TIA. 
Click to expand...
Read what is being reported...ive said that multiple times...read the times reports and forbes and subsequent reporting on what is being discussed.  Its all in there about his failures, his debts and so on.  I cant force you to read it all...but to claim it has not been provided is absolutely false.

 
BobbyLayne said:
Trump has used Better Call Saul for 50 years.
Click to expand...
actually a pretty funny analogy.    Bob Odenkirk is outstanding in this.   

But why would you expect different?    Trump was raised and cut his teeth on ruthless Roy Cohn tactics handed down from his father.    Fred, and in turn, The Donald, always felt the Manhattan nose in the air crowd looked down upon them as outer burough second class citizens, so the Trump Family was no more likely to have become a client of Skadden Arps than they were to become members of the Harvard Club on 44th Street in Manhattan.   

 
sho nuff said:
I agree with that...he is good at branding and marketing his name and promoting.

Which does not address the point I made, nor the point of the articles an reports on his businesses at all.  At best, it was a deflection.
Click to expand...
Walt Disney

Hewlett-Packard

Proctor & Gamble

Donald Trump

Warner Brothers

Austin Martin

Chrysler

Harley Davidson

Milton Hershey

Levi Strauss

McDonalds

 
The Z Machine said:
Legit question: can you claim the mortgage and operating costs of a vacation home as a business expense of you never rent it out?
Click to expand...
In my case, rented out nights per year are around 200 - 250 nights per year. 

If you are referencing Seven Springs, I have no idea how frequently it is rented to 3rd parties.   If the answer is never, then yes, this would seem to be a tax problem. 

 
spodog said:
Yes it was Don McGaahn (sp?) and the Federalist  Society that facilitated the creation of the list, and the vetting.

The names on the list weren't really the game changer though.   It was the act of publicly releasing it and affirming he would stick to it that was a bold move. 
Click to expand...


spodog said:
Not really sure what your point is.      Aware of the Federalist Society?    Sure     Aware they maintain a public list and a public stance on who they as an organization feel would be valid candidates to be on the SC?    Sure, as do other orgs.     For the most part, those outside the legal community, or outside the Beltway pay little attention to these lists, however.   What the Federalist society does isn't front page news in Peoria, though.   Ever. 

My point wasn't about actions of the Federalist Society.

My point was that in the '16 pre-election noise, the Trump campaign convinced their candidate to embrace not only a list of names on the list, but to champion it, speak about it in public, push it into the public discourse, and get it out in front of the mass media outlets so they yammered on about it endlessly and magnified the impact of the move.     This action had a number of consequences:

  • had somewhat of a calming effect on the traditionalist Republican establishment that had spent much of the primaries bashing Trump or attempting to find ways to sabotage his nomination at the '16 RNC  (Ted Cruz went from simmering and bitter towards Trump and withholding support to full throated endorsement of Trump in the General election, for instance)
  • likely moved a big block of traditional R voters for whom the SC was a significant issue, pro-life was a significant issue off the fence and into the Trump camp, such as Evangelicals
  • nailed a previously subtle talking point onto the election bulletin board in a much more prominent position . . .the SC nomination function is a massively important role in selecting a President, since the nomination action is his and his alone.
  • Set a precedent that likely will persist for a long time, possibly indefinitely.    It's obviously a factor here in the '20 election and will be for many more to come.
The shark move was putting a spotlight onto the list, and putting it into play as a major element for a big portion of the electorate.
Click to expand...
I was asking if you were aware that this is public knowledge or not.  You seemed to indicate that Trump was putting something out there that wasn't already out there and that action was a bold move.  Seems now you're saying it's a huge move to point out publicly known and already provided information.  You also seem to believe that the passionate abortion voters aren't aware of the primary source of justices that would give them what they want.  I think that's a fallacy.  Those people are very aware of the list and it's scrutinized often in those forums where they discuss these things ad nauseum.  Is the average voter aware?  No...probably not, but then they aren't typically in the category of person you were describing to begin with.  Those folks are primarily of the "hey, I need a justification for voting for this clown because I really don't like what he's doing but I don't want to vote Democrat, so this is what I'm going to hitch my wagon to" variety with the list being inconsequential to them.  

 
The Commish said:
I was asking if you were aware that this is public knowledge or not.  You seemed to indicate that Trump was putting something out there that wasn't already out there and that action was a bold move.  Seems now you're saying it's a huge move to point out publicly known and already provided information.  You also seem to believe that the passionate abortion voters aren't aware of the primary source of justices that would give them what they want.  I think that's a fallacy.  Those people are very aware of the list and it's scrutinized often in those forums where they discuss these things ad nauseum.  Is the average voter aware?  No...probably not, but then they aren't typically in the category of person you were describing to begin with.  Those folks are primarily of the "hey, I need a justification for voting for this clown because I really don't like what he's doing but I don't want to vote Democrat, so this is what I'm going to hitch my wagon to" variety with the list being inconsequential to them.  
Click to expand...
Well, the term public knowledge is pretty vague.    My church publishes a bulletin every week online indicating who will be handling various duties each Sunday.    In theory, that information is public knowledge, but it isn't likely that more than a few hundred people know about or pay attention to that information, even though it is technically available for the global population to review on the internet. 

Passionate pro-life voters, as you point out, are much more likely to be aware of these potential justice lists than the public at large.   I'll take your word for it that they scrutinize and debate the lists ad nauseum in online forums.   I don't frequent those forums, so have no idea.    You and I, by our mere presence in this forum, likely know who the backup QB on most NFL teams are, whereas the general public has no idea and doesn't care.    Highly specialized information can be in the public domain, but not given much widespread public attention.   That is really what the Trump campaign in '16 did, was move the list into plain view of 300M+ TV and internet consumers, via leverage with the media.

I listed the many consequences of (likely others as well) putting the list into the media's hands in '16 that the Trump campaign achieved.    That was really my original point.

 
spodog said:
Legitimate question for you on this, as I admittedly know little about Seven Springs specifically. 

I do know many individuals and couples, however, including myself, who maintain a lake house, a cabin in the mountains or some type of resort property.   In almost every case, they utilize the property for personal use a small portion of the year, and rent it out to others the majority of the time.    I would expect that the expenses associated with maintaining the property, the depreciation expenses, the R/E taxes, insurance, etc end up as business expenses in whatever entity they hold the deed to the property with.     Might be pro-rated per tax laws, but some portion are business expenses regardless. 

Isn't Seven Springs simply a magnified example of this same circumstance?    I can't imagine any of the Trump family actually claims Seven Springs as their primary residence, so isn't it a commercial property owned by a closely held family business entity, that incurs expenses to operate just like my own vacation rental property is? 
Click to expand...
Bingo, yes.  And I can guarantee you that there is no way Trump could explain it as well as you just did.  He has a team of accountants and lawyers do that for him.  The "blatant tax fraud" claim is just wishful thinking.

 
spodog said:
In my case, rented out nights per year are around 200 - 250 nights per year. 

If you are referencing Seven Springs, I have no idea how frequently it is rented to 3rd parties.   If the answer is never, then yes, this would seem to be a tax problem. 
Click to expand...
Ok. Thanks. 

So there are some real tax fraud questions that arise from the details reported on by NYT.

 
spodog said:
Legitimate question for you on this, as I admittedly know little about Seven Springs specifically. 

I do know many individuals and couples, however, including myself, who maintain a lake house, a cabin in the mountains or some type of resort property.   In almost every case, they utilize the property for personal use a small portion of the year, and rent it out to others the majority of the time.    I would expect that the expenses associated with maintaining the property, the depreciation expenses, the R/E taxes, insurance, etc end up as business expenses in whatever entity they hold the deed to the property with.     Might be pro-rated per tax laws, but some portion are business expenses regardless. 

Isn't Seven Springs simply a magnified example of this same circumstance?    I can't imagine any of the Trump family actually claims Seven Springs as their primary residence, so isn't it a commercial property owned by a closely held family business entity, that incurs expenses to operate just like my own vacation rental property is? 
Click to expand...
Your basic understanding of Vacation Rental Home is correct. You may use a rental property for up to the lessor of 14 days or 10% of the days it is rented out.

There is little evidence Seven Springs has ever been a rental property in the 26 years Trump has owned it. It's not listed on Trump International Realty or anywhere else. To be fair, Muammar al-Gaddafi did once rent it for $10K for a month when he was speaking at the UN, and they constructed temporary bedouin tents.

It has long been the family's private suburban retreat; that's literally what their website says. Recently it seems he favors Bedminster NJ when he's been in the area since coming into office. The misclassification has allowed him to write off $2.2M in property taxes since 2014. Under the current tax code individuals are limited to $10K Schedule A deduction for RE property taxes if this were not being classified as a business property. Mr Trump valued the property, which he purchased for $7.5M, at $291M in 2012. Do the math - as a business property(27.5 year depreciation schedule) they can claim over $10M in depreciation alone. Forbes in 2014 pegged the property, based on recent property sales and advice from local realtors and assessors, at $19.5M. For many years they tried to develop the land - variously described as 201/213/230, the easements seem confusing to reporters - as a golf course and then a luxury community. Local opposition stopped those efforts, and Trump received a $21.1M charitable deduction by placing 159 of the acres which don't have buildings into a newly created conservancy. They still own the land, they're just agreeing to never develop it.

There were reports last month the NYS AG is investigating the property's classification and have reportedly subpoenaed Eric Trump. To be continued...

 
BobbyLayne said:
Your basic understanding of Vacation Rental Home is correct. You may use a rental property for up to the lessor of 14 days or 10% of the days it is rented out.

There is little evidence Seven Springs has ever been a rental property in the 26 years Trump has owned it. It's not listed on Trump International Realty or anywhere else. To be fair, Muammar al-Gaddafi did once rent it for $10K for a month when he was speaking at the UN, and they constructed temporary bedouin tents.

It has long been the family's private suburban retreat; that's literally what their website says. Recently it seems he favors Bedminster NJ when he's been in the area since coming into office. The misclassification has allowed him to write off $2.2M in property taxes since 2014. Under the current tax code individuals are limited to $10K Schedule A deduction for RE property taxes if this were not being classified as a business property. Mr Trump valued the property, which he purchased for $7.5M, at $291M in 2012. Do the math - as a business property(27.5 year depreciation schedule) they can claim over $10M in depreciation alone. Forbes in 2014 pegged the property, based on recent property sales and advice from local realtors and assessors, at $19.5M. For many years they tried to develop the land - variously described as 201/213/230, the easements seem confusing to reporters - as a golf course and then a luxury community. Local opposition stopped those efforts, and Trump received a $21.1M charitable deduction by placing 159 of the acres which don't have buildings into a newly created conservancy. They still own the land, they're just agreeing to never develop it.

There were reports last month the NYS AG is investigating the property's classification and have reportedly subpoenaed Eric Trump. To be continued...
Click to expand...
Thanks.   Should be an interesting story line to follow.      Seven Springs doesn't seem like the type of property one would expect to pop up when doing an Airbnb.com search, so seems possible that whatever renting/leasing occurred for the property, if any,  was entirely privately arranged, and the only records of those transactions are buried deep in some accountant's paperwork, if they exist at all.      NYS AG interviewing Eric Trump seems like it's likely to end up as a script for a future SNL episode.  

I would imagine that all of this interaction with Eric, further investigation producing anything factual, will likely be kicked into 2021 with various legal maneuvers, however.    These stories are like comets that burn hot and fast and then fade quickly out of view, and would expect this one to be the same, regardless of whether there is underlying tax fraud or not.

 
spodog said:
BobbyLayne said:
Trump has used Better Call Saul for 50 years.
Click to expand...
actually a pretty funny analogy.    Bob Odenkirk is outstanding in this.   

But why would you expect different?    Trump was raised and cut his teeth on ruthless Roy Cohn tactics handed down from his father.    Fred, and in turn, The Donald, always felt the Manhattan nose in the air crowd looked down upon them as outer burough second class citizens, so the Trump Family was no more likely to have become a client of Skadden Arps than they were to become members of the Harvard Club on 44th Street in Manhattan.   
Click to expand...
Love the character, one of the best tv characters of all-time.

Spot on assessment, it has long been a sore point with Trump and is really a huge part of his makeup. He's long been shunned by old money Manhattanites. That insecurity is what drives him to view everything as transactional. He doesn't care about anyone except himself and his family. 

Listen, I worked for a telecom firm whose first office was in Trump Tower and our first client was Chuck Blazer. We had a lot of shady clients, and it reflected the loose morals held by our CEO. Our outside lawyer attended the same Shul as Felix Sater, and he briefly worked for him. Felix once offered to invest 5x the fair market valuation into our firm ($75M) from his friends in Eastern Europe. It was as blatant of an example of money laundering as I've ever seen and I was literally the only executive trying to stop the deal until I won our lawyer over to the side of sanity.

So I'm well acquainted with the underbelly of NYC and consider it nothing short of a miracle I never got caught up in anything corrupt. Happy I'm no longer a part of that scene; imagine what it's like going to work everyday and having your integrity challenged on an almost daily  basis. But there are a lot of folks for whom ethics is never, ever, a part of the equation.

We all view life through the sum total of our life's experience, right? I started my career with the belief that everyone gets one shot at integrity, and if you want to be a respected accounting/finance executive, you have to have bullet proof ethics. It didn't make me rich staying true to those principles, but it did allow me sleep at night.

For Donald Trump, that worldview is "If you can get away with it, then who cares? Let the other suckers pay taxes."

 
spodog said:
toshiba said:
But Kavanaugh wasn't on the list. 
Click to expand...
Neil Gorsuch was on the original list released in May of 2016, which contained 20 names.   Gorsuch was nominated in January of '17.

Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, along with 3 others, were added to the list in November of 2017.   Kavanaugh was nominated July 9, 2018.

Barrett was nominated last week.

link
Click to expand...
So what is the point of releasing a pre-election list if you are just going to change it?  The original list still had 19 names on it that were not yet nominated.

 
Is the overall narrative that the $750 was "fraudulent"?  I took a perusal (against my better judgement) of the various popular MSM sites in the country and I don't see many rooting their arguments in fraud.  Is it a pathetic indictment on our tax system?  Sure.  Does that need to be fixed?  Yup.  Does it show how inept he likely is in running businesses that are taking those kinds of losses?  Most likely.  Fraud is the last thing I'd call it though.  Not sure where that's coming from in any meaningful way.

 
toshiba said:
So what is the point of releasing a pre-election list if you are just going to change it?  The original list still had 19 names on it that were not yet nominated.
Click to expand...
Because if the list were never allowed to be updated and refreshed, the only names that would ever have been on it would be:

John Jay, James Wilson, William Cushing, John Blair, John Rutledge and James Iredell.

 
spodog said:
Because if the list were never allowed to be updated and refreshed, the only names that would ever have been on it would be:

John Jay, James Wilson, William Cushing, John Blair, John Rutledge and James Iredell.
Click to expand...
Trump's original list, without any updating or refreshing, had 20 names on it that were not John Jay or James Wilson. (I stopped checking after those two, so I'm not sure about William Cushing.)

 
Maurile Tremblay said:
Trump's original list, without any updating or refreshing, had 20 names on it that were not John Jay or James Wilson. (I stopped checking after those two, so I'm not sure about William Cushing.)
Click to expand...
I'll save you some further time checking the others.    Those 6 names were the original 6 justices on the SC in 1789.

 
spodog said:
I'll save you some further time checking the others.    Those 6 names were the original 6 justices on the SC in 1789.
Click to expand...
I know, but thanks. ;)

I think toshiba's point is that releasing a list you're not going to stick to is pretty much the same as not releasing a list.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Z Machine said:
Legit question: can you claim the mortgage and operating costs of a vacation home as a business expense of you never rent it out?
Click to expand...
If you never rent it out?  No.

If you are genuinely attempting to rent it out, but you've got no takers - possibly yes.  

BobbyLayne articulated the vacation home rules above as well, "vacation home" has a specific meaning in the tax code.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Steve Tasker said:
If you never rent it out?  No.

If you are genuinely attempting to rent it out, but you've got no takers - possibly yes.  

BobbyLayne articulated the vacation home rules above as well, "vacation home" has a specific meaning in the tax code.
Click to expand...
So there are legitimate some tax fraud questions surrounding this property.  Hmm... so it's not all, "this is what rich people do on their taxes."

 
The Z Machine said:
Hmm... so it's not all, "this is what rich people do on their taxes."
Click to expand...
The top 0.1% of income earners pay 19.5% of all federal income taxes in the United States.

"Trump pays only $750 just like all rich people" is the dumbest meme going around, if it's a meme.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maurile Tremblay said:
The top 0.1% of income earners pay 19.5% of all federal income taxes in the United States.

"Trump pays only $750 just like all rich people" is the dumbest meme going around, if it's a meme.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but the President of the United States pays 0%.  Cuz he's smarter than the rest of the 0.1%.  Plus, he's a terrible businessman who's lost a lot of money over the last 20 years.

 
The federal government feels anyone in extreme debt is not responsible enough to hold a federal position.   Republicans used to also think of fiscal responsibility but apparently not anymore

 
belljr said:
The federal government feels anyone in extreme debt is not responsible enough to hold a federal position.   Republicans used to also think of fiscal responsibility but apparently not anymore
Click to expand...
My bud in the air force was recently sidelined for a year because of credit card debt.  He has 4 kids in high school.

He moved to a new base and they denied him clearance.  He is 20 years in.  Took him past 1-2 years to clear some debt and show that he had a feasible plan going forward.

He had a 20-year exemplary record.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
belljr said:
The federal government feels anyone in extreme debt is not responsible enough to hold a federal position.   Republicans used to also think of fiscal responsibility but apparently not anymore
Click to expand...
The GOP brand of fiscal conservatism is really just austerity minus the revenue.

 
Daywalker said:
My bud in the air force was recently sidelined for a year because of credit card debt.  He has 4 kids in high school.

He moved to a new base and they denied him clearance.  He is 20 years in.  Took him past 1-2 years to clear some debt and show that he had a feasible plan going forward.

He had a 20-year exemplary record.
Click to expand...
He's not above the law the way Barr said Trump is. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
What are Your Thoughts on Democrats Calling Supreme Court Illegitimate, and State AG’s Vowing not to Enforce Abortion Bans?
7 8 9
Replies
401
Views
8K
BladeRunner
BladeRunner
GordonGekko
Saagar Enjeti: I Said Gas Prices More Important Than Jan 6, Liberals LOST IT (6/16/22 5:57 PST)
2
Replies
67
Views
2K
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
OP/ED: Biden Will Be Impeached After The Mid Terms & WWYD (5/17/22 19:42 PST)
2 3
Replies
128
Views
3K
quick-hands
quick-hands

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top