Sunday, October 2, 2016

MONDAY NIGHT COUNCIL MEETING PLUS TRUMP




As I noted I shall not attend Monday’s night Council meeting which is being held on the night of the second most important Jewish religious holy day.

I have scanned the agenda and with the exception of Resolution G to increase the award of a contract with Mitchel Humphry Software from $169800.00 to $208,660.00 which is a 23% increase.

Why there are now 40 licensed users instead of the original 25 is not clarified in any documentation Once again there is a resolution authorizing payment to Remington & Vernick an additional $43735.00 for “change order 1 contract #2.” An explanation should be appreciated.

Has anyone made a study to see if an in house engineer would be more cost effective than outsourcing?


Perhaps the revelation that Trump may not have paid any income taxes from 1995 is why he will not reveal his taxes. According to Allan Sloan in Sunday's Washington Post"


Despite what Donald Trump says, we really can learn a lot from his tax returns — even from the partial ones made public by The New York Times.
The major takeaway from the three pages of Trump’s 1995 returns that the Times made public is that Trump is right when he says the system is rigged. What he doesn’t say is that it’s rigged in his favor, and in the favor of people like him — and against regular people, those of us who earn money, pay income tax on it, and financially support the country in which we live.
To keep things relatively simple, I’m telling you what I see in Trump’s returns, based on my decades of experience parsing financial filings. I will try not to get bogged down in numbers and technicalities.
Sure, the $900 million-plus of losses reported by the New York Times — losses that could be used to offset income for a total of 18 years—are totally shocking. Legal, yes. But shocking.
But there’s something I consider even more shocking — although it involves a much smaller number.

By my read of the Trump tax return published by the New York Times, he would have been tax-free because of a $15,818,562 loss reported on Line 11 of the return under “Rental real estate, royalties, partnerships, S corporations, trusts, etc.” It looks to me that this loss reflects the outrageous, special tax break that real estate developers that people like Trump can get, but that the rest of us can’t.

To give you the brief version, people who qualify as real estate developers or managers can use depreciation deductions to offset non-real estate income. But people who don’t qualify for this special treatment can’t do that. (For full details, ask a tax expert about Section 469 of the tax code.)

Now, to the $909 million loss reported by the New York Times — which vastly exceeds any cash losses that Trump would have suffered in the collapse of his casino-hotel-airline empire, which fell apart in the early 1990s and resulted in four bankruptcies. (He had two more bankruptcies, in 2004 and 2009, from a publicly-traded company in which he was the primary shareholder.)

The Trump people are trying to counter that bad information by stating the amount of real estate taxes "he" has paid over those years. Without question this is a typical Trump misstatement. Those taxes were paid by the individual "corporation" owning the property.

6 comments:

  1. Doc, the tax Code has a basis for fairness. If you risk your money, that is invest it, and the investment makes money you pay taxes. If you lose the money you invest, or if you are allowed depreciation on the investment, you are given a deduction over a specified period of time. . One of the many reasons depreciation is permitted is because the investor is entitled to recover the amount which he has invested, that is the amount which the investor has put at risk. The government encourages investment, because investment is the key to providing jobs and growing the economy, something that we all agree is beneficial. Government does not in itself grow the economy. Government lives off the economy by collecting taxes. The government can be an instrument of growing, or shrinking , the economy through its policies. Having reasonable Corporate taxes can accelerate the domestic economic growth by encouraging Corporations to bring manufacturing back the this country, and to invet in new facilities in this country. Corporations escape to tax havens for two reasons, cheaper labor and less taxation. Both can be offset by reducing what is now the highest Corporate tax rate on the planet. Tax incentives can be created which reward Corporations for returning their facilities to the United States. Also, please remember that not all Corporations deal in manufactured goods. Many provide technical services which are not impacted as much by cheap labor. Admittedly, when the average person, which is most of us, sees a write off of almost a billion dollars it appears obscene. The reality is that it is legal. The IRS audits Trump's returns. If what he is doing is inappropriate believe me they will correct the inequity. The critics however should get under the sheets and understand the issues before they make their knee jerk, uniformed judgements regarding whether Trump has abuses the system or complied with system that trump did not originate.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Phrases such as may not have, could have, etc. only mean something to those with a bias. The statement about real estate taxes being paid by the "corporation?" Did Trump personally lose 900 million? Yikes!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Trump could not have taken the deduction unless the deduction represented his share of his investment in the Corporation. There is no magic by which you can conjure up a deduction without what is termed "a basis", i.e. having put money into the deal. You may be surprised to know that that was possible until that evil man, Ronald Reagan, reformed the rules. Now you can onlyy deduct the amount you invested, and lost. If there were other shareholders they too would have received deductions based on the amounts they invested commensurate with the amount of the loss. .
    Since the amount of the loss was apparently greater than the amount Trump earned the next year the rules permit you to carry the loss forward and apply it over a number of years until the loss is exhausted. This is not bias, these are the facts. The bias arises with your refusal to accept them because you don't like Trump. As to preference I will not sleep when one or the other gets elected. I am uncertain which of the two candidates will cause the greater loss of sleep.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reread my statement. The headlines are blaring that Trump did not pay federal taxes. The facts are based on the three pages leaked, we don't know. If you are a Trump hater you say he didn't. That is what I mean by bias. I am a Trump supporter. The second statement/question is did Trump have 900 million to lose? Hope that helps.

      Delete
    2. NO I am not a "Trump hater" nor a Clinton lover but probably will be a reluctant supporter at the polls. This will be my 18th Presidential election and I have never seen such two worse candidates. This election will be the choice of who is the least danger to our political life and civil freedom.

      The tax code is not based on fairness. I wish you woud identify yourself. You could send as a comment with do not post.

      Delete
  4. Don't blame Trump for taking advantage of existing law. We all do that. Blame him for being a bafoon.

    ReplyDelete