“The tax-return data also showed that Trump’s businesses reported major losses and that he avoided paying income taxes “largely because he reported losing much more money than he made,” the report said.”
The returns are not an unvarnished look at Trump’s business activity. They are instead his own portrayal of his companies, compiled for the IRS.
There is probably a lot more interesting information still hidden.
Normal people wish they had Trump’s wealth.
Democrats are jealous of Trump’s wealth.
Beware the Tenth Commandment, Democrats. It’s biting all of you in the ass! 
In this thread, basically
“Legal tax avoidance attacked by people who don’t pay taxes at all.”
Guess that’s NYT pandering to their base, the infamous “freeloading 47” Romney was lamenting years ago.
“Legal” as applied to any new information from the returns is not answered yet, there are ongoing cases.
Your second assertion (people who don’t pay taxes) seems baseless. Much of campaigning and voter choice is based on subjective judgements of the voters. There’s no reason shady tax avoidance schemes should get a special waiver to be off-limits for subjective judgements.
The fake trump org charity has already been dissolved, with a record fine for such fraud and public record with admission by Trump of his tax fraud associated with it.
No, they’re the portrayal of tax law.
You do realize that all businesses have two sets of books (at least conceptually) - one focused on tax law compliance, the other focused on GAAP compliance?
“Taxable income” is not a synonym for “profit”, “wealth”, or “cash flow”. Especially in real estate, they can be vastly different.
But by all means, keep doubling down on your agenda, letting your ignorance bleed through.
What “shady tax avoidance schemes”? You mean “The US tax code”?
There are no “loopholes” or otherwise “shady” schemes involved in these tax return. If still being audited there’s always a chance some numbers will be revised, but there’s no way to infer that with any degree of validity. I might as well infer that you are a 12 year old girl in India, it’d be just as accurate of an addition to the discussion.
“Shady” is not a legal term. So, no, not the tax code. The average person gets to decide for themselves if something is shady or unfair. Just like they can decide for themselves if Trump’s constant lieing and pandering to militant white nationalists and other fringe groups is acceptable. Or if the president’s constant nonsensical speech is a bigger sign of decline than vice president Biden’s occasional stuttering or impromptu speech mishaps.
For example when I sold some electronics on Craigslist, met the buyer near a train station, and they paid me with a stack of $20s several inches high. I would expect that to appear shady to a third party observer… they would of course have been free to judge me negatively and cross the street rather than stay on the same sidewalk (if they found themselves walking near me on a sidewalk afterwards). Or even to report me as suspicious to the police (had I not conducted the transaction within a bank lobby, intentionally within surveillance of security cameras…). And they surely would have been free to decide to vote against me because of the shady behavior if I were running for office. Ditto for any subjectively judged (un)fairness, whether ultimately legal or not.
I don’t think anyone implied that he broke the tax laws (that’s for IRS to decide). But regardless, it’s pretty unflattering optics when someone allegedly making $400+M a year ends up paying $750 in income tax.
If that’s how harshly the IRS treats him, I’d like to be treated on the same terms (that’d put my tax burden to about $0.40c which I’d have to suck up and pay reluctantly I guess).
Besides, IRS stated that they are done auditing him for tax years up to 2008 and he has not released those either. The audit process is well understood as an excuse, let’s be honest. The optics are just not good and would provide fodder for his opponents. Even if a few numbers would change slightly, it would not be night and day on the scale of the numbers talked about. If he owed $7500 instead of $750, it wouldn’t change at all the perception that the wealthy exploit tax law loopholes which are in effect not available to 99% of the population and pay an effective tax rate much lower than the middle class households.
I don’t blame him for avoiding tax actually. I’d do the same if the laws were stacked in my favor. But I blame him - and many others before including Obama - for letting this status quo endure. Why is my tax burden not on par with his despite making much less? Call it jealousy - aren’t you envious of a 0.0002% tax rate too - but I’ll call it asking for a lot more fairness in taxation.
Exactly. He claimed the “tax cuts” he pushed made things more fair and greatly lowered the taxes on the average people while closing loopholes used by the wealthy. Meanwhile, average citizens’ taxes were almost unchanged, and the 0.01% received large cuts, including some entirely new carve-outs that directly benefited the president personally.
It’s directly relevant.
So…why is Facebook, instagram, and other social media so “just” in making that decision for people? Even here, numerous times you’ve attacked “shady and unfair” statements as being unacceptable, rather than insisting people can decide for themselves.
I guess the concept only applies when you agree with what’s been decided?
Exactly - it’s all optics. Nothing more, nothing less.
What relevance does tax returns from nearly a decade before he entered public office have? Are you demanding Biden release his tax returns from 1965?
If we’re going to be honest, lets just admit the only reason anyone cares about Trump’s tax returns from 2008 is because they know full well the optics will yield a bunch of laypersons rabblerousing over nothing.
Flagging and/or removing statements that are demonstrably false, misleading, racist,
or incite violence all violate the ToS (and the contract with the company designates it’s the company’s discretion to decide)… You’ve jumped to a completely different topic of ToS violations and apparently arguing against basic contracts.
If you want the state to directly control companies and use them for propaganda purposes, there are some countries that better fit your model.
FTFY.
Yeah, I didnt say that. I just said that it’s awfully convenient to only allow things that lead people to the conclusions that you agree with, while deleting things that lead people elsewhere. That is telling people what to think, under the guise of letting them think they’ve reached their own conclusions.
Trump is free to not use the services if he doesn’t agree to the ToS. He can still maintain his presence with Alex Jones on infowars.
And 15 year old tax returns are relevant how? Again, where’s Biden’s tax return from 1965?
(Potential) Evidence of a broken system and what should be changed in future tax policy.
(Potential) Evidence of the effects of the last “tax reform” pushed by the Administration that claimed to eliminate loopholes for the wealthy when it actually added more special carve-outs that benefited the current president directly.
(Potential) Evidence of the current president’s foreign entanglements, which are a conflict of interest and contribute to the national security threats posed by the current president.
(As if we needed any more…) Evidence that Trump’s populist shtick is a complete farce.
My $0.02… The optics isn’t just for taking advantage of the loopholes that existed when he filed those tax returns. The optics extends into advancing and getting Congress to implement a tax reform that continued benefiting people like him, at the expense of the nation. After all, the rich should be contributing more to public finances than the middle class or the poor.