Takes One to Know One

Arianna Huffington gets busted for hypocrisy by her own employer:

TV commentator and author Arianna Huffington, who launched her campaign for governor with criticism of "fat cats" who fail to shoulder a fair share of taxes, paid no individual state income tax and just $771 in federal taxes during the last two years, her tax returns show.

(Thanks to reader Sean for the tip.)

Comments

[erf]

So she had minimal income. What's the point of this post again, Matt?

[Sean]

Add to that the hint of her using undisclosed but substantial child support for business purposes. This is sure to be the investigative journalists' prize sow. Yes, she explains that everything is on the up and up, and that she is above reproach. Perhaps she is indeed telling the truth. But then she owes an explaination of why we shouldn't just trust those same fatcats she criticizes, when they say the exact same thing.

[Nelson]

Well. . . I was too lazy to register.

Still, is she living in a cardboard box and eating cat food? Somehow I imagine her lifestyle is much more fab than mine, but I'm ponying up a lot more for taxes. (I figure I take home $2K a month, give $1K to the various governments).

[Matt Welch]

Erf -- She reported $410,000 in expenses for a company that does nothing but promote herself. She claimed earnings of $183,000, received non-taxable child support "very substantially above" that figure, continued to live like the Priness of Brentwood, and made a terrific living complaining about tax dodgers and "fatcats," all while paying less in taxes than me. When someone has made her number-one solution to California's $38 billion budget shortfall the closing down of tax loopholes, I daresay that this qualifies as noteworthy.

[Russ]

One question: Why are her tax returns public information? How exactly is it anyone's business what she earns and pays?

[Russ]

Oh, wait... that was two questions.

[B.P.]

It also speaks ill of child support orders if a judge says it takes very substantially more than $183,000 to raise a kid.

[Todd Fletcher]

"It also speaks ill of child support orders if a judge says it takes very substantially more than $183,000 to raise a kid."

She lives in So Cal right? That would explain it.

[erf]

Matt--
Ok, I see. As a New Yorker (not NYC), I wasn't aware that was her rallying cry. I guess if she was honest enough, she'd hold herself up as an example of a tax loophole benefiter that was in line for some readjustment. But I think that's as likely as ... well, too many examples of politicians not honestly assessing themselves to the public to choose from. Pick your own.

[R.C. Dean]

Most likely, what la Huffington is up to is running a bunch of what most folks would think of as personal (nondeductible) expenses through her company - all her travel, lots of meals, etc. etc. - to eat up her income with "deductible" expenses. Every trip has a business angle, every meal has some business purpose, etc. Given that she is in hte business of being Arianna, she probably has a lot of scope here.

This is a classic tax avoidance ploy, and up to a point is legal. Whether she passed that point, we don't know, but she is about to discover the truth behind the old saw about throwing stones and glass houses.

[Jim Walsh]

Funny how conservatives were so quick to forgive or ignore Arianna's shenanegans (or write it all off as "liberal" smearing) when she was writing for World Net Daily...

[Jeff]

It's every American's moral RIGHT to avoid letting the state steal a single penny more of the products of their efforts than allowed by law.

Her actions in avoiding taxes are noble - her mouth condemning the behavior she herself engages in is outrageous and sickening.

[Xmas]

Damn...I can't read the article without an LA times account.

I read a different account on NewsMax though.

Heck, if she is getting most of her money through "child support" payments, more power to her. That money was already taxed when her ex-husband earned it.

As for why people are talking about her tax returns, well, she's running for Governor of California. She has to file her last two years tax returns as public records.

[Matt Welch]

To access the L.A. Times:
username: laexaminer
password: laexaminer

[Lefty]

The "Smear the Chick" game is on. They're going into tax returns, talking to ex-husbands (last week he was quoting the kids) and checking out the church she goes to. Next they'll go through her trash and follow her shopping.

Let's see if they do that with the millionaire guys that are running.

[Joe]

Yeah, no one is trying to smear Arnold S. at all. Just giving him a pass. We haven't seen what he made for the past two years($31 million, IIRC in 2001), or paid in taxes, or donated to charity. Or the insinuations on womanizing or any other personal foibles. Nor was Bill Simons's returns made an issue in the last election or the bad judgement against his company. Just piling on the second highest profile challenger because she's a woman, not because she's a hypocrite of the first order. I suppose to mention Tawana Brawley(sp?) in relation to Al Sharpton is racist, or to call John Kerry an elitist is prejudiced against French-looking Vietnam Vets? Please, can we get past this infantile notion that women, minorities and guys that look French need to be protected from big bad meanies out to pillage the country-side and kill all oppostion, usually called Republicans in polite circles.

And actually, Arianna willingly released the tax returns to the LA Times from what I heard.

[Andy]

Thanks to Matt Welch's suggested username and password, I've read the article. Sounds like she personally earned ~$80,000 but offset that with her corporation's losses (she didn't personally lose money in 2002, but her corporation did... so her tax return reports she lost the money). I don't know if that's legal or not, but it sure does sound hypocritical considering her anti-fat-cat statements.

All of the above should be taken with a grain of salt though, since I don't know much about these sorts of financial issues.

Andy

[spectator]

Damn, Lefty! You beat me to it again. As I was scrolling through the comments, anticipating the end, where it's our turn to post (thoughts ambling through my mind as I read) what do I see as the last post? Lefty -- stealing my thunder again.

The thought I had was -- yup, the anal exams have begun.

Must be a very filthy job, scouring through trashcans, rummaging through closets for skeletons, lifting dresses, sniffing bung holes, all to come up with DIRT, DIRT, DIRT. (Yecch!)

Well, that's politics, I guess.

Personally, I don't give a hoot about the Huff. I'm rooting for The Terminator myself.

[Phil]

Let's see if they do that with the millionaire guys that are running.

Are you kidding? The "Arnold is a Nazi or Nazi sympathizer" meme is already taking fire.

[Lonewacko]

I've got Ahnold's financial statement out in the car. If anyone wants it, I'll provide it if they're a recognized blogger and pays FedEx or picks it up.

[Gene Berkman]

Maybe Arrianna is just preparing for her next career move. If she loses her bid for Governor as a Left-winger, she can move to Orange County and start a tax avoidance scam.
She can probably get enough suckers to keep the electricity on in her mansion.

[Sir Real]

So you're saying she's a hypocrite? I never saw that coming....

Come on people- Arianna's more fickle about her politics than a Fashionista- "Conservativism is SO 1997".

Besides, we all know Gallagher is the candidate to beat.

[Nelson]

Ha Ha.

Or maybe I'm the sucker for actually paying my taxes. How does a millionare get away with paying the IRS some pocket change she found in one of her SUVs? How do you do it? Paper losses? Offshore corporations?

[matt]

I'm sure as hell no fan of Ms Huff and Puff, but according to the article she didn't make any money(income) the past 2 years so why should she pay income taxes? I'm no tax expert so if someone can correct me if I'm wrong then please do so.

[Matt Welch]

Nelson -- Read the story. She says the company that publishes her best-selling books and handles her lucrative speaking engagements has suffered losses the last two years, due to the vagaries of the publishing cycle.

[Gray Neil]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://www.enlargement-for-penis.com
DATE: 01/25/2004 04:45:58
It's not all lies - not all of it. That's the age-old dilemma.