Leaked Returns: In 2005, Trump Claimed $150 Million in Earnings, Paid $36 Million in Taxes
Tax returns leaked; Rachel Maddow's exclusive gets scooped by White House pre-response.


Rachel Maddow of MSNBC today announced she had a big exclusive: a copy of President Donald Trump's tax returns from 2005. She promised she'd reveal the details on her show tonight at 9 p.m.
Unfortunately, she has decided that she should open her show by using her captive audience to babble on and on and on about every single thing she thinks about corruption in the Trump administration, sounding like the guy at the gym you never, ever make eye contact with. The Daily Beast has some analysis from the source of the leaked returns, David Cay Johnson of DCReport.org. And you don't have to endure a 15-minute monologue first:
Donald Trump earned more than $150 million in the year 2005—and paid just a small percentage of that in regular federal income taxes. Daily Beast contributor David Cay Johnston has obtained what appear to be the first two pages of Trump's 2005 federal income tax return, and published an analysis of those pages on his website, DCReport.org. The Daily Beast could not independently verify these documents.
The documents show Trump and his wife Melania paying $5.3 million in regular federal income tax—a rate of less than 4% However, the Trumps paid an additional $31 million in the so-called "alternative minimum tax," or AMT. Trump has previously called for the elimination of this tax.
"Before being elected President, Mr. Trump was one of the most successful businessmen in the world with a responsibility to his company, his family and his employees to pay no more tax than legally required," the White House said in a statement. "That being said, Mr. Trump paid $38 million dollars even after taking into account large scale depreciation for construction, on an income of more than $150 million dollars, as well as paying tens of millions of dollars in other taxes such as sales and excise taxes and employment taxes and this illegally published return proves just that."
The actual tax return info itself doesn't sound particularly interesting or damning. Note that this is the same tax year where Trump had previously gotten a major tax deal. Probably the bigger news is that Trump insisted and insisted and insisted both before and after the election that he could not release his tax returns because he was being audited. It became very clear very quickly that this is nonsense and many people have said so. But hilariously, before Maddow even made it on the air, the White House responded by confirming the number (ruining her scoop) and then complaining that providing the information is illegal. So the White House just deflated Trump's previous argument that he couldn't release his tax documents. But they also responded in a way that attempts to cast Trump as some sort of victim of an "illegal" disclosure that wouldn't have happened had he been transparent in the first place.
I'm hesitant at this point to even suggest that anything valuable at all will come from this info leak other than the continued polarization of two sides. The fact that Trump refused to release his returns for the dumbest of reasons didn't seem to affect those who voted for him. His angry response was to attack the media and then promise to stick with his own agenda. So it's perhaps political business as usual. Still, it's a net good for public transparency that Americans get this information and are able to evaluate it and decide for themselves whether they should care.
Update: The lack of any sort of smoking gun in the tax filings and the fact that they're apparently labeled "client copy" are already leading to theories that Trump himself had them leaked.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Rachel Maddow is a cunt.
You have done a grave disservice to cunts everywhere with that comparison.
More like toenail, with fungus. Lower, and smells worse than a cunt.
And without the upside.
Is that apart from her reporting on news in this instance, or because she has the temerity to report on his grapefruitness?
she reported that a rich guy paid a lot of taxes. Maybe this is news to you.
"...the temerity to report on his grapefruitness?"
I'm sure that means something to the editor of the "Willow Oaks Dog Walker's Weekly", but....
Grow up, Tony.
I'm offended by the comparison. Cunts are very pleasant. How about comparing Maddow to an anal wart, instead?
Rachel Maddow is a cunt.
Thanks. You're a credit to libertarianism with that thoughtful analysis. You should add that line to your Gadsden flag.
I'm always amazed at people who hold that flag in contempt. The only conclusion I can come to is that you absolutely relish treading upon others.
I honestly don't know what else would motivate you, other than tribalism.
Since our long-standing approach of using objective, rational analysis has failed, we're just adopting the language of progressives and Democrats so that you people can understand us.
"I'd call you a cunt, but you lack the warmth and the depth."
Pretty funny stunt by Trump.I actually put Maddow on for a few minutes until she started saying Trump USED THE SAME AIRPORT RUNWAY AS A RUSSIAN OLIGARCH!!11! and TRUMP INEXPLICABLY FIRED THE US ATTORNEYS APPOINTED BY OBAMA !!11!
More sweet tears to collect.
How desperate is the mainstream media? This is a campaign issue and Trump was voted into office without releasing tax records. I personally think transparency in government is important, so politicians should release tax records. It's not required in the constitution, so it's not not required at this time.
Everything the media does just makes Trump more popular. He paid $35 million in taxes in 2005. That is an outrageous amount to be extorted for just for the bureaucrats to waste. Cut government to the bone!
You know - Because income tax did not exist at the beginning of the nation, the Founding Father's could never have forseen a nation where a politician could choose to or not to disclose their income tax returns.
So we need to ignore the Constitution or something, something, left-wing blather.
You know - Because income tax did not exist at the beginning of the nation, the Founding Father's could never have forseen a nation where a politician could choose to or not to disclose their income tax returns we should get rid of it.
FTFY
I think it was worth the wait just to spoil rachel maddows big scoop
More sweet tears to collect.
How desperate is the mainstream media? This is a campaign issue and Trump was voted into office without releasing tax records. I personally think transparency in government is important, so politicians should release tax records. It's not required in the constitution, so it's not not required at this time.
Everything the media does just makes Trump more popular. He paid $35 million in taxes in 2005. That is an outrageous amount to be extorted for just for the bureaucrats to waste. Cut government to the bone!
Rachel Maddox squirrels double post'n
Damn, Trump is brilliant if he rick-rolled Madcow
Frankly, I thought Trump was broke. He had a $ billion loss in 1995 and in 2005, he had to pay $38 million in taxes?
Damn. Trump is rich after all.
Yeah, that's the real story here.
He took a billion-dollar loss in 1995, which is what led to all the media and pundit speculation that he could very well be living tax-free off that loss for the next twenty years.
In reality, ten years later he had a $38 million tax liability. Which means he really does have a shitload of money.
I love Reason adopting the if you have nothing to hide why are you nervous line here. Trump didn't want to release his tax returns. Simple as that. To caterwaul but what about the transparency is an odious repudiation of his fundemental rights. That doesn't entitle people to defy the law and leak his tax returns. People really want to stop child pornography and I maybe I then Shackford consumes child porn. I don't get to shout transparency and override his constitutional protections just because he gives off a child porny vibe.
But I get it there is shit ton more writers than there are spots at Salon and WAPO so curry that hard left favor or you'll end up a media matters troll like Tony.
Creative argument.
Agreed, what a completely un-libertarian paragraph to write.
Trump was not President in 2005 so his tax returns from then are not public records. Framing it as a transparency issue makes no sense. It's a privacy issue.
My above comment came from reading your post as sarcastic.
Yeah, I was being serious. Rare occurrence. I'm overtired, apparently.
Bravo! Golf Clap........
Shack Attack out scoops Maddow. Nice work
He's playing the Media like a harp from Hell, to borrow a phrase...
Why would Trump or anyone want to not release returns that are being audited? I remember MONEY or some other financial magazine sending out identical income information from a fake upper middle income earner to something like 200 CPAs and tax preparers and having them calculate dozens of different tax amounts. If professionals can't agree on the tax code and the correct preparation of an individual's 1040, then you can bet there will be a dozen different "I caught Trump cheating" opinions from media should his unaudited returns be made public.
"If professionals can't agree on the tax code and the correct preparation of an individual's 1040, then you can bet there will be a dozen different "I caught Trump cheating" opinions from media should his unaudited returns be made public."
As someone who prepared tax returns for some many years, that was one of my thoughts. The other is that it is only the first two pages - so the front and back side of the 1040. Those two pages are mostly a summary. The details are on the schedules A, B, C, D, etc. and their supporting pages. I have no doubt that some were salivating at the thought of finding out Trump's charitable gifts ? but that is shown on schedule A, even then some may have been phased out because of his AGI. BTW, you are not required to report voluntary expenditures (charitable gifts) giving rise to an itemized deduction. Others I am sure were hoping to find some smoking gun hidden in the revenue and expenses of his various business. Too bad that detail is on schedule C.
The other thing is the pass though income from his company, which is either an S Corp or LLC. So in reality the details of income generation are with the respective informational business returns.
Is that why no one makes contact with me at the gym?
No. That's not the reason.
Maybe leave the pink leotard at home next time, Crusty.
It brings out the beady in my eyes.
If Trump himself had these leaked, ho hum. But if he didn't, and there is ANY indication that the leak was from inside the IRS, then some serious bloodshed is in order. I do not care whose return got leaked; if the IRS ever leaks a tax return on anybody, heads should roll. People should face serious prison time. The government promises that the information is confidential, it goddamned better be.
I know. The government leaks like a seive and breaks its promises at the drop of an expedient hat. It's time someone set about schooling them on that.
Maybe Obama did.
That's why you should never put sensitive documents in the microwave
I would expect the same amount of bloodshed that occurred when "sounds like a conservative" became an indicator of potential fraud.
"The government promises that the information is confidential, it goddamned better be."
Ask an employee of a contractors with a security clearance how good that promise is.
Hear that clicking noise? That's the sound of a thousand hard drives mysteriously self destructing. Happens all the time, just ask Lois Lerner.
Reason.com is happy that the lesbian got scooped
Probably happier that Drumpf scooped the system and did not fork over one cent nore.
Smart to exploit loopholes
Libertarian now?
Oooh..you spelled it Drumpf. No one has thought of that before.
Don't you find it funny? Witty? No? What do you mean, it's not funny or witty in the slightest? I bet you didn't laugh at "Bushitler", either. So drole!
the left is full of those who believe they're clever. So how come we get stuck with guys like that and Tony?
You don't really have to be "stuck" with the persistent derp of the trolls here...
I think "Drumpf" is funny - kind of like "Obamonkey" is also funny!
It's not exploiting loopholes you moron. It's using the tax code to your advantage. Only an idiot would leave money on the table you're legally entitled to keep.
This is like those horrible KKKorporations following tax law and keeping earnings in places where the IRS can't grab it.
The HORROR! They should ignore the law and their duty to the stockholders and hand over every penny they can!
Damned|3.14.17 @ 11:16PM|#
"Libertarian now?"
I'll bet your pea brain found that amusing, being stupid most always.
BTW, fuck off.
Probably happier that Drumpf scooped the system and did not fork over one cent nore.
Release your own tax returns so we can see if you fill out a 1040EZ every year.
Don't everyone rush to the defense of the insane moron who runs the biggest government in the world. Jesus Christ this place.
If by running the government you mean in pitched battle with it, then you are correct. Carry on.
Maddow managed to do a sterling job of defending him on her own. Her colleagues were calling her out, with at least one suggesting tonight's whatever it was become an SNL skit and another saying he could do his taxes in less time than she took to showing Trump's.
Even insane morons have rights.
That's simply not true. Constitutionally, he has to release his tax returns. It's right there between "four score and seven years ago" and "we hold these truths to be self evident".
Ah, the government you *helped* to become the biggest and *want* to become bigger? Because if you have your way there will never be another insane moron to take control of it?
Tony|3.14.17 @ 11:25PM|#
"Don't everyone rush to the defense of the insane moron who runs the biggest government in the world. Jesus Christ this place."
Don't worry, you slimy piece of shit, when they come to take you away we will be there defending your right to be the dumbest human in world history.
You've seen mtrueman's defense of North Korea. Tony can't be dumber than that.
Yes, he's possibly insane and possibly moronic and he's definitely in charge of the biggest government in the world and we believe that to be inherently evil. Some people on this site defend him too much as well. But unlike the partisans on either side, when we criticize, we want it on our own terms and according to our own principles. Most of the crying from the left is that the wrong guy is running the biggest government in the world, not that the office itself has too much authority over our daily lives. I'm not interested in replacing Trump with some unholy mix of identity politics and socialism. That's all this "resistance" has been advocating
You're absolutely right - that's why I just sign over the title when someone steal my car. After all, if I had just given it to them in the first place then I wouldn't have become a victim.
"...sounding like the guy at the gym you never, ever make eye contact with...."
That's Maddow.
I still remember the MSM screaming about a loss carry-forward for approximately $1 billion Trump had back in the 1990s. Guess what bitches, that's called a deferred tax asset and Trump is allowed to carry-forward the loss for twenty years until exhausted.
Now he that he's paid the AMT on $150 million income what the fuck are they going to shrill about now? His accountants follow the IRS regulations like pros and they still want to crucify him.
"Now he that he's paid the AMT on $150 million income what the fuck are they going to shrill about now?"
Uh, let's see. Lefties will scream about:
"Yachts of Trump financial backer, Russian oligarch seen together"
http://www.sfgate.com/
Didn't see the yacht story, but the sfgate is going on and on about loopholes and non sequiturs in several stories regarding the tax code. It's like they spoke with a CPA for a 1/2 hour, then completely ignored everything they had to said. I can finally understand how the Gell-Mann amnesia effect works.
loss carry-forward for approximately $1 billion
If I remember correctly the issue was the way Trump stiffed contractors and workers out of their money, screwed over his business associates and then used their losses to avoid paying his own future personal income taxes. It's a common practice in the business world to sucker in investors and then stiff them with the bill all while you make out with millions and this probably explains why Trump had to take loans from Russian and Chinese banks because he is not a credible business partner.
There is a lifetime of evidence of Trump being a complete piece of shit and even Trump himself playfully acknowledges his shadiness in interviews with say Howard Stern but somehow in the confusion of life it's all down the memory hole for most people.
It's not "down the memory hole". Trump being a shitty business person--a proposition whose truth value seems to depend entirely on what you look at and who you ask--doesn't mean he's done something illegal or that the law was being "abused". I agree entirely that the man is not some kind of saint, and probably has done some shady shit in his life. Presidents are not immune from civil suit for private acts, so those who were legally wronged can still sue him. The problem isn't "is Trump a bad person", it's "what legal principles are at play, and how do they apply beyond just Trump?"
In order to carry a loss forward, you still have to have a net loss. If he had net personal income alongside that loss, then it seems to me it should be taxed. But I have not seen any evidence that he had untaxed income.
Does mad cow have a seven figure tax lien like the rest of the dufi at MSNBC?
She released her own tax returns as a show of good faith, I'm sure.
I do think Trump leaked them because it shows him paying a decent amount of tax. What I find funny is how Trump can act outraged over leaked documents when he was the most vocal proponent of leaking documents and emails when the subject was Hillary
*vocal proponent of leaking documents *
Incorrect. He joked about the Russians releasing documents that Hilary Clinton purportedly couldn't find/had deleted maliciously.
What I find funny is that the media who ignored the Podesta hacks due to the method of acquisition, has no qualms about using an illegal document to attempt to bludgeon a foe.
Anybody else having problems with this site? All of the sudden it's running like one of those shitty click bait sites with a thousand videos going at once.
Also, I looked all over the site, but couldn't find the page where Reason employees post all of their previous tax returns. If somebody could point me to it, I'd appreciate it.
Sometimes I wonder about this place. Snowden leaks classified government info and he is hailed as a hero. But someone leaks Trump's tax returns, far less private info, and his right to privacy is declared to be inviolable. What about all of the private conversations that Snowden abruptly made public? Or Assange? Or any number of leakers within the government that exposed wrongdoing? When is leaking "okay" and when is it "not okay"? I wish the commenters here would get their story straight. Is it okay to leak confidential information that embarrasses those in power, or is it not okay?
Not sure if serious....seems like a false equivalence
The returns of a private citizen which is mnadated by gov is of no concern to me, what people pay and make has no bearing on me. If there were shenanigans the irs would have come down on him.
In the case of snowden the govt is being revealed to spy on me and everyone else which is potentially a violation of my and otjers rights
You talk about exposing wrong doing. How is releasing a tax return doing that?
far less private info
You cannot possibly be serious. Are you honestly saying:
Details of how a person spent their own money: Not very private
Details on a weapons system or intelligence program: Very private
???
*Sometimes I wonder about this place.*
Apparently, not enough.
The government works for us.
Donald Trump in 2005 didn't work for us.
This may be the most disingenuous thing I have read today.
Nice try, but still not as disingenuous.
Trump has previously called for the elimination of this tax.
Nice to see our beloved "free minds and free markets" website is treating opposition to the income tax as something ominous and suspicious.
???
I am criticizing the author of a presumed news article on the framing of a story.
What are you doing?
good that are available to add new features to Kodi, kodidownloadtv This information is sent out to Apple only and will nice.
The lack of any sort of smoking gun in the tax filings and the fact that they're apparently labeled "client copy" are already leading to theories that Trump himself had them leaked.
If they were smart, they would have leaked fake documents containing some kind of smoking gun weeks ago, just to get them to bite on them.
The news coverage of Trump?s tax returns is somehow misleading. No one pays taxes from gross income, but from the tax base. Trump claimed an income of approximately $150 million less ?100 million in losses (seems to be the proportinate share of the tax loss carry-forward of 1995). That makes a tax base of $50 million. According to Form 1040, Trump?s income tax for 2005 amounted to ?38 million (because of the Alternative Minimum Tax), i.e. more than 75% of his tax base. That?s actually quite high, isn?t it?
Therefore, the debate should focus on the tax losses carried forward. Are those justifiable? I assume that Trump?s losses reported in 1995 were real and caused by his business activities. Setting them off against future profits from his businesses is no "tax loophole", no "tax relief" and no "tax shelter", this is just the logic of computing the profit of a business and reconciling it to the reporting required by the receipts-and-disbursements method (with a progressive tariff, though that doesn?t make much of a difference in this case).
good There's an also easier means to mount Kodi Download This is why we could download and install the nice.
+1 Keith Emerson
I saw a few minutes of Maddow's show last night. She followed up a conspiracy theory level rant about Trump not releasing his tax returns with an actual conspiracy theory rant about Trump selling a Palm Beach mansion to a "Russian Oligarch".
She was extremely dishonest in her assessment of the sale. He bought the thing at a bankruptcy auction in the early stages of the Florida real estate boom and sold it just after the peak of the real estate boom, doubling his investment.
She asked "why did this Russian Oligarch pay Trump almost double the price for this house at a time when real estate prices were actually falling?"
I live in the area. 2003-2008 was a massive bubble. I bought my house in 2005 and was offered a 50% markup in 2007. Prices kept trending up for a while into the teeth of the financial meltdown before crashing during the credit crunch. It is entirely reasonable that a house bought at a discount in 2004 would sell for double in 2008.
Yeah, a relative of mine made a few hundred K flipping a new house he never even moved into. (He didn't buy it to flip, circumstances changed and they decided to move somewhere else.) Crazy bubble.
Not that this chat room is not 98% Republican partisans.
There's always Balloon Juice if you want to indulge your own Democrat partisanship.
All the headlines this morning say "TRUMP WROTE OFF $100M ON TAXES!!!!!!1".
Fuck the media.
But they also responded in a way that attempts to cast Trump the arrested drug user as some sort of victim of an "illegal" disclosure search that wouldn't have happened had he been transparent in the first place.
I take it Reason is abandoning its support for the Fourth Amendment now? Because that's straight up what you're suggesting. Presidential candidates releasing tax returns is nothing more than a custom. Reason putting scare quotes around "illegal" when discussing the government leaking private information collected under penalty of law is sickening.
Dude, you have a fever and you don't know what you're saying. The Fourth Amendment protects people from the government. Trump is the government is now. The Fourth doesn't protect the govt from the people. Trump's fair game as long as he's in that office or seeking an office of power like that. Anyone who seeks the power to rule over you and I should be turned inside!! The less privacy for those who control the Leviathan the better to protect us from tyranny!!
*should be turned inside out
Trump's tax return was from 2005 when he was a private citizen and has no bearing on the governed. It isn't legislation, regulation, mandate or an executive order.
And not only is there no law compelling its release, there is instead law compelling its protection. I've got no problem forcing politicians to disclose their tax returns and other private records as a condition of holding office, provided that the law says so upfront and is applied equally.
This is not a heinous crime, but it is still a violation of the government's own privacy laws.
What I'm saying on this matter assumes the tax returns were actually leaked, as in released without Trump's consent. If they were simply provided by Trump directly or through an intermediary, that's a different story. If he wanted this to happen, then that's his right, too.
As long as that rule is codified in law and applied equally, that's fine. Letting government bureaucrats get to pick and choose who has privacy and who doesn't, in contravention of the letter of the law, is unconstitutional, no matter how powerful the targeted individual may be.
But hilariously, before Maddow even made it on the air, the White House responded by confirming the number (ruining her scoop) and then complaining that providing the information is illegal. So the White House just deflated Trump's previous argument that he couldn't release his tax documents.
Total non sequitur. Presumably they provided this information because they knew the returns were going to be released that night, so there was no way to keep them private anymore.
The lack of any sort of smoking gun in the tax filings and the fact that they're apparently labeled "client copy" are already leading to theories that Trump himself had them leaked.
To use the police analogy, this is like the cops illegally searching your car for drugs without consent or a warrant, and then when they don't find any, arresting you for interfering with police duties because you wasted their time.
I have enormous trouble trying to care about my taxes enough to do them, I just can't imagine giving a shit about anyone else's
Just when I'm convinced Trump is nothing but an idiotic 4-year old who knows nothing, something happens that makes me buy into the "Trump's just playing 4D chess" theory again.
I don't think Trump is playing some complex, multifaceted game. He just has to outwit the idiots in the press, which is increasingly being revealed as a very low bar to clear.
From Johnston's article at DCReport.org: "Donald Trump was paid that year like a member of the 0.001%, but he paid taxes like the 99%. And by at least one measure, he paid like the bottom 50%."
No,by at least one measure he didn't. The bottom 50% or even the bottom 99% do not pay almost $1.9 million (derived from line 27 of his return) in employment taxes - that's Social Security and Medicare to you and me.
Just in case anybody forgot why the entire controversy about the tax returns is bullshit:
http://blog.erratasec.com/2016.....w-tax.html
If they don't matter, then why go to such extremes to Hide The, even after promising to release them, "If I win".
???
Cue" Trumpsters and Russian trolls react with glee, since it proves nothing about Trumps suspicious relationship with DeutcheBank , The Russian Fertilizer dude, Putinm Kilimnik and all the other grifters, spies and toadies.
as Willie implied I am stunned that anyone can make $6428 in 4 weeks on the internet . view............. ??????O Big Job Big Currency
The article misses the real issue... Namely, the AMT is a retarded tax regime.
as Willie implied I am stunned that anyone can make $6428 in 4 weeks on the internet . view............. ??????O ONLINE JOB
my gf's parents just got an almost new red Buick Regal GS only from working off a laptop. look at this site?????O OPEN Big OPPORTUNITIES JOB ?????-
as Don replied I am amazed that a student can make $7195 in one month on the computer . browse this site ?????O FREE JOB VISIT FREE
?My last month paycheck was for 11000 dollars... All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour... This is what I do. Clik This Link....?????O FREE JOB VISIT FREE
You are right - seems that I need new glasses...
Correct, after $17 million in deductions taxable income is lower than his income tax, lol.
Looks like a tax return from Sweden. And David Cay Johnson is complaining that the effective tax rate is too low...
Trump campaigned on a 60% tax cut for HIMSELF
... and everyone else who files their taxes the same way. That's millions of other people, too.
Do you own all or part of a pass-through corporation?
No. I also don't pay $35 million in taxes. Both of those facts are irrelevant. Anyone who does own such a corporation gets the same tax schedule regardless of whether the rates change or stay the same.
He already gets a huge loophole. Equal to (probably) $15 billion that year
According to what calculation?
I didn't screw anything up. Anybody can own a corporation and their income will be taxed according to the corporate income schedule. Nobody is stopping you or Bill Gates or anyone else from owning a corporation and having the corporation's income taxed the same way as Donald Trump's.
"He already gets a huge loophole. Equal to (probably) $15 billion that year"
$15 Billion? Really? $15,000,000,000.00 is a lot of money for an individual. I'd love to see some backup for that claim.
Nobody is proposing that, so why talk about it?
Last time I checked, $35 million is greater than $0.
You linked your own post. Why don't you just respond to what was said instead of calling people names?
That's the wrong place for this comment.
Read what I wrote and try again.
You want to talk about facts but you keep making stuff up and bringing up unrelated topics. Anybody can found an S-corp or LLC. This has nothing to do with pension funds. Where is the $15 billion number coming from?
Justify the $15 billion number or shut up.
You have completely misrepresented what I said, attributed positions to me that I don't hold, and now just launch into baseless accusations. You have also not bothered to substantiate anything you've said and once again return to name-calling.
You don't explain anything. You just repeat the same thing over and over again and throw in red herrings like pensions. I'm sure you've thought all this out in your head but your inability to put it in print is your own fault, not mine.
^888
It's not stalking. You post empty babble and I call you out. If you don't like it, go away.
Has anybody ever seen Hihn and the Timecube guy in the same place? I'm just sayin'.
^888
Yes, if you just keep repeating it over and over again it will become true. Nobody is stalking you. Just go away if you feel so aggrieved.
Repetition is not substantiation. Stop repeating and start proving. Show your work or GTFO.
What proof? Show me the steps. Number them. Or go away.
I am not a supporter of Trump and did not vote for him.
The Self employment tax is a statutory rate of 15.3% it is not applied to all income so the $150million is not the correct amount to use. It is applied to net earnings from self employment; not things like capital gains, interest, dividends or income from real estate.
Also, if you are an employee getting a W-2 the maximum amount of taxable earnings in 2016 that is subject to SS is $118,500. The amount in excess of that is still subject to the 2.9% medicare tax.