PDA

View Full Version : OMG Ryan forgets $5 m asset w/$1 m income?!?!



Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 08:34 AM
I'm sure he just forgot it, as rich as he is.

He's turning into mini-Me for Romney, as Romney previously forgot a $3 million dollar asset, and somehow left it off HIS disclosures.

There's a powerful ad in this coincidental twin failure to disclose millions in assets in required filings.

From supposedly sharp businessmen, and all-over-it budget experts? They're telling us how competent they are in the numbers game as a key selling point for their expertise to handle the economy, but both of them now have been revealed to have 'forgotten' or 'overlooked' millions of dollars of assets?

Well, maybe they are as sharp as they say, and they were CORRUPT and HIDING these assets, only revealing them slightly ahead of when that was to come out. (Ryan quietly filed the corrected forms after the Romney veep vetting.)

Or maybe they are simply the bumbling clueless rich guys this must otherwise indicate.

Which do you think it is? Idiotic incompetents as to millions of dollars, or corrupt coverup artists who were hiding these large assets from disclosure?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Report: Ryan amended financial disclosure reports


By
Stephanie Condon

(Credit: Alex Wong/Getty Images)

(CBS News) Rep. Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney's new running mate, amended two years' worth of congressional financial disclosure reports in June to include an income-producing trust worth between $1 million and $5 million, USA Today reports.

The trust, which Ryan's wife Janna Ryan inherited in 2010 after her mother's death, was previously left off Ryan's financial disclosure reports. In documents filed with the Clerk of the House, Ryan said they were left off his 2010 and 2011 reports as an "inadvertent omission," according to USA Today. He reported that the trust produced at least $15,000 in income in 2010 and between $100,001 and $1 million in 2011.

Members of Congress every year are required to report their wealth and liabilities in broad ranges, so it's impossible to determine their exact net worth. USA Today notes that members of Congress often amend their financial disclosure reports as Ryan has and that there's nothing to suggest Ryan's omission wasn't inadvertent. </div></div>

Here (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57494570-503544/report-ryan-amended-financial-disclosure-reports/?tag=contentMain;contentBody)

Gayle in MD
08-17-2012, 09:00 AM
They are both crooks! They knew exactly what they were doing. If Romney wasn't sure that Americans would not approve of his corrupt behavior, he'd be flashing everythhing he's ever done in front of the American people, using it to his advantage.

His business decisions were not above board, or he would release the same number of years that all other presidents have released.

She's as bad as he is, with her own foriegn accounts and offshore corporations.

How does he expect people to believe that his blind trust isn't under his scrutiny, when it just happened to invest a million dollars in his own sons corporation?

What a colossal liar he is.

Their animal abuse, twice that we know of, and his physical attacks on two people that we know of, one of them blind, were enough for me to know he isn't a decent person, certainly not presidential material.

Ryan is the biggest misogynist on The Hill.

Disgusting.



G.

eg8r
08-17-2012, 09:02 AM
Well, I am sure you will be as accepting of this oversight as you were of Obama's tax-dodgers oversight.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 09:29 AM
I think that is tax-dodgeR, as in, one of them. Isn't that right?

That was Geithner. Geithner didn't hide income, or fail to disclose it. He failed to pay the self-employment tax due, although he paid the income tax due.

He revealed many years of his tax returns to review by the Senate for his confirmation hearings. By the time this oversight/error/wrong-doing had been found, and after adding interest and penalties for several years in the meantime, I recall what he then owed was ~$40k, likely 2x the original non-payment.

If you think fully disclosing his income, and simply not paying the additional self-employment tax rises to the level of not disclosing up to $5 million in assets, and between $100k to $1 million in INCOME, then by all means, vote against Geithner for vpotus and potus, for that matter.

Somehow, that did not trouble the GOP in the Senate sufficiently to block his appointment, although they had it within their power to do so. Even just ONE GOP senator could have blocked him, using the Senate hold power. None did.

Nice electoral campaign slogan you're implying here.

Vote for our guy. He's only engaged in several orders of magnitude of fraud greater than a CABINET secretary, and you can be well assured that the TWO years of tax returns he's willing to make public are as sufficient as the 4 or 5 years that scumbag let the Senate pour over with a dozen committee staff experts.

Trust us! Really, that up to over $8+ million in undisclosed although required by law to be disclosed assets between our candidates is the ONLY stuff they haven't disclosed. THESE TWO YEARS OF RETURNS CONCLUSIVELY PROVE THAT!!!

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 10:29 AM
From a comment on this original report:

"The trust, which Ryan's wife Janna Ryan inherited in 2010 after her mother's death, was previously left off Ryan's financial disclosure reports."

Wow - isn't that odd considering SHE'S A TAX ATTORNEY !!!! Sorry, but it doesn't pass the smell test that someone inherits "an income-producing trust worth between $1 million and $5 million" and then forgets about it. Who wants to buy a bridge?

Hmmmm. She's a TAX ATTORNEY!!!???!?!?! So how could she/they/he be expected to know how to handle the reporting on a $1 million to $5 million dollar range trust asset?

This gets better and better.

LWW
08-17-2012, 11:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that is tax-dodgeR, as in, one of them. Isn't that right?

</div></div>

Actually I think the number was thIrty six.

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 11:32 AM
Foolish to revisit your faulty claim.

They haven't dodged anything, or it wouldn't be a matter of public record.

You only have those numbers because these are admitted and pending, although not yet paid, taxes. (Therefore not dodged at all.) The way these things work, all those people are working now on payment schedule arrangements and/or agreements. Otherwise, since their source of income is known, they are looking at garnishments.

Again, however, which of them is running atop a national party's ticket for president?

I agree that none of them ought to be voted for as president, AND NONE ARE ON THE BALLOT, luckily enough.

eg8r
08-17-2012, 11:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That was Geithner. Geithner didn't hide income, or fail to disclose it. He failed to pay the self-employment tax due, although he paid the income tax due.</div></div>Instead of the giant rant, a simple yes or no would suffice. You can try to sugarcoat this all you want but he made a decision to not pay his taxes until he was forced to do so. He did not just come out and offer this information which is quite similar to Ryan.

Now you try to make it sound like Geitner made a simple mistake which leads me to believe you don't think Ryan's mistake was the same.

eg8r

eg8r
08-17-2012, 11:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Foolish to revisit your faulty claim.

They haven't dodged anything, or it wouldn't be a matter of public record. </div></div>Quite a foolish defense. It is ony public because those individuals are public and their personal finances were brought into the public eye. The taxes are dodged because they chose to not pay them.


eg8r

Qtec
08-17-2012, 12:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now you try to make it sound like Geitner made a simple mistake which leads me to believe you don't think Ryan's mistake was the same.

eg8r </div></div>

I can believe that G forgot to pay the $8,000 per year. I can't believe Ryan could forget a TRUST FUND of $5 Million.

Q

Qtec
08-17-2012, 01:11 PM
Geez, the Boy Wonder has only been the VP pick for a few days and he has already been caught lying [ just like Mitt ]at least twice and now he has amnesia about his finances! Just like Mitt. Has a trust fund, just like Mitt.

Personally, I don't believe a single word they say. Neither of them are sincere and both are only in politics for their own benefit.
Anne Romney let the cat out of the bag when she said "you people".

They couldn't give a rats a$$ about the working man.

Q

LWW
08-17-2012, 02:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now you try to make it sound like Geitner made a simple mistake which leads me to believe you don't think Ryan's mistake was the same.

eg8r </div></div>

I can believe that G forgot to pay the $8,000 per year. I can't believe Ryan could forget a TRUST FUND of $5 Million.

Q </div></div>

Of course that's what you believe, that's what you were od tht you believe.

I don't believe either one of them ... but only one was attempting to avoid paying their fair share.

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 05:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That was Geithner. Geithner didn't hide income, or fail to disclose it. He failed to pay the self-employment tax due, although he paid the income tax due.</div></div>Instead of the giant rant, a simple yes or no would suffice. You can try to sugarcoat this all you want but he made a decision to not pay his taxes until he was forced to do so. He did not just come out and offer this information which is quite similar to Ryan.

Now you try to make it sound like Geitner made a simple mistake which leads me to believe you don't think Ryan's mistake was the same.

eg8r </div></div>

Geithner PAID half the payroll tax due to the government, to the government, on time. He said he thought he was an employee of the IMF, not an independent contractor subject to the twice size payment, and that the other half, they had matched. As would be the case in a normal situation. You pay half, and the employer pays half. HE DID PAY HIS HALF. It's just that he also owed the other half, personally.

The enormity of his crime, and the huge payoff he received by shirking or ignoring or just blowing it, on that amount? Like $14k, and an additional $15k in interest was assessed. And it was not a crime, nor did it cause even a penalty imposition over the interest charges. It was indeed a minor situation, in the greater scheme of things. It was plausible he thought as he said, the money wasn't huge, and even as a banker, he is not a tax lawyer to be an expert on such matters.

Now, by comparison, we're talking about failure to disclose a seven-figure asset (up to $3 millions) and up to a seven-figure income, even though Ryan's wife is a tax lawyer?

What, she didn't know she'd gotten such a large inheritance right when it happened, or shortly thereafter, in 2010? Didn't mention it to Paul? Or she knew and he knew immediately, but just forgot to put it in the required disclosures?

Inadvertent? Not a chance in hell. (IMO)

What's more, ROMNEY said GEITHNER'S offense was disqualifying to be SecTreasury. How about Ryan's far more egregious failure to obey the law? Not disqualifying?

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 05:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Foolish to revisit your faulty claim.

They haven't dodged anything, or it wouldn't be a matter of public record. </div></div>Quite a foolish defense. It is ony public because those individuals are public and their personal finances were brought into the public eye. The taxes are dodged because they chose to not pay them.


eg8r </div></div>

There is no showing of any dodging in that stat, only that they owe tax payments they have not made entirely.

Anybody with income that is not withheld on may end up short of money to pay the tax on that income at the required time. Millions of people file an extension, show a tax payment due that they do not pay fully on time, and therefore have a continuing tax obligation. That is not a dodging scenario in the slightest. NOT PAYING it, but acknowledging the taxes due, is not dodging. It's HIDING that there IS any tax due (or income for which taxes are due) that equals dodging.

And sadly for the nuanced-challenged 'thinkers' out there, the only thing we know about the executive branch and the WH is that some people there OWE taxes, not that a single one of them hid that fact in any filings (or failures to file).

NOT THE SAME THING.

Soflasnapper
08-17-2012, 05:34 PM
I don't believe either one of them ... but only one was attempting to avoid paying their fair share.

If it's the case that Ryan and his spouse handled taxes for this income correctly, which we do not know at this time, then all he was trying to do was mislead and provide false information to Congress, under the lawful disclosure requirements.

Missing paying a smallish amount of money is worse than lying to Congress?

eg8r
08-17-2012, 07:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">HE DID PAY HIS HALF. It's just that he also owed the other half, personally.</div></div>LOL, so the future head of the Treasury cannot even figure out what his taxes should be? And Obama thought this idiot was fit to run the Treasury. Thanks for this tidbit of info. It let's us know Obama's choices are even dumber than he lead us to believe.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-17-2012, 11:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">nuanced-challenged 'thinkers' </div></div>

A very kind description!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Gayle in MD
08-17-2012, 11:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Geez, the Boy Wonder has only been the VP pick for a few days and he has already been caught lying [ just like Mitt ]at least twice and now he has amnesia about his finances! Just like Mitt. Has a trust fund, just like Mitt.

Personally, I don't believe a single word they say. Neither of them are sincere and both are only in politics for their own benefit.
Anne Romney let the cat out of the bag when she said "you people".

They couldn't give a rats a$$ about the working man.

Q
</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
They couldn't give a rats a$$ about the working man.

Q
</div></div>

And they make that perfectly clear every time they open their mouths! I just hope they keep on yapping!

Ryan hasn't even managed to provide the standard temporary blip in the polling data which traditionally follows the VP announcement. Repiglicans are sweating bullets!

And our Dems! Wow oh wow, they are finally learning how give it back as fast as the Repiglicans can throw it out!

Bravo!

G. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

LWW
08-18-2012, 04:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Foolish to revisit your faulty claim.

They haven't dodged anything, or it wouldn't be a matter of public record.

You only have those numbers because these are admitted and pending, although not yet paid, taxes. (Therefore not dodged at all.) The way these things work, all those people are working now on payment schedule arrangements and/or agreements. Otherwise, since their source of income is known, they are looking at garnishments.

Again, however, which of them is running atop a national party's ticket for president?

I agree that none of them ought to be voted for as president, AND NONE ARE ON THE BALLOT, luckily enough. </div></div>

Here's a clue ... just because you deny something happened doesn't change te fact that it did.

Most of us learned this life lesson before age five.

LWW
08-18-2012, 04:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">HE DID PAY HIS HALF. It's just that he also owed the other half, personally.</div></div>LOL, so the future head of the Treasury cannot even figure out what his taxes should be? And Obama thought this idiot was fit to run the Treasury. Thanks for this tidbit of info. It let's us know Obama's choices are even dumber than he lead us to believe.

eg8r </div></div>

What he leaves out is that he was paid the extra amount by his prior employer and signed off tat he realized he was suppsed to pay it to te IRS.

Sofa will, as always, spin any number of lies and invoke doublethink to slavishly defend the regime.

LWW
08-18-2012, 04:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Foolish to revisit your faulty claim.

They haven't dodged anything, or it wouldn't be a matter of public record. </div></div>Quite a foolish defense. It is ony public because those individuals are public and their personal finances were brought into the public eye. The taxes are dodged because they chose to not pay them.


eg8r </div></div>

There is no showing of any dodging in that stat, only that they owe tax payments they have not made entirely.

Anybody with income that is not withheld on may end up short of money to pay the tax on that income at the required time. Millions of people file an extension, show a tax payment due that they do not pay fully on time, and therefore have a continuing tax obligation. That is not a dodging scenario in the slightest. NOT PAYING it, but acknowledging the taxes due, is not dodging. It's HIDING that there IS any tax due (or income for which taxes are due) that equals dodging.

And sadly for the nuanced-challenged 'thinkers' out there, the only thing we know about the executive branch and the WH is that some people there OWE taxes, not that a single one of them hid that fact in any filings (or failures to file).

NOT THE SAME THING. </div></div>

Out of curiosity ... IYHO if someone owes a tax that they do not pay, what are they if not a tax dodger?

Soflasnapper
08-18-2012, 12:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">HE DID PAY HIS HALF. It's just that he also owed the other half, personally.</div></div>LOL, so the future head of the Treasury cannot even figure out what his taxes should be? And Obama thought this idiot was fit to run the Treasury. Thanks for this tidbit of info. It let's us know Obama's choices are even dumber than he lead us to believe.

eg8r </div></div>

Romney thought Geithner was very well qualified to be Sec Treasury. Something about being the then-current president of the NY Federal Reserve clinched his qualifications.

And surprising to you though it may be, bankers are not typically CPAs or tax attorneys, nor would you want one to do your taxes, if you have a complicated return.

Soflasnapper
08-18-2012, 12:17 PM
Here's a clue ... just because you deny something happened doesn't change te fact that it did.

Just because you claim something happened doesn't make that true.

You have no evidence at all that any of the past due taxes owed from among the personnel of the WH or executive branch were at any time undisclosed or hidden by being omitted on tax forms. That would be dodging, and potentially at least, criminal. But you actually have no evidence of that at all.

Now, it may be true in some of these cases, even though there is no evidence. It may also not be true. You think you have proven it true because you cannot imagine how it couldn't be true, I suppose. The argument from ignorance is a form of fallacy.

Soflasnapper
08-18-2012, 12:31 PM
Out of curiosity ... IYHO if someone owes a tax that they do not pay [in full when it is due], what are they if not a tax dodger?

A normal taxpayer, really. Millions of people file for their automatic extension, showing a net tax owed, without including the check for the entire amount.

That makes for penalties and interest charges, but it is not a crime, not tax evasion or dodging, and is entirely common.

It may even be an inadvertent failure to pay, as they always take pains around filing time to say that taxes are still due 4/15 (or the next business day sometimes) even if you are filing an extension. People tend to get this wrong, which is why they emphasize that message every year.

Here's one example to help you understand. Joe Ambitious working in the WH mainly spends what he takes in, and sometimes spends more than that, using credit cards. He has a nice run up in the value of a capital asset, maybe some stocks, and cashes them in for what at the end of the year will be booked as a capital gain, with taxes due. As of mid-year, he uses that money for a vacation, or a small boat, and to pay down some of his cc debt. Now, 4/15 the next year, he shows that he owes that money on his tax filings, but you know, he just doesn't have it in hand anymore. He cannot write the check for that extra money owed.

He COULD borrow on a cc to pay it, but he knows the cc APR is high, in double digits, and the current federal interest rate is about 2%. So he lets the balance owed sit with Uncle Sam at the low interest rate, and makes payments toward what he owes.

He may have it paid off as of when the 1040 is due, after the extension period, or may not. He'll be billed on-going interest, maybe penalties, until it's paid off.

This is the OPPOSITE of dodging taxes. It is COMPLYING with taxes, just on a payment plan.

But guess what? This guy's overdue balance, although fully disclosed on his tax form, known to the US government, and on which he's making good faith payments, GETS ADDED INTO THAT LIST YOU CITE, and YOU leap to the conclusion that he was a tax dodger.

LWW
08-18-2012, 09:39 PM
Yet you are apopectic over Ryan.

Again ... you aresimply incapable of using a single standard.

Soflasnapper
08-19-2012, 10:29 AM
You really haven't seen me apoplectic about anything yet, believe me.

I'm actually quite relaxed in reaction to civil tax problems of underpayment or necessary amendings of past tax filings that do not rise to the level of a crime. I was a little surprised that Kimba Woods and Zoe Baird had to withdraw as AG nominees over domestic help tax non-payments (again a civil matter). Although as the chief law enforcement officer as AG, there was a point I recognized in those cases.

I judge them all equally, which is not much of a judgment at all, and rather, the same slack for them on this that I'd wish for myself. If/when it comes out, then fixing the problem is necessary, and then that's that. Paying the back owed, plus interest and penalty, clears these civil matters.

That's true even when the violation really was a felony, but amnesty is provided, as with (probably) Mitt's Swiss bank account. Which turns it then into again a civil matter with fines and penalties due with the unpaid taxes.

It is YOU who have the double standard, as I see it. **I** do not say that Ryan or Romney are disqualified for their tax shenanigans. I say that YOU should say that, based on your prior positions, which you now run from.

LWW
08-19-2012, 10:35 AM
Yet you yammer incessantly about Romney Hood and Ryan being tax cheats ... sans evidence, of course ... while howling at the Moon over anyone dring to suggest that 36 tax dodgerswork for the regime, based on the flimsy evidence that 36 tax cheats actually work for the regime.

Tell me more?

Soflasnapper
08-19-2012, 01:14 PM
As to Romney, I don't think I've characterized him in that way at all.

I will say I'm leaning toward his having committed a felony by hiding his Swiss bank account, but as he likely took the same amnesty program get-out-of-felony charges for that which I accomplished for my ward, that's been turned into a civil penalty matter. (I'm guessing revealing that would doom his candidacy further, but that's just me. That's not the reason I oppose his bid.)

As for his less felonious tax problems, he did claim Utah residency and receive preferred tax treatment on his Utah house real estate tax situation, while avoiding the Massachusetts taxes due, until his lies about that situation were uncovered under political pressure. At that point he had to re-file (for the 'mistake' of his CPA, of course, he alibied), and then pay back Utah (as he wasn't 'really' a resident) for that tax break, and then pay MASSACHUSETTS what he'd evaded paying them.

So he certainly did have, uh... certain tax-related problems... that he lied on the record about... with his filings (not his fault, he is quick to point out, weasel-like), and likely more to follow.

Now, Mr. Ryan, under the microscope, had to refile an amendment to his 2011 taxes, to show that pesky $60k+ in income he hadn't revealed. That was just revealed.

Did he then have to pay additional taxes on that amount? I'm guessing that must be the case, although I'll entertain whatever tap dancing you wish to offer on that subject.

As non-judgmental as I tend to be as to penalizing such all-American evasion, I am interested in pointing all this out to people who are not non-judgmental, as an informational service related to an attempt to influence their vote.

Qtec
08-19-2012, 05:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yet you are apopectic over Ryan.

Again ...<span style='font-size: 17pt'> you aresimply incapable of using a single standard. </span></div></div>

No, that would be YOU!

Q

Qtec
08-19-2012, 05:33 PM
Neither of them have ever had a real job.
Has Mitt ever got his hands dirty? The guy admitted he doesn't even mow his own lawn.

They both profess to want to help people they know nothing about. The idea of being one pay check away from disaster is a totally foreign concept for the Trust Fund Twins.

Anne Romney said it all. They don't mix with the plebs.

Q