Originally Posted by janmcn

When will Gov Romney release his tax returns? I read an editorial in today's paper that said President Obama released seven years of returns in 2008 and has released his every year since then. I want to see Romney's returns before I cast my vote on Jan. 31.

Can someone explain to me the impact of tax returns that show a candidate NOT violating the law and doing something that is standard fare for anyone with money.

Actually the BIGGEST SINGLE PROPONENT of this tax "loophole" is former Speaker of the House Pelosi.

Nothing illegal....all standard...why is there this fuss. Did you think that Romney was a pauper ?

I would like to know more about Romney having investments of more than $33 million dollars parked in the Cayman Islands. Doesn't sound too honest to me?

Originally Posted by buggyone

I would like to know more about Romney having investments of more than $33 million dollars parked in the Cayman Islands. Doesn't sound too honest to me?

So long as the money got to the Cayman Islands legally, as the result of money earned in foreign countries and not repatriated back into the U.S. as an example, depositing the money in a tax-free account in the Cayman Islands is a pretty smart move. Remember, under the current U.S. tax laws, if Romney were to bring the money back into the U.S. it would be taxed at whatever the appropriate rate might be, probably ordinary income.

That's why American corporations doing business offshore try to avoid bringing money back into the U.S.--to avoid having to pay taxes on it. Typically, they keep foreign earnings outside the country, available for further investments outside the U.S.

The bigger question might be, what would an American citizen do with a large sum of money held in the Cayman Islands? A logical answer might be to make investments outside the U.S. In other words, if the money was earned outside the U.S. why would one bring it back into the U.S., pay a hefty tax on it, only to re-invest it outside the U.S.?

I'm afraid none of the real motivations behind Mitt Romney's wealth held outside the U.S. will be explained by his tax returns. And my guess is that he probably won't explain what his plans are for the use of the money. Even if he had a well-developed investment plan, why should he tell the public? I know I wouldn't.

Originally Posted by Bucco

Can someone explain to me the impact of tax returns that show a candidate NOT violating the law and doing something that is standard fare for anyone with money....Nothing illegal....all standard...why is there this fuss. Did you think that Romney was a pauper ?

And by the way, I agree with Bucco. No one has alleged anything illegal about how much money Romney earned, how much he was taxed on the earnings, or even where the money is located. As his record in business clearly shows, he has been an effective business manager for years. It would be skills such as resulted in him creating a personal fortune, effectively turning around the Salt Lake Olympics, and governing the state of Massachusetts, that are exactly the skills needed for a new POTUS to effectively address the fiscal problems facing this country.

I might add...could a thorough examination of Newt Gingrich's ample fortune survive similar scrutiny?

Does anyone really think that if there were "anything illegal about how much money Romney earned, how much he was taxed on the earnings, or even where the money is located"......the IRS would not have been alerted in all the vetting done on Romney when running for governor, for president in 08, and for president now???

Do you really think the IRS would ignore the opportunity to get their hooks into such a public figure under a microscope with the amount of money he has??

When it comes to Republicans it's the appearance of impropriety that's the big issue with the liberal media. The real facts about the issue are secondary.

Democrats rarely have to rise to that standard with the liberal media.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

...Democrats rarely have to rise to that standard with the liberal media.

I don't know, Richie. The media did a pretty good number on Bill Clinton.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I don't know, Richie. The media did a pretty good number on Bill Clinton.

You edited the most important sentence of my post. Clinton's problem was a bit more than the "appearance of impropriety", was it not?

So What Have We Concluded Here?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We've been all over the waterfront with our responses. Some are still proposing that one of the other candidates, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul or Perry, could wind up being the GOP nominee. If everyone takes a calm look at things, I think we can agree that's unlikely.

You know it will probably get down to the "Florida Hanging Chad"

one thing I conclude is there are a lot of naieve people who have no concept of what is legally available to Americans with sufficient resources to advise how to keep, protect and grow their wealth.

We may not like what they do. But most of them do what is legal. Far too many articles talk about the "tax rate" these people pay. Which is not a fair presentation because the comparison usually winds up being a comparison of the tax rate on wages earned VS income earned (by various means)....which are two very completely different means of "EARNING".

The folks that know the difference are trying to stir the majority that do not into believing what is done is "bad" to take their attention away from the merits of their potential candidacy!!

Just another example of how the media and the current adminstration's supporters can and do jerk we the people around with mis-information.

[and of course we all know there are some wealthy folks who no doubt abuse the process].

btk

I recall it was the various Republican candidates who were asking Mitt to release his tax records and to explain why $33 million of his money was parked in the Caymans. It was not the Obama administration that brought up those points.

The Republicans are feeding upon themselves while Democrats sit back and just wait until all the chum has taken care of itself.

Originally Posted by jebartle

So What Have We Concluded Here?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We've been all over the waterfront with our responses. Some are still proposing that one of the other candidates, Santorum, Gingrich, Paul or Perry, could wind up being the GOP nominee. If everyone takes a calm look at things, I think we can agree that's unlikely.

You know it will probably get down to the "Florida Hanging Chad"

Maybe, but there is a large contingent of Conservative Republican voters that want a conservative candidate and are not sold on Romney. It's far from over.

Originally Posted by buggyone

I recall it was the various Republican candidates who were asking Mitt to release his tax records and to explain why $33 million of his money was parked in the Caymans. It was not the Obama administration that brought up those points.

The Republicans are feeding upon themselves while Democrats sit back and just wait until all the chum has taken care of itself.

I believe Obama has enough problems of his own. He doesn't need any help in damaging his position.

Richie, your fingers slipped when they were on the keyboard. I am positive you meant to type, "I believe Gingrich has enough problems of his own. He doesn't need any help in damaging his position." Newt really is a slimeball when you come right down to it.

Just look at your boy, Rick Perry. He has dropped out now - just like Herman, Michelle the Mouth, and Huntsman.

My prediction is that Newton will be the next to drop out with Ron Paul close behind him. Ron will form the 3rd party, siphon off votes, and thus will be hated by Republicans - as they will blame him for their 2012 loss.

Originally Posted by buggyone

Richie, your fingers slipped when they were on the keyboard. I am positive you meant to type, "I believe Gingrich has enough problems of his own. He doesn't need any help in damaging his position." Newt really is a slimeball when you come right down to it.

Just look at your boy, Rick Perry. He has dropped out now - just like Herman, Michelle the Mouth, and Huntsman.

My prediction is that Newton will be the next to drop out with Ron Paul close behind him. Ron will form the 3rd party, siphon off votes, and thus will be hated by Republicans - as they will blame him for their 2012 loss.

Ha ha; no slip. You liberals love allegations and damn any real evidence of facts. You make my point every time and you're a good friend to keep doing that.

"You liberals love allegations."

Well, Richie, we also love alligators.