Trump’s Taxes

Why No Criticism of GM, Chrysler, and the UAW? They Got a Much Sweeter Tax Loss Deal from the Democrats.

nyt-logoA Saturday story in the New York Times alleges that Republican Presidential nominee Donald J. Trump may have avoided paying income taxes for 18 years due to a $ 915 million net operating loss declared on his 1995 federal tax return.  A net operating loss is a form of tax loss carry forward which can be used by a taxpayer to offset future (and sometimes past) income taxes due the federal government.  The authors claim that someone anonymously mailed them pages from Trump’s 1995 return.  A felony violation of federal law which the New York Times only participates in when its enemies are the victims.  Given recent history, it is far more likely that some snake in Obama’s IRS mailed the pages to the New York Times.  One more reason to impeach IRS Commissioner John Koskinen.

None of this is news.  Trump admitted to the size of his 1990’s loss in his book Art of the Comeback.  More interestingly, he explains how the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA 1986) crushed the real estate market in New York and created his massive loss.  Note that he mistakenly attributes his predicament to TEFRA, a 1982 act which also caused him some problems, but it was actually TRA 1986 which he is referring to.

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at the Family Leadership Summit in AmesTax loss carry forwards date back to at least 1954 in the U.S. tax code. The logic behind them is simple: if the government benefits from an entity’s income, it should share that same entity’s misfortune when it runs losses. Both moral and ethical, two concepts not usually associated with the U.S. tax code. The salacious case being made against Trump has no merit, except as propaganda. Remember, Trump had to lose $ 915 million on long term assets to get the tax loss carry forward.  More importantly, Trump’s massive loss was created by a sea change in the rules of the game dictated by the same federal government.

chrysler-logoTrump is actually a piker when it comes to tax loss carry forwards. The new General Motors is enjoying an unlimited $ 45 billion tax loss carry forward from its pre bankruptcy antecedent which was granted to it by a Democratic Congress and President in 2009. Chrysler got the same tax treatment.  This was never allowed in the tax code before ARRA. General Motors, Chrysler, and their UAW workers got very special treatment from the Democrats, but no one in our lying media will remind you of this inconvenient fact.

No, Halloween is not on November 8th!

No, Halloween is not on November 8th!

Hillary Clinton and her husband used the traditional tax loss carry forward provision in the U.S. tax code to reduce her 2015 income tax by $ 700,000.  Her mouthpiece, the New York Times, used the same tax loss carry forward provision to completely wipe out their 2014 taxes.  Hypocrisy at its finest, a hallmark of modern Democratic Party propaganda.

By comparison, Trump’s usage of a tax loss carry forward has been long enshrined in the tax code. He did not declare bankruptcy.  His tax loss carry forward is just the federal government recognizing the losses TRA 1986 inflicted and regurgitating taxes previously collected.  On the other hand, the lying media ignoring GM’s and Chrysler’s special treatment – claiming unlimited tax losses of legally separate entities – makes it clear that this whole tax issue is devious Democratic propaganda aimed at jealous ignorati.  The modern Democratic base by another name.

uaw-logoAbsolutely no one who works at GM or Chrysler, a GM or Chrysler supplier, or who draws a pension from them, or purchases a GM or Chrysler product, can morally fault Trump for his tax loss carry forward. They got much sweeter tax treatment than Trump did.

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(0)

  7 comments for “Trump’s Taxes

  1. JD
    October 4, 2016 at 10:00 pm

    Correction:
    Democrats would have never received ANY opportunity to bail out either the UAW *OR* GM/Chrysler had the lame duck Bush administration/Republicans (similar to our MiGOP corruptly manipulating pension obligation bond legislation in yet another lame duck election cycle and even WORSE years later concerning non-codified health benefits) NOT allowed TARP funding to corruptly limp them all several months in to Obama's waiting arms.

    it's as if we have to continually keep reminding our kids as to how we (truly) got in to this mess or who is STILL nastily knocking them out of the way on their own selfish paths to the lifeboats.

    Our kids are going to read this stuff someday and say:
    "You know what?...there wasn't a Republican or Tea Partier on the face of this earth who would debate ANY pension bailout in 2008/12 or 16...as a good share of them were manipulating their OWN way out the back door...at the same time!"

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  2. JD
    October 5, 2016 at 3:04 am

    President Bush announces $13.4 billion in emergency loans to prevent the collapse of General Motors and Chrysler,. Another $4 billion would be available for the automakers in February.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N5kRVfmMoE

    Since 2008, Is it any wonder that Republicans (let alone grassroots conservatives/Democrats) suddenly lose all desire to debate corrupt pension bailouts both before and after critical elections..not to mention well in to each political cycle's (even worse) lame duck?

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  3. Sue Schwartz
    October 5, 2016 at 4:58 am

    Glad to hear from you 10x25--It has totally upset our way of life--the Robinhood factor of government. Trump is being punished for NOT filing bankruptcy--while GM, Detroit, et al are being rewarded for doing so. At stake, of course, is gadzillions in future pension payments with the latter, as well as government ownership of corp. assets. And. let us not forget that while GM-USA was stealing from us GM-China was thriving. Cannot the idiot-sheeple among us--oops Democrats--see that the entire motive behind this exercise was to justify these manufacturing jobs leaving our country, destroying unions, and the workers which make up these unions? Trump clearly understands this. There is Fear among the idiots . . .

    You Betcha! (5)Nuh Uh.(0)
  4. JD
    October 5, 2016 at 8:54 am

    (Sue):
    "..And. let us not forget that while GM-USA was stealing from us GM-China was thriving. Cannot the idiot-sheeple among us--oops Democrats--see that the entire motive behind this exercise was to justify these manufacturing jobs leaving our country, destroying unions, and the workers which make up these unions?.."

    Remember, the (again) 'older' GM pensioners were gifted over 10% of the company by Bush, Obama, donkeys AND elephants. That company, by hook or crook, was (now) THEIR global mob-like nest egg...no differently than the corrupt creation of municipal (and soon state) pension/HEALTH obligation bonds are right now via "no vote of the people required".
    "Destroying the union" or "worrying about manufacturing jobs leaving" **didn't even cross their mind**. Propping up the company until every union worker but the younger generation got out by any legal means possible (GUARANTEED benefits) was.

    The above is no different than the privately/publicly funded municipal pension obligation bonds being presently hoisted on our kid's backs and everybody reading this knows it.

    Not ONE of these gray-hairs past/presently/gleefully smashing our children's piggybanks/skipping town cares absolutely ANYTHING about what type of country is left behind or even how long it lasts beyond their time on a beach, in diapers (again) or finally in a box.

    And how do we know this to be true?

    Because every single time that generational thieving pensions are brought up or the historic facts surrounding them (as presented) are challenged?

    Our kids receive the deafening SILENCE of TRUTH..which this site has proven (sadly) time and again.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  5. JD
    October 5, 2016 at 9:06 am

    ...by the way...
    "..Destroying the union" or "worrying about manufacturing jobs leaving" **didn't even cross their mind**.

    ...was just as much the mindset of BOTH political parties at that time (and still today)...not to mention pensioners across this entire country 'hoping' to emulate the exact same scheme using pension/health obligation bonds privately funded or not.

    'Privately' funded (or artificially 'rating' inflated) POBs were and ARE the goal (now) given that local control of government will 'finally' be (completely) wrestled from succeeding generation's hands.

    And the 'silence' ensued...(while our kids sharpen their pitchforks, boil the tar and light the torches 'hopefully').

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  6. JD
    October 5, 2016 at 9:41 am

    A law touting:
    "No vote of the people required" (Michigan pension obligation bonds; later turned in to 'health' obligation bonds as well) 'supposedly' was a call to arms (anywhere) for the original grassroot Tea Partiers.

    When the (comic) decision was made to 'change' their local Republican parties by "being nice" when they arrived at their local country club doors..the predictable happened:

    Each was sat down and asked 'who' exactly in their extended families depended on a pension of any kind.
    They were then asked how their 'cause' or losing further control of their child's local/state governments through fast upcoming privately funded means 'related' to Question #1.

    'That' is the TRUE history of the Tea Party movement in this country and why "changing the party" was never anything but a generational crushing INTENTIONAL (extremely selfish) diversion using both our children and their treasure as political pawns.

    If it didn't 'go down' in that exact manner?

    I'd love to hear about it with not one Tea Partier willing to talk pension "obligation" (period) today.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
  7. Corinthian Scales
    October 6, 2016 at 12:00 pm

    Meet the now largest shareholder, Lebanese Mexican owner of the NY Times:

    Always follow the money:

    The new NY Times motto: "All the News That Fits our Views"

    You Betcha! (2)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.