September 21, 2012 04:10 PM
By Matt Viser, Globe Staff
...For political reasons, (click here) Romney claimed a charitable deduction of $1.75 million less than he could have – claiming $2.25 million from contributions of $4 million. The reason, according to his accountant, was so that he could still abide by a pledge he made in August that he paid at least 13 percent in income taxes in each of the last 10 years....
...by a pledge he made in August that he paid at least 13 percent in income taxes in each of the last 10 years....
He manipulated his tax rate for 2011 to MAKE UP for taxes in the previous years less than 13 %?
Joking.
Romney is remorseful for the lack of taxes he paid to the USA government over the past ten years? He is manipulating his returns so he can qualify votes. I am getting this right?
So, his statement that he paid no less than 13% any given year of the past ten isn't that he paid 13%, it is that it was AVERAGED to 13% for low years compared to other higher years where 20.1% may have been paid.
Is this guy for real?
He is manipulating the truth to fool the electorate.
Real simple arithmetic here:
If Romney paid an average of 13% for 10 years it would be a number of 130 divided by 10. If he paid ZERO for three years that would mean he would have only paid more than that in seven years. In other words, 130 divided by 7 equals 18.57%.
Follow that?
If Romney has three years where he paid no taxes that means the only numbers adding up to 130 are seven other years. So, the three years where he paid no income tax doesn't matter to the 130 total number.
It gets more interesting though.
If Romney states he paid 20.1% as the highest rate he ever paid then there was more than three ZERO years. As a matter of fact, he probably got money back which would enter a negative number into the mix. Now, the 20 percent is in the 20 year summary, so we don't know if that 20% was in the last ten years, but, I guarantee you the income tax returns since the slide started in 2007 until the recovery in 2009 are probably ZERO paid and / or monies returned to him. This is his personal finances now.
It is my guess Romney not only has at least three years of ZERO taxes paid in the past ten years, but, negative (-) taxes with refunds as well.
Does that matter?
Wouldn't he expect it to matter? The USA Treasury is not a charity whereby one year 'the giving' is higher to make a pledge made to the electorate since August 2012. That is manipulative and dishonest. Now, I want to know what the taxes SHOULD HAVE BEEN for Romney with all his deductions including $1.75 million he left off his returns.
Why?
Because he can later go back and refile and get those monies back, that's why.
The nine percent in the article of the actual tax rate he would have incurred if he took all his charitable donation is not necessarily the actual rate. We don't know what he may have deliberately left off because he 'takes license' with his tax reporting year to year. His tax reporting is not honest. He pays the minimum of what is required of him under law, but, he could file higher rates when he choose to by leaving out deductions in a variety of ways.
He isn't honest. He skirts the system for his own aggrandizement to add 'capital' to his personal esteem and / or his political ambitions. He isn't honest in any of his dealings. He conveniently lies even about his tax returns. Wow.
Romney writes his own rules.
...Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, paid an effective rate of 20 percent in 2011 on $323,416 of adjusted gross income.
President Obama paid an effective tax rate of 20.5 percent in 2011 on adjusted gross income of $789,674. Vice President Joe Biden and his wife paid an effective rate of 23.2 percent on income of $379,035....
