General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs Mitt Romney Trying to Avoid Having to Admit to Massive Tax Fraud?
Dave Lindorff connects a few dots that Corporate McPravda seem to avoid like a Porsche 911 zipping around potholes.
Is Mitt Romney Trying to Avoid Having to Admit to Massive Tax Fraud?
by Dave Lindorff
Created 08/20/2012 - 22:58
ThisCantBeHappening.net
A lot of theories have been put forward to try and explain why Romney has allowed his campaign to become bedeviled by charges of tax dodging, but what if what he is hiding is felonious tax fraud?
Okay, so he's taken the legal option of delaying filing his 2011 taxes, which every taxpayer is entitled to do without penalty and without having to give any explanation until October 15 this year (I agree it's a little weird when a super-rich guy who pays accountants by the dozen does this, but hey). The nagging question though is why he hasn't just responded to the demand that he release two years of tax returns like John McCain did in 2008 by simply releasing his 2009 tax filing, along with the 2010 return he already released?
The answer may well be that 2009 was the year that the Treasury Department decided to offer an amnesty from prosecution for tax fraud to any of the tens of thousands of millionaires who were known or suspected to have illegally hidden income abroad in the Cayman Islands or in Swiss banks -- a felony, but one that people thought they'd never be caught at.
That year alone, some nearly 30,000 people, many of them no doubt prominent in society, politics and business, and customers of the finest accounting firms, reportedly voluntarily came forward to the IRS to admit that they had hidden some of the estimated $100 billion in income that crooked rich Americans have for years been secreting away in banks overseas. Under the terms of the program, they were able to just report their fraud, pay the taxes, penalties and interest on the money and then walk away scott free, with no charges and with their returns kept confidential by the agency.
CONTINUED...
Source URL: http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/1291
UBS is where Deregulator Sen. Phil Gramm serves as Vice Chairman. Makes sense and saves Mitt a whole lot o' cents 'n' dollars, too.
BTW: Bradley Birkenfeld, he whistleblower who exposed the offshoring of loot the American ultrarich have copped is currently serving time for "failing to disclose his own role in helping them avoid taxes." Right.
LeftofObama
(4,243 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)The most recent development in the Birkenfeld saga is his revelation that some politicians kept off-shore accounts with UBS. According to Birkenfeld, UBS had an office in Washington D.C. referred to internally as the PEP office for "Politically Exposed People." One wonders: where is the outrage over this? Birkenfeld's revelations have been largely overshadowed by the Goldman Sachs debacle, but we definitely haven't heard the last from this high-octane UBS whistleblower.
SOURCE: http://quitamteam.com/blog/birkenfeld-time-ubs-clients/
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)The presstitutes are owned and operated by War Inc, the same ones who own and operate Bush and the rest of the Buy-Partisan Warmonger Party.
PS: Me, too, cbdo2007. I hope we return to the day where the People can ask their elected representatives what is going on with all the looting and warring and plain ol' criminality.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)That would really catch him off guard!!
sibelian
(7,804 posts)I really can't think of any other reason he's playing this out.
The weird thing is his entering the race with such a big blind spot.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)"Well, you can see that the DOj has once again screwed up this international banking scandal. The 'Amnesty Program' was a blatant indication to cover for the politically connected and wealthy individuals. Now, the DPA and John Doe summons was a joke - 4,450 names out of 52,000 (less than 10%) and now it seems that they will not even get those. The fine of $780 mm was also a joke given UBS made $200 million a year for the 8 year period in question (2000-2007). I guess the US taxpayer gets screwed again (by a foreign bank) when it is in fact the banks that got us in this mess and people are losing their homes and paying outrageous credit card debit interest. Maybe we should look at all the political contributions from UBS to US politicians - I know this is huge. Just look at the recent Supreme Court ruling to continue this pattern of conduct." -- UBS whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld, from somewhere in the Federal Penitentiary System
SOURCE: http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-01-27/law_review/30033648_1_bradley-birkenfeld-ubs-banker-international-banking
Panasonic
(2,921 posts)He's in Philadelphia CCM - basically a halfway house...
He is scheduled to be released on November 29th.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Bradley Birkenfeld got the Siegelman Treatment.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)The guy's got a lot of explaining to do. For instance, I'd like to know how one gets a $100 million IRA.
Individual Retirement Accounts were designed as a tax-free way for middle-class Americans to plan for their retirement. The annual contribution limit is $6,000, but somehow Mitt Romney managed to to build his IRA into a $100+ million treasure chest. Without specifically naming Romney, House Democrats are saying they want a review of the loopholes that someone like Mitt Romney would need to exploit in order to generate such a massive amount of tax-free wealth in an IRA:
...
Even if Romney broke no laws, the stated purpose of IRAs certainly is not to allow people like him to build $100+ million fortunes without paying any taxes...
SOURCE: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/08/1117931/-Could-that-100-Million-IRA-by-the-Answer-to-Mitt-s-Mystical-Magical-Taxes
It must be nice. I don't even have $10 in my wallet...been that way for a while now.
CanonRay
(14,104 posts)He got amnesty in '09 for failing to report the Swiss account.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)By Matthew Yglesias
Updated Tuesday, July 17, 2012, at 3:12 PM ET
When attempting to engage in baseless speculation over what it is that's in Mitt Romney's tax statements that's so embarassing he'd rather take the heat for non-disclosure, I think it's important to remember that he was actively running for president in 2007 and 2008. That means it's relatively unlike he was doing anything during those years that he thought couldn't withstand scrutiny. So why not release a nice even five years of tax data? Perhaps because of something that happened in 2009.
Something like this
Wealthy U.S. taxpayers, concerned about an Internal Revenue Service crackdown on the use of secret overseas bank accounts as tax havens, are rushing to meet a Thursday deadline to disclose those accounts or face possible criminal prosecution. The concern was triggered this summer when Switzerland's largest bank, caught up in an international tax evasion dispute, said it would disclose the names of more than 4,000 of its U.S. account holders.
The decision shattered a long-held belief that Swiss banks would guard the identities of its American customers as carefully as they did their money, and it raised concern that other international tax havens might be next. Under an amnesty program, the IRS is allowing taxpayers to avoid prosecution for having failed to report their overseas accounts. As a result, tax attorneys across the nation have been besieged by wealthy clients who are lining up to apply even though they will still face big financial penalties.
Romney might well have thought in 2007 and 2008 that there was nothing to fear about a non-disclosed offshore account he'd set up years earlier precisely because it wasn't disclosed. But then came the settlement and the rush of non-disclosers to apply for the amnesty. Failing to apply for the amnesty and then getting charged by the IRS would have been both financially and politically disastrous. So amnesty it was. But even though the amnesty would eliminate any legal or financial liability for past acts, it would hardly eliminate political liability.
SOURCE...
http://mobile.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/07/17/romney_s_tax_returns_is_the_2009_swiss_bank_account_amnesty_what_he_doesn_t_want_us_to_see_.html
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Rmoney is not going to be elected. But how much of a difference would it make for Rmoney to admit to tax fraud, massive or otherwise? Who can say that it is not the policy of this Administration that IOKIYAR?
_Liann_
(377 posts)A guy who would cheat his motherland of his fair share of support would cheat his church of her standard share too... after all, sociopathy is 100% though and through.
malaise
(269,063 posts)uponit7771
(90,347 posts)Viva_Daddy
(785 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(49,011 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)clear that he has something to hide. If he doesn't, then it would be smart of him to allow his tax returns to be made public to end the speculation once and for all.
librechik
(30,674 posts)So whip em out, Mitt--we'll understand!
warrior1
(12,325 posts)spanone
(135,846 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)and repatriation of tens of millions of dollars from overseas under the amnesty program.
There is not one thing about Willard that is not fraudulent.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)obvious
aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)Even if he's sent back to hell after losing the election it will forever trouble me that we won't know what a major candidate for the Presidency is hiding.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)Rumor has it he claims he voted in Massachusetts when he was not legally able to do so.
starroute
(12,977 posts)It seems increasingly likely that the Mittster used every tax dodge he could, every tax shelter that was available, and every opportunity to stow his money where Uncle Sam could never get it. And when some of those dodges seemed about to backfire on him, he lied and cheated some more to cover over the damage.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)That's a big part of it.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)investment through another foreign fund since his 2008 campaign. Probably isn't paying nearly as much as a regular taxpayer would on those Cayman funds either since he didn't file a 990.
bobthedrummer
(26,083 posts)own Bradley Foundation
Bradley Foundation entry ( The Center for Media and Democracy/Source Watch)
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Bradley_Foundation
-the banksters
Bankster USA
http://www.banksterusa.org
That's some of what has Rmoney and Ryan's "back". They are the no tax on US "job creators" too big to fail...
The 1%
K&R
jayjayusa
(28 posts)He's hiding the fact that he didn't give a dime to his cult in the last couple of years.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)The only reason not to show the tax returns is that there's something to hide from the law and, when running for pretzeldent, the public.
PS: A hearty welcome to DU, jayjayusa!
hughee99
(16,113 posts)I can't imagine that he paid no taxes, then, since his taxes, penalties and interest would have been substantial.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)so we'll let it slide *sarcasm*
hughee99
(16,113 posts)is the "Rmoney paid no taxes" theory, and it would seem only one could be true.
cbdo2007
(9,213 posts)and then we'll see the other horrible stuff.
I'm sure Reid has some trick up his sleeve....but what it is at this point is anyone's guess.
Lone_Star_Dem
(28,158 posts)I think it's highly possible this will turn out to be the case.