Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

silvershadow

(10,336 posts)
Sat Apr 16, 2016, 02:26 AM Apr 2016

Clintons omit shell company from public financial files (edited)

The newly released financial files on Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton’s growing fortune omit a company with no apparent employees or assets that the former president has legally used to provide consulting and other services, but which demonstrates the complexity of the family’s finances.

Because the company, WJC, LLC, has no financial assets, Hillary Clinton’s campaign was not obligated to report its existence in her recent financial disclosure report, officials with Bill Clinton’s private office and the Clinton campaign said. They were responding to questions by The Associated Press, which reviewed corporate documents.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to provide private details of the former president’s finances on the record, said the entity was a “pass-through” company designed to channel payments to the former president.

Under federal ethics disclosure rules, declared candidates do not have to report assets worth less than $1,000. But the company’s existence demonstrates the complexity of tracking the Clintons’ finances as Hillary Clinton ramps up her presidential bid.

more: http://nypost.com/2015/05/26/clintons-omit-shell-company-from-public-financial-files/

on edit: To add my personal thoughts: I don't care what kind of excuse these lawyers and financial types try to give, it is all spin to me. Once I hear of "pass-through" company, it equates to "money laundering" in my mind (and probably in reality as well, though whether or not the legalese is in order I wouldn't know)

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Clintons omit shell company from public financial files (edited) (Original Post) silvershadow Apr 2016 OP
Showing the "complexity" of the finances...Hmmmmm flor de jasmim Apr 2016 #1
This message was self-deleted by its author silvershadow Apr 2016 #2
It's not a complete tax disclosure until their shell company filings are made public. pa28 Apr 2016 #3
You are correct. I learned that here on DU. nt silvershadow Apr 2016 #4

Response to flor de jasmim (Reply #1)

pa28

(6,145 posts)
3. It's not a complete tax disclosure until their shell company filings are made public.
Sat Apr 16, 2016, 02:35 AM
Apr 2016

That's what she demanded from Bernie so now she ought to turn her own records over.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Clintons omit shell compa...