This is so horrible that the New York Times used it to not pay taxes in 2014 even getting a tax refund (3.6 million dollars) in a year they generated nearly 30 million dollars in taxable profits... 

---

This is so horrible that the New York Times used it to not pay taxes in 2014 even getting a tax refund (3.6 million dollars) in a year they generated nearly 30 million dollars in taxable profits...

But...but....Trump!!! rabble rabble rabble!!!

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

This is so horrible that the New York Times used it to not pay taxes in 2014 even getting a tax refund (3.6 million dollars) in a year they generated nearly 30 million dollars in taxable profits... 

 

This is why I don't understand the attack vector. This behavior is normal among big business and perfectly legal. Why does everyone care about this when Trump does it when its a norm of the industry?

 

Honestly, if Trump's taxes finally gets momentum for tax code reform, that is great! Thanks Trump, for making everyone aware of how screwed up the tax code is. Now, lets start reforming! Oh, wait, no that wont happen because Hillary will get elected and all those big businesses that financed her don't WANT tax code reform.

---

This is why I don't understand the attack vector. This behavior is normal among big business and perfectly legal. Why does everyone care about this when Trump does it when its a norm of the industry?

 

Honestly, if Trump's taxes finally gets momentum for tax code reform, that is great! Thanks Trump, for making everyone aware of how screwed up the tax code is. Now, lets start reforming! Oh, wait, no that wont happen because Hillary will get elected and all those big businesses that financed her don't WANT tax code reform.

 

good point. a vote for Hillary isnt going to change anything.  maybe Bernie would have, he gone though

---

People aren't railing against the tax code for a simple reason: Most people don't know much about the tax code.  They don't now what part allows this.  The fact that this is legal is ridiculous--but what exactly makes it legal?  Most people don't know.  I freely admit that I don't.


But here's the thing: If it's Trumps fiduciary responsibility to pay as few taxes as he can... as President he's going to continue policies that help make him more money.  That's who he's going to look out for.  Not the middle class.  Oh, he'll scream about how he's bringing manufacturing jobs back (Spoilers: They're not coming back), but in the end he's going to look out for himself.  It's what he's done his whole life.  And... there's not necessarily anything wrong with that--but he's running for President.  Given everything else on top of it, I don't find him fitting to be President.  Maybe you don't find any problems with this.  If you can't see why I do though, then that's your problem.

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

People aren't railing against the tax code for a simple reason: Most people don't know much about the tax code.  They don't now what part allows this.  The fact that this is legal is ridiculous--but what exactly makes it legal?  Most people don't know.  I freely admit that I don't.


But here's the thing: If it's Trumps fiduciary responsibility to pay as few taxes as he can... as President he's going to continue policies that help make him more money.  That's who he's going to look out for.  Not the middle class.  Oh, he'll scream about how he's bringing manufacturing jobs back (Spoilers: They're not coming back), but in the end he's going to look out for himself.  It's what he's done his whole life.  And... there's not necessarily anything wrong with that--but he's running for President.  Given everything else on top of it, I don't find him fitting to be President.  Maybe you don't find any problems with this.  If you can't see why I do though, then that's your problem.

 

Take the personality out of the policy for a minute.

 

Whose economic plan is more likely to grow local business and the economy: Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?

 

I am of the belief that lower corporate taxes, lower middle-class income tax, less energy regulation, and re-balanced trade are a recipe for success for local American business. Regardless of what I think of Trump personally, that is a winning policy in my mind.

 

Will those policies help Trump's business? Maybe, but why is that a negative? If his business is doing well with his plan, then middle-American business will also be thriving. His policy is centered around the growth of the American economy. If he ONLY cared about his business, or the wall-street internationals, he would be taking Hillary's approach by supporting TPP, NAFTA, and raising the corporate tax that all the American internationals already avoid. The whole point of Hillary's corporate tax raise and TPP support is to stifle local American business so they can't compete with the big dogs who can use every tax loophole in the playbook. It is why all the wall-street internationals are financing her campaign.

---

People aren't railing against the tax code for a simple reason: Most people don't know much about the tax code.  They don't now what part allows this.  The fact that this is legal is ridiculous--but what exactly makes it legal?  Most people don't know.  I freely admit that I don't.


But here's the thing: If it's Trumps fiduciary responsibility to pay as few taxes as he can... as President he's going to continue policies that help make him more money.  That's who he's going to look out for.  Not the middle class.  Oh, he'll scream about how he's bringing manufacturing jobs back (Spoilers: They're not coming back), but in the end he's going to look out for himself.  It's what he's done his whole life.  And... there's not necessarily anything wrong with that--but he's running for President.  Given everything else on top of it, I don't find him fitting to be President.  Maybe you don't find any problems with this.  If you can't see why I do though, then that's your problem.

 

Basically, whatever allowed the deduction is an "encouragement" by the government to spend in some area.  This is how the tax code has worked for forever.  What he spent all that money on is still unknown to anybody not Trump and his accountants.

 

These expenditures are available to ALL people, it's just that people in the middle class and below dont invest these mass amounts of wealth back into the economy, therefore they dont get to see these "tax break" benefits.

 

If I knew what exactly caused the loss, I could explain it.  However, I dont know and Trump (nor NYT) isn't giving any details.

---

That's just good business

---

this article does a good job of explaining what was happening around that time. big debt, airline failures, plus the usual high depreciation costs in real estate led to the huge loss.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump...1475415294

 

"After borrowing more than $3 billion to build his business empire during the 1980s, much of it personally guaranteed, Mr. Trump faced a severe financial crunch starting in 1990. That was because casinos and an airline he owned at the time didn’t meet operating projections just as some of his debt was coming due. Meanwhile, a downturn in the New York City real-estate market and other factors made it hard for him to sell some assets, according to reports by New Jersey casino regulators at the time. 

 

During this period, he worked out several restructurings with creditors that bought him time, putting him on a monthly allowance for a period. He leaned on his Atlantic City casinos in New Jersey, dragging them through bankruptcy court and then borrowing against them to pay off loans elsewhere. He took out around $160 million from the casinos during this time to pay down other debt, a Wall Street Journal analysis showed.

 

<p style="font-size:16px;font-family:'Chronicle SSm', serif;color:rgb(51,51,51);">He finalized a deal with creditors in 1995 to wipe out the last of his personal debt.

<p style="font-size:16px;font-family:'Chronicle SSm', serif;color:rgb(51,51,51);">The tax treatment of losses, bound to become a subject of national debate, is a typically uncontroversial feature of the income-tax system. The government doesn’t pay net refunds when business owners lose money, but it lets taxpayers use those losses to smooth their tax payments as they make money. That reflects the fact that “the natural business cycle of a taxpayer may exceed 12 months,” according to a congressional report."

---

Hillary did the same thing just last year. 

 

The number for Trump's loss was pretty staggering, but it was also 20+ years ago.  Clinton did it last year as she was growing her wealth by selling access to the highest bidder, giving speeches to Wall Street banks that she vilifies on a daily basis, and endorsing checks from foreign entities who directly contradict her "pro women" and "anti-outsourcing" rabble. 

 

Which are a few of the many reasons I don't like her, either. Your point? Maybe there's a thread or two about her shortcomings I missed.

 

The real question here is does anyone really believe Donald Trump is going to do anything to remove a tax benefit on a scale only available to people like him? Being clever enough to milk a rigged system, thus garnering decades of benefits from poor business decisions, is not admirable.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

this article does a good job of explaining what was happening around that time. big debt, airline failures, plus the usual high depreciation costs in real estate led to the huge loss.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump...1475415294

 

....

 

So this is the reason CNN is telling me it is the end of Trump's campaign and will kill all his support in the Rust Belt? :no:

 

‘This Will Be The End Of Trump’s Campaign,’ Says Increasingly Nervous Man For Seventh Time This Year

---

From the Trump campaign: "Trump has paid hundreds of millions of dollars in property taxes, sales and excise taxes, real estate taxes, city taxes, state taxes, employee taxes and federal taxes.”

 

Does anybody here doubt this? This is undoubtedly true.

---

The NYT article misleads the reader for almost half the article into thinking these are federal tax records. They aren't.  It is a state tax return.

---

The big loss comes from line 15 'other income'

 

edit: the NY return does say enter each line as it appears on your federal return.  im still trying to figure out line 15.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/...taxes.html

---

So can any of the Clintonites give me a legitimate reason as to why DJT's taxes are a huge deal, but Hillary Clinton and her foundations are not? Why do all the MSM, in a coordinated effort, attack only Trump's reports but not his opponents, despite using the <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-02/clinton-campaign-admits-hillary-used-same-tax-avoidance-scheme-trump'>same methods</a>? Do you find it acceptable for the overwhelming majority of media to be so blatantly biased and one-sided? Is it acceptable because she is your candidate?


Hillary sent out this tweet that kind of spoke volumes, but didn't get any coverage (obviously).

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://mobile.twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/782770554252234752'>https://mobile.twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/782770554252234752</a>


Why would she gloat about having the media being completely on her side? The behavior of the press this election season is disturbing. There is no free press anymore.


There is a <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-03/fbi-allowed-2-hillary-aides-destroy-their-laptops-newly-exposed-side-agreements'>report </a>coming out that she worked a side deal with the FBI to destroy the evidence for her private server investigation. This is unheard of, but I guarantee it will not get any coverage from the major outlets.

---

Which are a few of the many reasons I don't like her, either. Your point? Maybe there's a thread or two about her shortcomings I missed.


The real question here is does anyone really believe Donald Trump is going to do anything to remove a tax benefit on a scale only available to people like him? Being clever enough to milk a rigged system, thus garnering decades of benefits from poor business decisions, is not admirable.

Nottaxing business losses isn't rigging anything.

---

Business Guru loses a billion.

---

Guru not god... Big difference

---

Business Guru loses a billion.

 

you already said something like this. not getting enough attention?

---

Basically, whatever allowed the deduction is an "encouragement" by the government to spend in some area.  This is how the tax code has worked for forever.  What he spent all that money on is still unknown to anybody not Trump and his accountants.

 

These expenditures are available to ALL people, it's just that people in the middle class and below dont invest these mass amounts of wealth back into the economy  political contributions, therefore they dont get to see these "tax break" benefits.

 

If I knew what exactly caused the loss, I could explain it.  However, I dont know and Trump (nor NYT) isn't giving any details.

 

Fixed it for you. 

---