60/60 #27
Today's number is $4 Million. That's how much Mitt Romney donated to charity in 2011. Wouldn't it be nice if we all made so much money that we could all give $4 Million a year to charity and still maintain 3 very nice homes?
Here's the problem Mitt made for himself though. Earlier this year, Mitt refused to release several years of tax returns. Critics claimed that Mitt was hiding something. Senator Harry Reid went so far as to say that he had "strong evidence" that Romney had paid $0 taxes in recent years. Still waiting on Harry to back that one up. To silence these critics though, Mitt provided an extra tidbit of information; he said "I've never paid less than 13% in taxes." He went on to clarify that he takes every deduction possible, and in a debate said "I don't think you want someone as the candidate for president who pays more taxes than he owes."
You see, in Mitt's world, the fact that he maximizes his deductions means he's qualified to lead the country. When poor people do it and end up not owing income taxes, they're among the 47% of free-loaders that Mitt and his rich pals love to hate.
Here's the other problem - between his two statements, he backed himself into a corner. If he had taken the tax deduction for that $4 million he gave to charity, his tax bill would've been close to 10.5%, making his "I've never paid less than 13%" statement false. So on his 2011 return, he actually only writes off $2.25 million.
“The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year,” the family’s trustee Brad Malt explains. “The Romney‘s thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor’s statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years,” he adds.
Simply put, because Romney didn’t claim the full deduction his charitable donations entitled him to, he overpaid in taxes to the federal government, something you don't want your Presidential candidates to be doing (in Romney's own words).
Here's the problem Mitt made for himself though. Earlier this year, Mitt refused to release several years of tax returns. Critics claimed that Mitt was hiding something. Senator Harry Reid went so far as to say that he had "strong evidence" that Romney had paid $0 taxes in recent years. Still waiting on Harry to back that one up. To silence these critics though, Mitt provided an extra tidbit of information; he said "I've never paid less than 13% in taxes." He went on to clarify that he takes every deduction possible, and in a debate said "I don't think you want someone as the candidate for president who pays more taxes than he owes."
You see, in Mitt's world, the fact that he maximizes his deductions means he's qualified to lead the country. When poor people do it and end up not owing income taxes, they're among the 47% of free-loaders that Mitt and his rich pals love to hate.
Here's the other problem - between his two statements, he backed himself into a corner. If he had taken the tax deduction for that $4 million he gave to charity, his tax bill would've been close to 10.5%, making his "I've never paid less than 13%" statement false. So on his 2011 return, he actually only writes off $2.25 million.
“The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year,” the family’s trustee Brad Malt explains. “The Romney‘s thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor’s statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years,” he adds.
Simply put, because Romney didn’t claim the full deduction his charitable donations entitled him to, he overpaid in taxes to the federal government, something you don't want your Presidential candidates to be doing (in Romney's own words).
Comments
Post a Comment