Support NeoGAF

[TalonJH]

I want to be so rich that my complete failures are better than everyone else's successes. Shot for the moon, and if you miss at least you don't have to pay taxes for 18 years.

Me too.

 

[wumster3000]

He wanted to be the first major candidate in recent history not to release returns. They leaked and show he paid nothing. They also highlight his record of business failure.

Failure stories will bait trump into lower self discipline and more erratic and non presidential behavior.

Voters will decide if it's a non-issue. Pretty sure it is an issue.

It is an issue for sure. Could you imagine Hillary having such a huge loss on her record? The Republicans would feast on her innards.

 

[FrenchMovieTheme]

A tax loss carryforward is common. Most wealthy individuals and corporations use it. Even Hillary Clinton of all people

See page 17 of the below PDF; turns out the Clintons did use the same "tax avoidance scheme" Trump used

https://m.hrc.onl/secretary/10-docu...linton_2015_Form_1040_with_Signature_Page.pdf

EDIT: I see someone beat me to the punch earlier on the page. Point still stands. It's a non-issue; however, the mainstream media won't let go

It may be a "non issue" to you, but may be an issue to other voters. You don't get to decide for others... fortunately!

 

[JustenP88]

It's funny to see the contrast between the shit thrown at Jimmy Carr in the UK (a God damn COMEDIAN) for some tax fuckery and the excuses conservatives are making for their presidential candidate. Shit, they fucking admire him for it. They're traitors to the country, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Phreaker]

Wow, what a terrible business man. Lost a billion in a year? SAD!

At least he shows us how smart he is by never paying taxes.

 

[demigod]

Can't believe i had respect for Giuliani during 9/11. Now i see why everyone hates his ass.

 

[Parmadillo Marshmallow]

It may be a "non issue" to you, but may be an issue to other voters. You don't get to decide for others... fortunately!

Anyone with a decent accountant who suffers a loss in a year will carry that loss forward. Heck, I did it one year, though not on this scale. It's a perfectly legal tax manoeuvre. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Trump, but this particular issue is legal and everyone in similar situations does the same thing.

You can think of it kind of like "store credit" with the IRS.

 

[Sean C]

Josh Marshall has a good several grafs (start at "An entirely separate point.") on why this is not necessarily a legal problem for the NYT. Boils down to did the info just fall from the sky and into the NYT's lap, or was the NYT in contact with the unknown actor prior to the acts being committed.

Right now, we're in fall-from-the-sky territory. If Trump can find evidence of some sort of collusion on the NYT's part, then it's a different ballgame.

If they're Marla Maples' tax returns, as some have speculated, it's actually perfectly legal for her to release them.

 

[FrenchMovieTheme]

Anyone with a decent accountant who suffers a loss in a year will carry that loss forward. Heck, I did it one year, though not on this scale. It's a perfectly legal tax manoeuvre. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Trump, but this particular issue is legal and everyone in similar situations does the same thing.

You can think of it kind of like "store credit" with the IRS.

But how can you say it's a "non issue" for someone else?

 

[HerbertBirdsfoot]

Anyone with a decent accountant who suffers a loss in a year will carry that loss forward. Heck, I did it one year, though not on this scale. It's a perfectly legal tax manoeuvre. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Trump, but this particular issue is legal and everyone in similar situations does the same thing.

You can think of it kind of like "store credit" with the IRS.

It's not illegal or immoral or anything like that. It's not wrong or improper. It's still an issue.

The business loss is an issue, because the talk will be Trump as the Biggest Loser. The figure is astonishingly high.

He's portrayed himself as this smashing business success. Clearly he once was in his glory years of NY and Atlantic City development. But it came crashing down like 20 years ago, and he's been trading on his name and fame since then. Trump Steaks, Trump University, The Apprentice.

It puts the focus on him. It's not a good look. Of course it isn't.

 

[AndyD]

With the Trump and Republican stance that this was his fiduciary duty as a bsinessman, I can see this line at some point in a debate:
"You might say it was your fiduciary duty Donald, to pay no taxes, but that's a Wall Street excuse we heard during the recession from bankers and businessmen like yourself who led this country to the brink of disaster. And what about your patriotic duty to pay your fair share of taxes? A fair share that pays for the soldiers and veterans doing their patriotic duty in Afghanistan/Iraq..."

 

[CrunchyFrog]

Minimizing one's tax burden is in everyone's interest. I don't understand how/why it's seen negatively, especially around here.

Genuinely curious, how could this possibly be? If everyone skimps out on taxes, the government has no money, and if the government has no money, they can't provide public services or worse they take even more from people who actually are paying their portion. Noone expects people to just give all their money away, but it's the fact that the American people are basically subsidizing companies who instead of using those profits to invest in the community use it to further increase their own power and influence at the expense of everyone else. Every time I hear the phrase "job creator" I want to punch a kitten.

 

[DrForester]

Anyone with a decent accountant who suffers a loss in a year will carry that loss forward. Heck, I did it one year, though not on this scale. It's a perfectly legal tax manoeuvre. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Trump, but this particular issue is legal and everyone in similar situations does the same thing.

You can think of it kind of like "store credit" with the IRS.

So after not paying taxes, did you spend two decades complaining publicly about the poor not paying anything?

 

[Christine]

he fought and clawed back to build another fortune

Not in any year he still had enough carryforward to pay zero taxes.

Rudy is terrible, but his instincts are pointing him to the right play--a billion dollar loss is not good but you can spin it as "Donald Trump is an entrepreneur taking large risks in pursuit of large profits, not every risk pays off favorably, anyway, he made it all back quickly and more besides"

At least, you can if you haven't done something as stupid as interrupt Hillary Clinton with "That makes me smart" when she's talking about how maybe you haven't paid any taxes.

 

[Slurpy2k20]

Chris Wallace Cannot Believe Chris Christie Is Calling Trump’s NYT Tax Bombshell a ‘Good Story’

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moO3haTfMc0

Chris Christie is embarrassing.

Christie: "The fact is, that Donald Trump's entire life has been making sure that everyone in America has an opportunity to build weath".

Seriously, I can't wrap my head around how much of a fucking cartoon character Christie has become. Go fuck yourself, you worthless, grovelling, lying piece of shit.

 

[BlastProcessing]

A tax loss carryforward is common. Most wealthy individuals and corporations use it. Even Hillary Clinton of all people

See page 17 of the below PDF; turns out the Clintons did use the same "tax avoidance scheme" Trump used

https://m.hrc.onl/secretary/10-docu...linton_2015_Form_1040_with_Signature_Page.pdf

EDIT: I see someone beat me to the punch earlier on the page. Point still stands. It's a non-issue; however, the mainstream media won't let go

Wow. How did you get access to Clinton's tax records!?

 

[captive]

Genuinely curious, how could this possibly be? If everyone skimps out on taxes, the government has no money, and if the government has no money, they can't provide public services or worse they take even more from people who actually are paying their portion. Noone expects people to just give all their money away, but it's the fact that the American people are basically subsidizing companies who instead of using those profits to invest in the community use it to further increase their own power and influence at the expense of everyone else. Every time I hear the phrase "job creator" I want to punch a kitten.

well if you actually talk to these people they believe the government should literally not exist or be bare minimum at best. How that would work exactly, im not sure

 

[rokkerkory]

The point isn't about filing a loss based on the rules, I am sure Trump used every ounce of the rules available to avoid paying taxes.

The point is this wouldn't even be a talking point if he just release his taxes like any other candidate.

Nothing to hide then release them.

 

[RustyNails]

Woke up and the spin is incredible.




Really, can we call a mulligan on this whole party?

Same party that has been chastising the poors as moochers and freeloaders for 3 decades for not paying income taxes.

 

[Jmille99]

Ah, so the 18 years would have finished in 2013. I wonder what the last couple years look like now that he has to pay federal income taxes again.

 

[rjinaz]

A lot of people in this thread thinking everybody hates taxes, would do anything not to pay them. Actually no. In fact most democrats are fine with taxes even on themselves. Heck, I'd paid more if Democrats were actually able to pass some things like free tuition and healthcare.

I guess I'm not part of this "everybody" that keeps being brought up. Mind you I don't celebrate being taxed, but I accept it just fine. For the wealthy, it's better for them because despite their taxes, yeah, they are extremely wealthy which means paying taxes effects them far less than they do me, and yet I'm still not a part of this "everybody".

 

[Byakuya769]

Anyone with a decent accountant who suffers a loss in a year will carry that loss forward. Heck, I did it one year, though not on this scale. It's a perfectly legal tax manoeuvre. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Trump, but this particular issue is legal and everyone in similar situations does the same thing.

You can think of it kind of like "store credit" with the IRS.

It runs counter to his narrative as a great business man and it displays inherent flaws in our tax code. We consistently tax social mobility and credit pre-existing wealth. It's bullshit and it needs to end. And I'm glad Trump is shining some light on it.

 

[Christine]

Ah, so the 18 years would have finished in 2013. I wonder what the last couple years look like now that he has to pay federal income taxes again.

2010, actually. 3 years back and 15 forward, for a total of 18 years.

And he might not have had to pay taxes after that point if he has had other substantial losses after 1995. Has he had further losses large enough to allow him to continue smartly paying zero tax? We can only speculate.

 

[Christian]

A lot of people in this thread thinking everybody hates taxes, would do anything not to pay them. Actually no. In fact most democrats are fine with taxes even on themselves. Heck, I'd paid more if Democrats were actually able to pass some things like free tuition and healthcare.

I guess I'm not part of this "everybody" that keeps being brought up. Mind you I don't celebrate being taxed, but I accept it just fine. For the wealthy, it's better for them because despite their taxes, yeah, they are extremely wealthy which means paying taxes effects them far less than they do me, and yet I'm still not a part of this "everybody".

Pretty much. My life isn't completely motivated by me, me, me. If paying taxes means I can help others get an education and have the opportunity to build a great life and a family for themselves, I'm more than happy to do it. And I donate time and money, as I can, to charities with zeal.

 

[rjinaz]

Pretty much. My life isn't completely motivated by me, me, me. If paying taxes means I can help others get an education and have the opportunity to build a great life and a family for themselves, I'm more than happy to do it. And I donate time and money, as I can, to charities with zeal.

Exactly. And that doesn't even consider the basic public services our taxes pay for such as education programs, roads, police, emergency response.

But screw taxes, I'm a selfish a-hole how about you?

 

[CHC]

The second debate is going to make the first one look like a joke. Trump has been flailing wildly this week and this issue here is going to be at the center of at least a decent part of the conversation. He's going to be spectacularly disorganized and belligerent when responding, no question.

 

[v0yce]

So after not paying taxes, did you spend two decades complaining publicly about the poor not paying anything?

And calling for lower taxes on the "job creators."

 

[Muppet of a Man]

He's a corporate welfare queen and con artist. Surprise, surprise!

 

[Already Torn]

The second debate is going to make the first one look like a joke. Trump has been flailing wildly this week and this issue here is going to be at the center of at least a decent part of the conversation. He's going to be spectacularly disorganized and belligerent when responding, no question.

"I'm very proud of it. VERY proud."

 

[Exile20]

The Billionaire Mark Cuban on Donald Trump's Tax Bombshell. #2016Election @mcuban
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVuES5aiMJE

a real billionaire talking about the significance of Trumps tax returns.

 

[Joe]

In 1995, Trump's loss was singlehandedly 2% of the entire country's total individual net losses.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tax-returns-estate-taxes-hillary-clinton-2016-10

 

[Exile20]

In 1995, Trump's loss was singlehandedly 2% of the entire country's total individual net losses.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tax-returns-estate-taxes-hillary-clinton-2016-10

Genius, no one can do that. He is so special

 

[Nordicus]

The Billionaire Mark Cuban on Donald Trump's Tax Bombshell. #2016Election @mcuban
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVuES5aiMJE

a real billionaire talking about the significance of Trumps tax returns.

Love that Cuban seems to always be there when Trump's campaign tries to shrug off suspect behaviour as "just your normal(/GENIUS) billionaire things"

 

[Piecake]

In 1995, Trump's loss was singlehandedly 2% of the entire country's total individual net losses.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tax-returns-estate-taxes-hillary-clinton-2016-10

This statistic is just too good not to be used in adds.

 

[Bleepey]

There's a difference between minimizing your tax burden and not paying any tax at all. Clinton overpaid taxes, but still has income. Trump has "no income."

Plus excessive tax avoidance is tax evasion soooooooooooooooooooo


.



..

You're an accountant ain't you? what do you think of the whole thing?

 

[RustyNails]

“While we remain very concerned about the political motives behind A.G. Schneiderman’s investigation, the Trump Foundation nevertheless intends to cooperate fully with the investigation,” Hope Hicks, Mr. Trump’s spokeswoman, said in a statement on Monday. “Because this is an ongoing legal matter, the Trump Foundation will not comment further at this time.”

Politicizing the AG decision is the only game left to play.

Edit: wrong thread but will keep it here!

 

[Steel]

So, apparently, Trump wants us to believe that 1995 was worse than the great recession economically.

In 1995, Trump's loss was singlehandedly 2% of the entire country's total individual net losses.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tax-returns-estate-taxes-hillary-clinton-2016-10

We have the biggest losses, folks. The greatest, deepest losses. Really Big Losses.

 

[joebruin]

Trump: 'I'm working for you now, I'm not working for Trump'

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/03/polit...-trump-taxes0917PMVODtopVideo&linkId=29488510

 

[phisheep]

The Billionaire Mark Cuban on Donald Trump's Tax Bombshell. #2016Election @mcuban
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVuES5aiMJE

a real billionaire talking about the significance of Trumps tax returns.

Three things stand out from this:

1) We don't know whether the $900,000 was legit or whether it was a tax scam
2) Probably most of it wasn't his own money, and we don't know whether any of it was subsequently forgiven and should have been accounted as income
3) Nobody with complicated affairs files their return on April 15th, except Trump

 

[fart town usa]

This won't change anything. Few, if any, should find this surprising.

The tax code favors the wealthy and the burden is left on the middle class to make up for lost revenue.

/ThanksReagan

 

[ntropy]

In 1995, Trump's loss was singlehandedly 2% of the entire country's total individual net losses.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-tax-returns-estate-taxes-hillary-clinton-2016-10

this is why he wants to be president, jettison his taxes

 

[Christine]

3) Nobody with complicated affairs files their return on April 15th, except Trump

That stood out for me too, as possibly the reddest flag of all. The bar here for "complicated" is very low indeed. I want to emphasize this, "complicated" is almost everyone with capital gains/losses and a real asset structure. Your CPA is going to file that extension by autonomous reflex because your taxes are "complicated" enough to bring to a professional.

 

[Snowybreak]

Pretty much. My life isn't completely motivated by me, me, me. If paying taxes means I can help others get an education and have the opportunity to build a great life and a family for themselves, I'm more than happy to do it. And I donate time and money, as I can, to charities with zeal.

Fuck man, I haven't even filed yet because I've yet to make $10,000 in a single year. Yet I still give about 5% of what I make to drug rehab clinics and cancer research. I live pretty ok, and I don't need a lot of extra stuff, so I might as well help others.

 

[pigeon]

This writer thinks he knows what happened to the lost $916 million and how Trump got out from under it:

The big New York Times scoop that Donald Trump used $916 million of tax losses to enjoy many income tax-free years raised a question the newspaper didn’t try to answer: How did Trump do it?

Trump, the only major-party presidential nominee in four decades to keep all his tax returns secret, insists “there’s nothing to learn from them.”

Yet in one day I figured out how Trump’s advisers almost certainly arranged the massive tax losses, skipped out on a massive income-tax bill, and then fashioned a loophole with more valuable tax benefits than the already liberal tax breaks Congress gives big real-estate owners while sticking others with the bill....

Trump’s gambit is easy to explain in plain English, but for tax wonks the short version is this: Trump combined tax benefits under Section 1231 of the Internal Revenue Code with the exception provisions in Section 108.

The story of Trump’s income tax-free life begins in 1990 with Trump’s well-documented mismanagement of his casinos and his admission that he paid far too much for “trophy properties” like the Plaza Hotel in Manhattan and 23 worn-out jetliners for the short-lived Trump Shuttle airline.
These mistakes created about $1 billion of “net operating losses,” or NOLs, under Section 1231 of the tax code...

Trump claimed to be worth billions in 1990, just as he does now, yet he could not pay his bills. He stiffed hundreds of small-business suppliers, including those for the Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City, which will go out of business next week. In all he owed more $3 billion, nearly a third of his debt secured by nothing more substantial than his signature on bank loan papers....
Back then Trump threatened endless litigation unless 70 banks he owed money gave him millions more in new loans at low interest rates and provided him with $5.4 million a year for personal spending, the equivalent of $10 million in today’s money....
When the New Jersey Casino Control Commission took Trump’s side against his bankers, they gave in. The banks canceled close to a billion dollars of Trump’s debts and extended new loans on favorable terms....

Normally, any part of a loan that is forgiven becomes taxable income, as millions of people who could not repay home mortgages or student loan debt have learned in recent years.
That’s where Section 108 comes in. Three years after Trump bested his bankers, Congress amended that section to let real-estate professionals avoid income taxes on debts that were canceled....Trump agreed to forgo his future right to take about $1 billion worth of depreciation on his casino hotels....

This exchange created a future problem for Trump. Real estate that cannot be depreciated is worth a lot less. Indeed, generous tax benefits drive real-estate investment. So while Trump escaped an immediate income-tax bill, the future tax benefits he gave up would mean that he would likely have to pay income taxes on his salary, fees for licensing his name, and other income.

To solve this problem, Trump sold stock for the first time in 1995. He founded Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts, which which then took ownership of his casino hotels.
That meant Trump got money for selling his casino hotels, while the investors got real estate with greatly diminished tax benefits.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...s-is-how-trump-lost-916m-and-avoided-tax.html

Here's the tl;dr on this guy's theory:

a) Trump lost $916 million through basically incompetence in 1995. This gave him $916 million in losses for tax purposes but also $916 million in actual losses.
b) Trump forced the banks to bail him out by threatening to sue them/go bankrupt unless they forgave a bunch of his debt. They caved and gave him about a billion dollars of debt forgiveness. This canceled out his losses but also counted as taxable income.
c) Trump used Section 108 to cancel out the debt forgiveness against his future real estate depreciation for tax purposes. This got rid of the taxable income, leaving trump with just the NOL for tax purposes. But it also left him with a bunch of real estate that had already had about a billion dollars worth of depreciation waived, meaning that it would have pretty bad performance for tax purposes in the future.
d) Trump started a corporation and sold his depreciation-blocked real estate to that corporation for cash, then sold the stock of that corporation publicly. This lets him trade his bad real estate for real money.
e) The corporation then tanks, since it's saddled with a bunch of real estate it can't depreciate, and is also run by Donald Trump. The shareholders lose their money. Trump walks away with the NOL for tax purposes, the cash from the real estate, and the salary he got for running the corporation.

This is mostly not provable but seems plausible enough and apparently multiple tax experts agree with the analysis.

 

[Crimson_Gold]

This writer thinks he knows what happened to the lost $916 million and how Trump got out from under it:



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...s-is-how-trump-lost-916m-and-avoided-tax.html

Here's the tl;dr on this guy's theory:

a) Trump lost $916 million through basically incompetence in 1995. This gave him $916 million in losses for tax purposes but also $916 million in actual losses.
b) Trump forced the banks to bail him out by threatening to sue them/go bankrupt unless they forgave a bunch of his debt. They caved and gave him about a billion dollars of debt forgiveness. This canceled out his losses but also counted as taxable income.
c) Trump used Section 108 to cancel out the debt forgiveness against his future real estate depreciation for tax purposes. This got rid of the taxable income, leaving trump with just the NOL for tax purposes. But it also left him with a bunch of real estate that had already had about a billion dollars worth of depreciation waived, meaning that it would have pretty bad performance for tax purposes in the future.
d) Trump started a corporation and sold his depreciation-blocked real estate to that corporation for cash, then sold the stock of that corporation publicly. This lets him trade his bad real estate for real money.
e) The corporation then tanks, since it's saddled with a bunch of real estate it can't depreciate, and is also run by Donald Trump. The shareholders lose their money. Trump walks away with the NOL for tax purposes, the cash from the real estate, and the salary he got for running the corporation.

This is mostly not provable but seems plausible enough and apparently multiple tax experts agree with the analysis.

And they cap my student loan interest at $2500 a year...bastards

 

[User 85168]

This writer thinks he knows what happened to the lost $916 million and how Trump got out from under it:



http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...s-is-how-trump-lost-916m-and-avoided-tax.html

Here's the tl;dr on this guy's theory:

a) Trump lost $916 million through basically incompetence in 1995. This gave him $916 million in losses for tax purposes but also $916 million in actual losses.
b) Trump forced the banks to bail him out by threatening to sue them/go bankrupt unless they forgave a bunch of his debt. They caved and gave him about a billion dollars of debt forgiveness. This canceled out his losses but also counted as taxable income.
c) Trump used Section 108 to cancel out the debt forgiveness against his future real estate depreciation for tax purposes. This got rid of the taxable income, leaving trump with just the NOL for tax purposes. But it also left him with a bunch of real estate that had already had about a billion dollars worth of depreciation waived, meaning that it would have pretty bad performance for tax purposes in the future.
d) Trump started a corporation and sold his depreciation-blocked real estate to that corporation for cash, then sold the stock of that corporation publicly. This lets him trade his bad real estate for real money.
e) The corporation then tanks, since it's saddled with a bunch of real estate it can't depreciate, and is also run by Donald Trump. The shareholders lose their money. Trump walks away with the NOL for tax purposes, the cash from the real estate, and the salary he got for running the corporation.

This is mostly not provable but seems plausible enough and apparently multiple tax experts agree with the analysis.

Man. Is D the only part that could be illegal, if any?

 

[pigeon]

Man. Is D the only part that could be illegal, if any?

If D happened there would be potential legal quibbles since presumably Trump sold the real estate at a higher value than it is worth considering the depreciation thing, and since he was the seller and also ran the buyer, it's pretty questionable.

There could also be problems with E if he did an IPO and the disclosure was insufficient, maybe?

I am not really a lawyer though, so can't be sure.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Anyone with a decent accountant who suffers a loss in a year will carry that loss forward. Heck, I did it one year, though not on this scale. It's a perfectly legal tax manoeuvre. Don't get me wrong, I don't like Trump, but this particular issue is legal and everyone in similar situations does the same thing.

You can think of it kind of like "store credit" with the IRS.

It's not only a legal issue in this situation. A large part of Trump's platform is how he's a good businessman who can fix America's economy.

Failing so hard at that business he touts makes him look like even more of an idiot at one of the only places he was still fooling some people. He also tried to hide it to help him get into office, which seems like a very politician-esque thing to do for someone who has been claiming that politicians are all dishonest thieves who are only looking out for their own hides.

 

[tokkun]

Genuinely curious, how could this possibly be? If everyone skimps out on taxes, the government has no money, and if the government has no money, they can't provide public services or worse they take even more from people who actually are paying their portion. Noone expects people to just give all their money away, but it's the fact that the American people are basically subsidizing companies who instead of using those profits to invest in the community use it to further increase their own power and influence at the expense of everyone else. Every time I hear the phrase "job creator" I want to punch a kitten.

As a general rule, the government wants you to take advantage of tax breaks. The thing to understand is that most tax breaks were put in place in order to encourage behaviors beneficial to the country. The mortgage interest deduction exists because someone thought that American families owning houses was a good idea. Tuition deductions exist because they want more people to go to college. IRA deductions exist to encourage people to save money for retirement. The Earned Income Tax Credit exists to make it more attractive for poor people to work than to take unemployment benefits. Longterm capital gains tax is lower than income tax so people will invest money in growing businesses. Companies get tax credits for research & development so they will take more risks and develop more new products.

Now, that is not to say that every case of avoiding taxes is something the government intended or sees as beneficial. Nor is it to say that there aren't edge cases even among the intended use of the law (such as by the extremely wealthy) that go against its spirit. Nevertheless, on the whole it is in the government's interests to have people act to minimize their tax burden, because it is one of the few effective ways they have to guide behavior while maintaining a relatively free society.

 

[old]

Here we thought Trump was part of the 1%.

Turns out Trump is part of the "47%" that Romney claims pay no income taxes.

I wonder how many other rich fucks at that Romney fundraiser belonged to that 47% as well.