• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

A REAL tax story

Steve

Well-known member
As the tenant of four rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem,... as a hardship case for rent control. (He also used one of the apartments as an office in violation of rent-control rules, but that’s another story.)


four units... a hardship case? used one as an Office?

maybe Rangal missed the ethics course?

it has confirmed that Mr. Rangel owned a home in Washington from 1971-2000 and during that time claimed a “homestead” exemption that allowed him to save on his District of Columbia property taxes. However, the homestead exemption only applies to a principal residence, and the Washington home could not have qualified as such since Mr. Rangel’s rent-stabilized apartments in New York have the same requirement.

sure looks like Rangal is living large... on someone's dime...

Term limits!
term_limits.png
 

Tam

Well-known member
Why tax problems have plagued Team Obama
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
March 17, 2009
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner speaks at the Treasury Department in Washington, detailing the Obama Administrations plans for the economic recovery. (AP)
It’s been a recurring question about the young Obama administration: Why have so many of its nominees come down with tax problems?

Timothy Geithner, Tom Daschle, Ron Kirk, Nancy Killefer, and a number of others who didn’t make it to the nomination stage — all have been felled, or tainted, by unpaid tax bills ranging from a few hundred dollars to more than $140,000. After the first few cases, Republican Rep. Eric Cantor quipped that “it’s easy for [Democrats] to sit here and advocate higher taxes because — you know what? — they don’t pay them.”

For their part, some Democrats have suggested that the Senate Finance Committee, which investigates nominees before confirmation, has gotten so nit-picky in examining tax returns that good candidates have gone down in flames. “The Finance Committee has gone a bit overboard, and I find it a little striking that a Democratic committee is doing this to a Democratic administration,” one anonymous insider told the Politico recently. “This has been a lot more in-depth and detailed, to the point of being silly.”

Now, we find out that neither Cantor nor the unnamed Democrat was correct. The problem is not with Democrats in general, nor with the Finance Committee in particular. The problem is the Obama White House, which, fully aware of its nominees’ tax issues, decided that those problems were trivial, or that the public wouldn’t care about them, and pushed forward with nominations that in the past would have been quietly shelved.

In little-noticed remarks last week, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, gave us a look inside the confirmation process. Irritated by news reports suggesting the committee had been too hard on Obama’s nominees, Grassley pointed the finger back at the White House.

“I want to stress that the Finance Committee is not doing anything different now from what it has always done under the leadership of either Senator Baucus or me,” Grassley said, referring to Democratic chairman Max Baucus of Montana. “We are vetting nominees for the current administration the same way we vetted nominees for the previous administration.”

“The tax issues of the nominees considered by the committee this year came to be public only because the nominees chose to proceed.”

Grassley said the committee has always requested three years of tax returns from nominees, and always employed experts to review them. And in the past, he added, “many nominees” faced questions based on their tax returns. The reason tax problems seem more prevalent now, Grassley explained, is that in previous administrations those nominees chose to quietly withdraw. Now, they try to stick it out, leading to sometimes embarrassing controversy. “Chairman Baucus and I agree that if a nominee chooses to proceed after tax issues are identified, then the public should be informed of those issues,” Grassley said.

I asked a Senate source close to the nominating process why the troubled nominations kept coming, in spite of the tax problems. “I think it was the administration underestimating what the grassroots folks who elected President Obama were going to object to,” the source told me. With the out-of-touch White House firmly behind the nominees, Senate Democrats got the message that they, too, needed to line up in support. So they did — until they started hearing from outside the Washington bubble. “If you look at Daschle’s experience, he came out of a meeting with members of the committee, and the Democratic members said they supported him,” the insider pointed out. “But on the next day he withdrew.”

So when it comes to tax woes, the White House has no one to blame but itself. Looking at the reports the Finance Committee staff produced on Geithner, Daschle and others, it’s impressive how bipartisan the work has been. Baucus and Grassley appear to be working together quite closely on nominations, and their assessments of nominees’ tax problems have been dry, matter-of-fact, and fair. Some members of Team Obama may believe the senators have gone too far, but it’s a very hard case to make.

So why the complaints? “I think it’s just someone in the administration being completely frustrated by what’s going on with their nominees and then attempting to discredit the process or discourage Baucus and Grassley from doing what they’ve always done before,” my Senate insider told me. “It hasn’t worked.”

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Why-tax-problems-have-plagued-Team-Obama-nominees-41336037.html#ixzz0ehMezLqC


Was it not Obama that claimed his Administration is run by the strictest ethics in history? :?
If that is true then shouldn't the Senate Finance Committee be nit picking on a failure to pay taxes when it comes to WH appointees? :roll:

I guess the White House was right on one thing, it doesn't seem to matter to their supporters that his Administration is filled with tax cheats and lobbyists. :???: If it was a Republican like Sarah Palin that didn't pay her property tax before her land was re-accessed that would matter but not when the Head of the Treasury knowing cheats on his. :x
 

Liveoak

Well-known member
So, Democrat politicians are for non-payment of taxes and Republican politicians are angelic in their payments. I guess that explains McCains non-payment of home taxes for several years :lol2: . All "innocent" mistakes, I'm sure. :shock:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Liveoak said:
So, Democrat politicians are for non-payment of taxes and Republican politicians are angelic in their payments. I guess that explains McCains non-payment of home taxes for several years :lol2: . All "innocent" mistakes, I'm sure. :shock:

McCain's taxes were paid as soon as the bills were sent to the right address.

"SAN DIEGO – The problem causing Cindy McCain to rack up delinquent taxes on a La Jolla Shores condo has been fixed.

The solution? A better mailing address.

About 2:15 p.m. yesterday, a representative of McCain's family business in Phoenix asked the county to send future tax bills there.

An aide to Cindy McCain's husband, presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain, said late last month that the bills hadn't been paid because the bank managing the trust had not been receiving the notices.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Liveoak said:
So, Democrat politicians are for non-payment of taxes and Republican politicians are angelic in their payments. I guess that explains McCains non-payment of home taxes for several years :lol2: . All "innocent" mistakes, I'm sure. :shock:

A far cry from what several of the lib is the cabinet owed
Shortly after NEWSWEEK inquired about the matter, the McCain aide e-mailed a receipt dated Friday, June 27, confirming payment by the trust to San Diego County in the amount of $6,744.42. County officials say the trust still owes an additional $1,742 for this year, an amount that is overdue and will go into default July 1. Told of the outstanding $1,742, the aide said: "The trust has paid all bills shown owing as of today and will pay all other bills due."
 

Liveoak

Well-known member
Of course he paid after a few years and after it was noticed. :D Like I said, Dem tax delinquincy or Repub; it catches up to them eventually. And it's no surprise that we see more of it among Dems.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Liveoak said:
Of course he paid after a few years and after it was noticed. :D Like I said, Dem tax delinquincy or Repub; it catches up to them eventually. And it's no surprise that we see more of it among Dems.

It's obvious that the reason it didn't get paid was because the bill wasn't received. Once again, liberals trying to manufacture an issue..... :roll:

When do you think Geithner's tax evasion will catch up to him?
 

hopalong

Well-known member
How about this liveoak??
Make Mcains and Sarahs's little indiscretion seem rather insignificant, huh???
This from the group that is going to clean up Washington according to Obama, Nancy and Harry.

Remember: This all happened in just the FIRST QUARTER of 2009, folks!

Pretty good summary of what is known - how much more is hidden?

$34,000:

The amount of federal taxes that Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner (D) failed to pay during his employment at the International Monetary Fund despite receiving extra compensation and explanatory brochures that described his tax liabilities.

True: http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.s ... omine.html

$75,000:

The amount of money that the head of the powerful tax-writing committee, Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY), was forced to report on his taxes after the discovery that he had not reported income from a Dominican Republic rental
property. His excuses for the failure started with blaming his wife, then his accountant and finally the fact that he didn't speak Spanish.

True http://www.nypost.com/seven/09102008/ne ... 128444.htm

$93,000:

The INCREASE in the amount of petty cash each of our Congressional representatives voted to give themselves in January 2009 during the height of an economic meltdown. That's a $40 + million INCREASE!

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/ ... akers.html See video here from Fox


$133,900:

The amount Fannie Mae "invested" in Chris Dodd (D-CT), head of the powerful Senate Banking Committee, presumably to repel oversight of the GSE prior to its meltdown. Said meltdown helped touch off the current economic crisis. In only a few years time, Fannie also "invested" over $105,000 in then-Senator Barack Obama.

True: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07 ... fanni.html


$140,000:

The amount of back taxes and interest that Cabinet nominee Tom Daschle (D) was forced to cough up after the vetting process revealed significant, unexplained tax liabilities.

True: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1233359 ... lenews_wsj Wall Street Journal


$356,000:

The approximate amount of income and deductions that Daschle (D) was forced to report on his amended 2005 and 2007 tax returns after being caught cheating on his taxes. This includes $255,256 for the use of a car service, $83,333 in unreported income, and $14,963 in charitable contributions.

True: http://online..wsj.com/article/SB123335 ... lenews_wsj Wall Street Journal


$800,000:

The amount of "sweetheart" mortgages Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) received from Countrywide Financial, the details for which he has refused to release details despite months of promises to do so.. Countrywide was once the nation's largest mortgage lender and linked to Government-Sponsored Entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Their meltdown precipitated the current financial crisis. Just days ago in Pennsylvania , Countrywide was forced to pay $150,000,000 in mortgage assistance following "a state investigation that concluded that Countrywide relaxed its underwriting standards to sell risky loans to consumers who did not understand them and could not afford them."

True: http://rightvoices.com/2008/08/21/more- ... n-affairs/


$1,000,000:

The estimated amount of donations by Denise Rich, wife of fugitive Marc Rich, to Democrat interests and the William J. Clinton Foundation in an apparent quid pro quo deal that resulted in a pardon for Mr. Rich. The pardon was reviewed and blessed by Obama Attorney General and then Deputy AG Eric Holder, despite numerous requests by government officials to turn it down.

True: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/nov/20 ... a-holder20


$12,000,000:

The amount of TARP money provided to community bank OneUnited despite the fact that it did not qualify for funds, and was "under attack from its regulators for allegations of poor lending practices and executive-pay abuses." It turns out that Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), a key contributor to the Fannie Mae meltdown, just happens to be married to one of the bank's former directors.

True: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123258284337504295.html Wall Street Journal


$23,500,000:

The upper range of net worth Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-WV) accumulated in four years time according to The Washington Post through earmarks of "tens of millions of dollars to groups associated with his own business partners."

True: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01032.html Washington Post



$2,000,000,000:

($2 billion) the approximate amount of money that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) is earmarkingrelated to his son's lobbying efforts. The son, Craig Obey, is "a top lobbyist for the nonprofit group" that would receive a roughly $2 billion component of the "Stimulus" package.

True: http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/a_ ... /C530/L37/

and this as a list of these related stories: http://search.yahoo.com/404handler?src= ... al_parks_2


$3,700,000,000:

($3.7 billion) not to be outdone, this is the estimated value of various defense contracts awarded to a company controlled by the husband of Rep. Diane Feinstein (D-CA). Despite an obvious conflict-of-interest as "a member of the Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, Sen. Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions to her husband's firms."

True: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 310531.DTL


$4,190,000,000:

($4.19 billion) the amount of money in the so-called "Stimulus" package devoted to fraudulent voter registration ACORN group under the auspices of "Community Stabilization Activities". ACORN is currently the subject of a RICO suit in Ohio .

True: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/stim ... ill-pelosi


It's becoming a culture of corruption and stupidity. In addition, these folks appear to be above the law.

All of the aforementioned are still in office, living like the royalty they think they are.

Comments from kolo aka jingo2, don.liveoak, or the rest of you complaining about a mere $300-$500 dollars that has not even been assessed yet!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:
 
Top