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

Another Darn Tax Evading Politician!!!

A

Anonymous

Guest
Alaska says Palin owes taxes on per diem expenses
By ANNE SUTTON – 1 hour ago

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Gov. Sarah Palin must pay back taxes on nearly $18,000 in expenses she charged the state for living in her home outside Anchorage instead of at the state capital, officials said Wednesday.

A review of state policy and Internal Revenue Service tax laws determined the per diem payments should be treated as income, Department of Administration Commissioner Annette Kreitzer said.

The charges came to light after Palin was named John McCain's running mate on the Republican presidential ticket in August and became a campaign issue after she was presented to the nation as a fiscal conservative.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Yep!
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is under fire for allegedly taking what amounts to personal loans that he didn’t repay. Yet his predicament shouldn’t scare customers of personal unsecured loans like yourself. His came in the way of alleged favors he received, which is particularly odd when you consider that Emanuel used to sit on the board of Freddie Mac. More on that in a moment.

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann of the New York Post report that “lived rent-free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate.” It is common knowledge that Emanuel is a multimillionaire, which makes it all the more strange that he would need free room and board for any period of time.

Wait, here it is
Rep. De Lauro’s husband is Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg. While Emanuel was on the Freddie Mac board, he was also the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That organization, according to Morris and McGann, gave Greenberg large polling contracts - to the tune of $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008.

Emanuel never declared free rent on his taxes. he claimed it was a five-year show of “hospitality.” Since this gift easily added up to more than $100,000 over that time, some experts even consider Rahm’s rent to be taxable income. Thus the “personal loans” are like cash he earned.

And there’s more
While Emanuel was on the board of Freddie Mac, the government-backed lender lied about its earnings. This played no small rule in the current financial catastrophe. Morris and McGann point out that The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency “singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for ‘failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention.’” The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission fined Freddie Mac $50 million for this very same fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002. Rahm Emanuel was there.

And more…
When Emanuel left Freddie Mac to run for Congress in 2002, the not-so-big-Mac’s political action committee contributed $25,000 to his campaign. Now, in a twist of irony, Rahm Emanuel is President Obama’s right hand man. They’re trying to dig America out of the mess Freddie Mac helped cause.

But let’s back up for a moment. Should Emanuel have declared his housing as taxable income? According to Steve Willis of the Post:

Mr. Emanuel would have the burden of proving it is not. The controlling authority is Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278 (1960). The Supreme Court found very similar facts - but involving much less money - to be taxable rather than a gift. Mr. Duberstein received the “gift” of a Cadillac from a business associate, who was also a friend.

Honest Americans who have suffered through IRS audits hope that one is on the way for Mr. Emanuel. They know about personal loans. They’ve used personal loans. You, Mr. Emanuel, don’t need personal loans.

Emanuel got out of paying property taxes in Illinois by declaring himself a charity. :roll:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Mike said:
Yep!
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is under fire for allegedly taking what amounts to personal loans that he didn’t repay. Yet his predicament shouldn’t scare customers of personal unsecured loans like yourself. His came in the way of alleged favors he received, which is particularly odd when you consider that Emanuel used to sit on the board of Freddie Mac. More on that in a moment.

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann of the New York Post report that “lived rent-free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate.” It is common knowledge that Emanuel is a multimillionaire, which makes it all the more strange that he would need free room and board for any period of time.

Wait, here it is
Rep. De Lauro’s husband is Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg. While Emanuel was on the Freddie Mac board, he was also the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That organization, according to Morris and McGann, gave Greenberg large polling contracts - to the tune of $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008.

Emanuel never declared free rent on his taxes. he claimed it was a five-year show of “hospitality.” Since this gift easily added up to more than $100,000 over that time, some experts even consider Rahm’s rent to be taxable income. Thus the “personal loans” are like cash he earned.

And there’s more
While Emanuel was on the board of Freddie Mac, the government-backed lender lied about its earnings. This played no small rule in the current financial catastrophe. Morris and McGann point out that The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency “singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for ‘failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention.’” The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission fined Freddie Mac $50 million for this very same fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002. Rahm Emanuel was there.

And more…
When Emanuel left Freddie Mac to run for Congress in 2002, the not-so-big-Mac’s political action committee contributed $25,000 to his campaign. Now, in a twist of irony, Rahm Emanuel is President Obama’s right hand man. They’re trying to dig America out of the mess Freddie Mac helped cause.

But let’s back up for a moment. Should Emanuel have declared his housing as taxable income? According to Steve Willis of the Post:

Mr. Emanuel would have the burden of proving it is not. The controlling authority is Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278 (1960). The Supreme Court found very similar facts - but involving much less money - to be taxable rather than a gift. Mr. Duberstein received the “gift” of a Cadillac from a business associate, who was also a friend.

Honest Americans who have suffered through IRS audits hope that one is on the way for Mr. Emanuel. They know about personal loans. They’ve used personal loans. You, Mr. Emanuel, don’t need personal loans.

Emanuel got out of paying property taxes in Illinois by declaring himself a charity. :roll:


Don't try and confuse oldtimer, he can't comprehend more that one thing at a time and right now he is dead set of bashing everyone except a democrap!!!!
I bet he has several newsgroups just dedicated to finding little bits and pieces of dirt on anyone he doesn't like.

Poor bitter oldman who has nothing better to do than post bashing posts on here! (what a rancher he is) :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Mike said:
Yep!
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is under fire for allegedly taking what amounts to personal loans that he didn’t repay. Yet his predicament shouldn’t scare customers of personal unsecured loans like yourself. His came in the way of alleged favors he received, which is particularly odd when you consider that Emanuel used to sit on the board of Freddie Mac. More on that in a moment.

Dick Morris and Eileen McGann of the New York Post report that “lived rent-free for years in the home of Rep. Rosa De Lauro (D-Conn.) - and failed to disclose the gift, as congressional ethics rules mandate.” It is common knowledge that Emanuel is a multimillionaire, which makes it all the more strange that he would need free room and board for any period of time.

Wait, here it is
Rep. De Lauro’s husband is Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg. While Emanuel was on the Freddie Mac board, he was also the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That organization, according to Morris and McGann, gave Greenberg large polling contracts - to the tune of $239,996 in 2006 and $317,775 in 2008.

Emanuel never declared free rent on his taxes. he claimed it was a five-year show of “hospitality.” Since this gift easily added up to more than $100,000 over that time, some experts even consider Rahm’s rent to be taxable income. Thus the “personal loans” are like cash he earned.

And there’s more
While Emanuel was on the board of Freddie Mac, the government-backed lender lied about its earnings. This played no small rule in the current financial catastrophe. Morris and McGann point out that The Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight Agency “singled out the Freddie Mac board as contributing to the fraud in 2000 and 2001 for ‘failing in its duty to follow up on matters brought to its attention.’” The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission fined Freddie Mac $50 million for this very same fraud in 2000, 2001 and 2002. Rahm Emanuel was there.

And more…
When Emanuel left Freddie Mac to run for Congress in 2002, the not-so-big-Mac’s political action committee contributed $25,000 to his campaign. Now, in a twist of irony, Rahm Emanuel is President Obama’s right hand man. They’re trying to dig America out of the mess Freddie Mac helped cause.

But let’s back up for a moment. Should Emanuel have declared his housing as taxable income? According to Steve Willis of the Post:

Mr. Emanuel would have the burden of proving it is not. The controlling authority is Commissioner v. Duberstein, 363 U.S. 278 (1960). The Supreme Court found very similar facts - but involving much less money - to be taxable rather than a gift. Mr. Duberstein received the “gift” of a Cadillac from a business associate, who was also a friend.

Honest Americans who have suffered through IRS audits hope that one is on the way for Mr. Emanuel. They know about personal loans. They’ve used personal loans. You, Mr. Emanuel, don’t need personal loans.

Emanuel got out of paying property taxes in Illinois by declaring himself a charity. :roll:


HIJACK!!!!
 

Steve

Well-known member
per diem is not "normally" taxed.


with that said..

Per Diem is one of the most misunderstood terms used as it relates to our tax system. To help clear up this misunderstanding, you need to understand per diem does not equal tax free compensation. The Federal government established per diem rates to as means to simplify the reporting requirements of their employee’s business related travel. Per Diem rates are broken into two components, lodging and meals. The expectation is the per diem payments are to be used to cover these costs.

Non-governmental businesses can use the per diem method to cover its own employees business related lodging and meals expenses. By using the per diem method, businesses are attempting to simplify its own recordkeeping.

The other method of dealing with business related travel is called an “accountable plan”. Employers using this method expect their employees to pay for travel out of their own their own pocket. The employee would submit an expense report with receipts attached to their employer. The employer would then reimburse their employee for these costs.

From the employee perspective, per diem payments are only tax free if these funds are used to cover business related travel expenses (specifically lodging and meals). There are instances when the per diem payments might exceed the actual amounts paid for lodging and meals. When this occurs, it has been widely accepted the differences are considered de minimis. De minimis refers to something or a difference that is so little, small, minuscule or tiny that the law does not refer to it and will not consider it.

Putting the per diem issue aside, your real issue is whether or not your employment is considered a temporary assignment. The guideline for determining a temporary assignment is one that lasts less than one year.

Once your assignment lasts beyond a year, it is no longer considered temporary.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Alaska says Palin owes taxes on per diem expenses
By ANNE SUTTON – 1 hour ago

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Gov. Sarah Palin must pay back taxes on nearly $18,000 in expenses she charged the state for living in her home outside Anchorage instead of at the state capital, officials said Wednesday.

A review of state policy and Internal Revenue Service tax laws determined the per diem payments should be treated as income, Department of Administration Commissioner Annette Kreitzer said.

The charges came to light after Palin was named John McCain's running mate on the Republican presidential ticket in August and became a campaign issue after she was presented to the nation as a fiscal conservative.

Is that tax evasion or just a mistake. Apologize Sarah, pay the taxes (interest and penalty free) and you'll get a cabinet post.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
TexasBred said:
Oldtimer said:
Alaska says Palin owes taxes on per diem expenses
By ANNE SUTTON – 1 hour ago

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Gov. Sarah Palin must pay back taxes on nearly $18,000 in expenses she charged the state for living in her home outside Anchorage instead of at the state capital, officials said Wednesday.

A review of state policy and Internal Revenue Service tax laws determined the per diem payments should be treated as income, Department of Administration Commissioner Annette Kreitzer said.

The charges came to light after Palin was named John McCain's running mate on the Republican presidential ticket in August and became a campaign issue after she was presented to the nation as a fiscal conservative.

Is that tax evasion or just a mistake. Apologize Sarah and you'll get a cabinet post.

To me the real crime was and still is- that shes taking taxpayer money in the form of per diem for staying in her own house... Might not be illegal in that state- but its wrong- and just a symptom of the GREED over ETHICS that has overcome this country....
Then on top of it- she paid no tax on it as income.... :roll:
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
TexasBred said:

Is that tax evasion or just a mistake. Apologize Sarah, pay the taxes (interest and penalty free) and you'll get a cabinet post.

That's the point. Sometimes it is just a mistake.

The stranger point is that she got paid per diem but was at home and that she was at home the majority of the time she was governor.


A bit more info. Oldtimer:

Some other state employees also owe back income taxes for travel payments and will be getting revised tax forms, Annette Kreitzer, state administration commissioner, said in an e-mail.

She wouldn't say which, or how many, employees will be receiving the notifications.

The payments became a touchy issue for Palin last fall when she was running for vice president and campaigned as a budget watchdog.

The Washington Post published a story in mid-September that said she had charged the state almost $17,000 for meals and incidentals while staying in her own home.

The state considers Juneau, where she lives in the Governor's Mansion, to be Palin's official duty station.

Palin billed the state for 312 nights spent in her Wasilla home during her first 19 months in office, according to the Washington Post. She received $60 a day tax free, money intended to cover meals and incidentals, while traveling on state business, her travel forms show.

"Last fall we raised questions about longstanding practices within the Department of Administration regarding tax treatment of per diem payments," Kreitzer wrote in an exchange of e-mails over the past few days with the Daily News.

"At the Governor's request, we reviewed the situation to determine whether we were in full compliance with the pertinent Internal Revenue Service regulations," Kreitzer wrote. "As a result of this review, we determined that per diem needs to be treated as income, requiring a revision of W-2 forms for any affected employees."
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
So I owe income tax?! lol, I don't think so.

It wasn't for generating income!

The difference here is that this issue came to light in Aug. not a year or two ago, after numerous notices from the IRS, for all we know she paid them as soon as she got word!
 

Steve

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
TexasBred said:

Is that tax evasion or just a mistake. Apologize Sarah, pay the taxes (interest and penalty free) and you'll get a cabinet post.

That's the point. Sometimes it is just a mistake.

The stranger point is that she got paid per diem but was at home and that she was at home the majority of the time she was governor.

with that rational how is it alright for Nancy Pilosi to "fly home" on our dime?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
reader (the Second) said:
TexasBred said:
Is that tax evasion or just a mistake. Apologize Sarah, pay the taxes (interest and penalty free) and you'll get a cabinet post.

That's the point. Sometimes it is just a mistake.

The stranger point is that she got paid per diem but was at home and that she was at home the majority of the time she was governor.

with that rational how is it alright for Nancy Pilosi to "fly home" on our dime?

Oh I think they should pay Sister Sarah for her travel costs-- but not pay her per diem for every day she lives in her own house and not in the Governors mansion...
Per Diem is for your costs when you're away from home on business- not for when you go home...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Now that it has been determined/reviewed that way, I'm sure there are others that will be getting a bill, and paying it as a responsible person, like they are.
 

Mike

Well-known member
The incident with Sarah comes from a new state ruling on taxes.

Not only Sarah, but about 55 senators and legislators got hit with the new ruling..........even the Democrat that complained about her owes/owed back taxes.

We're talking about a small mount of money that Sarah owes in comparison to Daschles $100 k plus. :roll:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
I used to work for a large international firm that paid a per diem if you were staying with friends/family, while away from home. It was a cheaper per diem than staying at a motel.
 

Steve

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
Steve you claim to understand per diem so you should know it would be wrong to take per diem if you were staying at your home or even staying with your aunt on travel and being fed by her. The point of per diem is because you are on travel officially and incurring unusual expenses such as hotel and meals in restaurants.

The fact that officials can have their expenses for travel to and from their home paid for is acceptable, as part of what is owed them for being public servants and serving in the nation's or state's capital. Why should they pay to go to and from their homes when the expense is related to their job?

I don't think Palin should have taken per diem to begin with, nor travel expenses to her home.. or been given it... she was provided with accomidations.. going home wasn't a "business" or needed trip... period... so it should have been on her dime.. not Alaska's

I also find it offensive that we are paying for Nancy to fly home as well..

when every one can rely on facts instead of emotions I am sure most will say the whole practice is obnoxious.. no matter who gets the unwarrented perk..
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
when every one can rely on facts instead of emotions I am sure most will say the whole practice is obnoxious.. no matter who gets the unwarrented perk..

If they weren't getting paid as well as they do, I may feel differently, but for now I agree!

Maybe we should decide what they get paid, instead of having them do it themselves! Kinda like a restriction on Bank executive salary and bonuses!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
reader (the Second) said:
Steve you claim to understand per diem so you should know it would be wrong to take per diem if you were staying at your home or even staying with your aunt on travel and being fed by her. The point of per diem is because you are on travel officially and incurring unusual expenses such as hotel and meals in restaurants.

The fact that officials can have their expenses for travel to and from their home paid for is acceptable, as part of what is owed them for being public servants and serving in the nation's or state's capital. Why should they pay to go to and from their homes when the expense is related to their job?

I don't think Palin should have taken per diem to begin with, nor travel expenses to her home.. or been given it... she was provided with accomidations.. going home wasn't a "business" or needed trip... period... so it should have been on her dime.. not Alaska's

I also find it offensive that we are paying for Nancy to fly home as well..

when every one can rely on facts instead of emotions I am sure most will say the whole practice is obnoxious.. no matter who gets the unwarrented perk..

Steve I agree with you on the travel costs...And its both sides...I don't know if Pelosi- as 3rd in succession line to the President deserves a privat plane or not-- but I do know those folks waste a lot of money travelling..

Besides their little "research" junkets to "sunny beach" areas in the winter- the one that bent me worse was when during the energy argument the Repubs refused to take the recess- put on their dog and pony show in the House in the dark- and my Congressman (Rehberg) flew back and forth from Montana to D.C. so he could keep someone speaking, several times on taxpayer bucks....Pure Waste--and I don't think Repubs even realized their little tantrum pout and show actually cost them votes....
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
reader (the Second) said:
Steve you claim to understand per diem so you should know it would be wrong to take per diem if you were staying at your home or even staying with your aunt on travel and being fed by her. The point of per diem is because you are on travel officially and incurring unusual expenses such as hotel and meals in restaurants.

The fact that officials can have their expenses for travel to and from their home paid for is acceptable, as part of what is owed them for being public servants and serving in the nation's or state's capital. Why should they pay to go to and from their homes when the expense is related to their job?

I don't think Palin should have taken per diem to begin with, nor travel expenses to her home.. or been given it... she was provided with accomidations.. going home wasn't a "business" or needed trip... period... so it should have been on her dime.. not Alaska's

I also find it offensive that we are paying for Nancy to fly home as well..

when every one can rely on facts instead of emotions I am sure most will say the whole practice is obnoxious.. no matter who gets the unwarrented perk..

Steve I agree with you on the travel costs...And its both sides...I don't know if Pelosi- as 3rd in succession line to the President deserves a privat plane or not-- but I do know those folks waste a lot of money travelling..

Besides their little "research" junkets to "sunny beach" areas in the winter- the one that bent me worse was when during the energy argument the Repubs refused to take the recess- put on their dog and pony show in the House in the dark- and my Congressman (Rehberg) flew back and forth from Montana to D.C. so he could keep someone speaking, several times on taxpayer bucks....Pure Waste--and I don't think Repubs even realized their little tantrum pout and show actually cost them votes....[/quote]


You have hard and fast proof of that oldtimer or is it another one of your attempts to slander and BASH :roll: :roll:
 
Top