It bothers me how the story on T's losses is being handled
Please bear with me on this... I'm not going where it may appear I'm going.
And I'm going to leave his name out of it, because I would say the same thing about anybody else.
The clips and write-ups I've seen so far on the story all push how much money he lost and therefore what a con and bad businessperson he was. But according to the NYT story, the available information doesn't prove he LOST that much money, only that he REPORTED losing it.
That's two separate and different things. Saying he lost it will generate conversations about why he lost it and whether it matters -- and one talking head is already making excuses and blaming it on the economy back then. OTOH, saying he reported it will generate conversations about whether the tax returns were truthful. I happen to believe the second one is more important than the first.
Let's not forget that this individual didn't just sit down at the kitchen table and fill out a five-or-six-page return like many of us mere mortals: there was a small army (okay, maybe a platoon) of tax specialists doing those taxes, and I have to believe they knew all the tricks and loopholes. Somebody had to sign those returns, asserting, under penalty of perjury, that they were truthful
So, for my money, I wish the pundits and reporters focused on his REPORTING he lost the money, instead of on his LOSING it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
... and he did it routinely - every year - to keep his tax bill as low as possible. To many of us it looks like tax fraud but apparently the IRS did audit him and OK'ed it.
We're looking at 30-year-old information, don't forget. Chump filed these during the years he had 4 bankruptcies. What's more relevant would be his recent filings from the last 10 years. Those are the ones we haven't seen, and they would tell the most about gifts/loans from the Russians etc.
