Is the issue here that people want to know how much he made (makes) or how much he was taxed? If this is an issue of fair taxation, then why not pressure the IRS for a review, audit, or other verification process. If the dude has off book stuff, it's not going to show up on his tax returns. If he evaded taxes - shame on him and I hope he gets busted. If he has tax people who know how to navigate the system and maximize his take home pay - shame on the IRS. Do people care because he has lots of money? or do people care because they are mad he pays less taxes than them? I genuinely don't understand the issue.
I don't think tax evasion is the issue I think it is if he legally nothing it will look bad. His dad apparently did not take deductions on principle.
There was some issue about when he was CEO of Bain, and whether he claimed he was. That might be something that he doesn't want revealed. But I don't think these records go back that far. But, maybe there is something similar. If his records are not substantially different from those he released, he probably would have released them.
I can't speak for "people" but from where I sit, it is simple. He is running for President of the US and the electorate would like to see his tax record for several reasons: 1. Ensure he is abiding by our tax laws 2. See where he falls percentage wise 3. See what "loop holes" -(his words) he takes advantage of. When you have a huge portion of your policy platform dedicated to cutting taxes for upper earners, it's only fair that we know where he is on the tax spectrum and what his recent history is there. You "genuinely" can't see why the electorate would be wary of someone taking this much guff over releasing the records? His own party is urging him to do so, yet he won't. There must be something pretty damning there. Now we are all extremely curious. This isn't some new baseless request like say... a long form birth certificate, there is precedent for showing the public these things. What does this say about how transparent of a president he will be? He can't trust us enough to show us his tax returns, what else are we incapable of knowing?
Would you be satisfied with a statement from the IRS or some other auditing firm that stated that 1. He has paid taxes as required by the federal government 2. that the percentage he paid was the correct percentage for his tax bracket and 3. that all loopholes, deductions, and other ethically slippery stuff his tax people use is all legal? I don't think a lot of good comes from knowing what other people earn. Aside from an assurance that all three of your points are validated, I think that knowing Willard's bottom line is morbid curiosity. And so that my next point is very clearly understood, let me clearly state that I personally don't care about seeing a long form birth certificate. But since you brought this up, I think it is a lot like that situation. Why do the crazy nut jobs want to see the long form birth certificate (besides being crazy)? Because they were given something and they want more. They should be happy with a birth certificate. (I mean, it's a small thing, but it's a thing.) I think we should accept some kind of verification that Romney's dealings are/were above board. Whether we like the percentage he pays isn't up to him. It's up to the shelters at the IRS and elsewhere that help rich people pay less. Maybe... but that's an assumption. Look, I'm not a Romney-ite. I don't care how much he earns. What I care about it if the people he pays to do his taxes did it honestly. I don't care to see President Obama's tax returns or birth certificate either.There must be something pretty damning there.
How much Mit payed in taxes seems like a pretty interesting question to me. He is running on a platfrom to get america back to work. This is supposed to be done by removing the barriers to the 'producers' that is the 'rich' to get things done. This means lowering taxes, removing pesky regulation, beating down those ugly unions, and generaly putting more wealth and power into the hands of captial at the expense of workers (if the rich pay less taxes the middle class ends up bearing a greater percentage of the cost of running the government). If Mit has already payed a way lower tax rate then you or I, and he and his friends stand to significantly benefit in even lower taxes and regulation as a result of his proposed policies this is pretty interesting. Mitt is probably the richest man to ever run for president (not sure how much old Ross was worth). If the richest man to ever run for president pays way less then a working man and has promised to make sure he pays less then maybe that is something that voters might like to know about.
It's not morbid curiosity when the man could potentially be in a position to shape the tax code. There could be a conflict of interest there which would be evident to the electorate or media but as is will remain cloaked. I'm not curious about how much money he earned, I know that it's a hefty number. I'm curious about the percentage of his earnings he paid in taxes. I pay approximately 30% of my earnings in taxes. That hurts. If I were to find out that Romney paid 10%, and that the policies he hopes to enact would only reinforce such things, I'll be inclined to vote elsewhere. I would be happy if the IRS stated what % of overall earnings Romney paid in taxes. That is a fair question imo. It is directly related to policy making --something a long form birth certificate is not. By the way, there are certain deductions that I could probably "get away with" when I file my taxes but I don't do it because while it may toggle the line of legality, it's less than honest. I'm no "wing nut", I just would like to know where a candidate that I could potentially support draws his ethical lines. Also, I posted this cool link per this discussion. Check it out, pretty cool that this is available imo. Tax records tell a story steve, it's not just morbid curiosity, it's history.
That is a VERY cool link. I've been looking through the 203 pages of Romney's 2010 return (as much as I can in between things at work). If I read it right - with no wages, salaries, tips, etc. he earned about 21mil and paid about 3mil (14% tax). Most of his income seems to have come from "Capital Gain" President Obama paid between 25%-33% in 2007 and 2008. Most of his income came from "Business Income". I'm not a tax guy, so I'll shut up. I think the tax code is jacked.