WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney released a trove of information on Friday afternoon about his financial holdings, capping a politically difficult week by returning the campaign to a topic that has dogged his presidential candidacy since last year.
In addition to releasing his completed 2011 tax returns, Romney also provided a one-page snapshot of 20 years of returns, an attempt to offer a deeper view of his wealth and to illustrate to voters that he has been paying income taxes for more than two decades.
Comments
Will Harry Reid apologize?
the Romney campaign said Romney's tax filings from 1990 to 2009 show that the couple paid 100% of the federal and state income taxes they owed and that their overall average annual effective federal tax rate was 20.2%. Annually they never paid an effective rate below 13.66%.
The Romney campaign SAID SO, but still refuse to release the returns? Gosh. How could ANYONE possibly doubt that they're hiding something? Ooops.
The fact that the Romney campaign said the effective tax rate was 20.2% is like my saying at the bank I have millions of dollars held overseas, but I can't show it too you. Come on "begolfing" that is not acceptable, it is not even reasonable. Merely a self-serving statement.
PricewaterhouseCoopers is lying?
Frankly Pricewaterhouse tells me nothing except what Mitt averaged you will note over a twenty year period. My own federal income tax is much higher over the last twenty years if averaged as opposed to the last ten years. As one voter I don't care what Mitt paid. However, this is a bit of political gamesmenship, which is also the way the game is played. If you weren't so enabored or dislike one candidtae so much you might recognize the difference between showing the tax returns for each year of a ten year period as opposed to coming up with an average for a twenty year period.
Actually I just heard that Mitt had to forgo taking his charitable deduction in order to raise the taxes paid from 9% to the 14.1. Now hey that's a fine thing to do, but it is a bit too funny. I'll pay more because I don't want to look bad. Amazing I surely wouldn't do that. I'd stick by my guns and say I paid only what I owed. Now Mitt plays with the numbers to look half-way good. This guy is one long comedy sketch.
He can file an amended return after the election, and take the deduction at that time. So there's no risk on his part.
The Boston Globe needs to hurry up and get it's attack dog team out of mothballs (OOPS, I meant to say the Globe's Investigative team).
regardless of how he discloses the information, the media will find some way to pounce, which is why he presented it this way. It is an average. He played games to keep his rate high. Whatever. Harry Reid is a spineless liar.
Romney's average annual effective federal tax rate was 20.20% and the Romneys gave, on average, 13.45% of their adjusted gross income to charity.
Wow, he really is cold hearted
Biden and his wife, Jill, gave 1.5 percent of their income away in 2011, with charitable donations totaling $5,540 out of $379,035
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81529.html#ixzz278cvIQt2
oh, and he released his medical records
and here come the MSM questioning: why did he release his records now?
This comment has been removed.
So, begolfing, this is possibly the dumbest thing I've seen you post. And that's saying a lot. How much does theRomney campaign pay you? Cuz if they're not paying you, you're missing out, big time.
"begolfing" You act as if asking the question is somehow saying Mitt is a bad guy. I frankly don't have a problem with the politician in fact if it wasn't for the Republican Party a Romney Presidency wouldn't bother me in the least. What I don't understand is how you refuse to recognize a twenty year average is not a reflection of what he paid in any give year. That's not picking on the guy that's saying come on run a decent campaign. He seems to be clueless unaware about how things look. He is obviously a generous guy no one denies that. What people do raise is the question of why his rate should be the same as some poor middle class schmuck. I get your ideological argument. I am merely pointing out the political argument. He's running a horrible campaign making one stupid remark after another and then getting caught looking like some business weasel. Even my conservative friends merely shake their heads and wonder why they couldn't come up with a real candidate.
he is damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. There is no way he can release individual returns becuase they would get parsed to deat. And his other commnets: He was right ablut Libya, right about the 47% (in context), correct about Palestine.
Romney is running campaign in which he is both too timid and too harsh. And because of his fear of criticism, he does come off looking like a weasel. I don't have a problem with him paying a low tax rate. What we pay in taxes is a rip off considering what we receive in return. That said, he is far more generous with the money he donates to charity than the Democrats, who specialize in giving away other people's money.
Harry reid LIED on the Senate floor. Great leader.
Why do you forget that the money was already taxed at a normal rate?
We earn money and are taxed.
If we earn a lot of money we are taxed a lot.
If we then invest money and realize a profit we that is taxed as capital gains.
How many of those who are commenting here have paid 1.9 million in taxes?
At least we know that his family can afford to go to Spain with anyone they want and it won't cost us anything.
How did the champagne at Beyonce and Jay Z's fete/fundraiser taste this week? Or was it kool-aid?
Since we know that Mr. Romney tithes, which means that he gives at least 10% of his income to the Mormon Church, and his Representatives are reporting that he's averaged 13.45% in charitable donations, that leaves only 3.45% given to other charities. I'm not impressed.
Do you understand the following paragraph from this article?
"Even though he made charitable contributions of $4 million in 2011 — nearly 30 percent of his income — he claimed deductions covering only $2.25 million. That decision increased the tax rate from 10.5 percent to 14.1 percent."
In other words, he COULD HAVE CLAIMED THE ENTIRE $4 MILLION, but ONLY claimed half, thereby INCREASING THE AMOUNT HE PAID IN TAXES!!
"Most of the donations go to a charitable foundation that he and his wife, Ann, started. The foundation helps the Mormon church, the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute’s Jimmy Fund, and the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, among other groups."
Now, let's put your other assertion into actual figures. If Romney gave $4,000,000 to charities of which 10% of his gross income, or $1,360,000 was given to his church, THAT LEAVES $2,640,000 to other charities. AND YOU HAVE THE NERVE TO FIND FAULT WITH THAT????
Romney was right all along. He said that Democrats would find fault with any and every tax return he put out there, and this HIT PIECE by the LIBERAL BOSTON GLOBE, is just that.
Let me ask you...what percentage of YOUR tax return did you give to charity?
I think martdec is still waiting for your reply
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
Romney doubles Obama's charitable giving
"Mitt Romney's presidential campaign is releasing a brief summary of 20 years of tax returns on Friday, and his accountant says it will show he gave 13.45 percent of his adjusted gross income to charities.
That's nearly twice the rate of President Obama, who according to his tax returns from 2000 through 2011 donated just less than 7 percent of his adjusted gross income to charities."
Read more: Romney doubles Obama's charitable giving - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/sep/21/romney-doubles-obamas-charitable-giving/#ixzz27CJAYIwG
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/sep/21/romney-doubles-obamas-charitable-giving/
NOW, let's see Harry Reid's Tax Returns! And how about Nancy Pelosi's?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/sep/21/nevada-republican-harry-reid-make-our-day-release-/
let us not forget that charitible donations are tax deductable, so in the long run it is a tax loop hole.
If you deduct the 10% he is REQUIRED TO TITHE to the Mormon church, he's a cheap skate.
Now it's time for Obama to release his college and law school records. And let's not forget Clinton's medical records. And how about Senator Kerry's service records?
Thank you, Leo! These "folks" are never questioned by their loyal media friends like the Globe. One add on for interest is that I have heard that either Obama's mother or grandmother was one of those rich CEO's who sponsored him all the way from Indonesia through Harvard. That old blowhard, Kerry's eyewitness testimony re: Vietnam should be printed and played repeatedly by the Boston Media. He made it soiund like hundreds of thousands of monsters wore American Uniforms.
Why aren't you asking for all those records from Romney and Ryan? The answer: You're not interested in the records. You're only interest is creating an issue where one doesn't exist.
Martec, Romney increased his tax payments because if he didn1t his effective rate would have been just over 9%. By the way he, and the rest of us have 3 years to amend our taxes. I`m sure he will refile his 2011 taxes and recoup what he let go, especially if he loses.
Blaming Bush goes on and on. Please find a new song to sing or just hum along with Obama's chorus as they swing and sway, pointing their fingers toward heaven when anyone complains. If you really believe increasing taxes on the "rich" is the answer, consult with the experts who agree that you could take every dime of every "rich" person and still no solve America's financial plunge toward a "Greek" ecnomic solution. Please recall that unemployment was 4.1% in 2008. Prior to this era under Mr. Obama, gasoline was $1.58/gallon. That Democrat wish for those unemployed "folks" on welfare with bad credit to own their home under the Dodd/Frank bill is the prime cause of our entire housing collapse. Good luck with your future analyses.
Profox - I think you've lost it. BobAnn's post that you replied to doesn't mention Bush. Your post is an illogical. confused stream of conscieousness. Maybe a good night's sleep would help.
Romney video explaining qualifications for Presidency ...
youtube.com/watch?v=YLrvvRkqrKM&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Yesterday, releases 2011 return paying MORE taxes than due to RAISE the tax percentage to ABOVE 14.
A more truthful analysis of Romney`s (or anyone`s for that matter) tax payments would be the "mode" not the "average". The mode reveals the number, in this case the tax %, that most frequently appears. An average merely takes all the numbers, adds them up and divides them. This method can skew percentages quite a bit, i.e. raising the amount paid in this case. Show the real numbers and maybe we will all go away. Otherwise it still appears you are hiding something.
Front Page news, above the fold - Globe priority! However, no mention of Obama telling us that he had didn't know what the U.S. debt was when he took office 4 years ago (10 trillion) - nor - could he tell us the amount of the U.S. debt now (16 trillion). Anyone besides me wondering how the Globe determines their presidential campaign priorities?
Front page above the fold story tomorrow .... Globe holding Harry Reid responsible for his claim that Romney paid no taxes! Of course this is something the Globe will cover, the totally irresponsible slander of Romney!
Note: my previous comments regarding Obama's lack of knowledge about the U.S. debt (16 TRILLION) was televised during Obama's interview with David Letterman.
The exact amount of the national debt is unimportant. It's virtually impossible to do much about it.
The goal should be to balance the budget over the next few years (it's not an emergency) so that we don't continue to add to the debt.
There's no realistic way to lower the debt by paying it off, but inflation over the years will lower it as a percentage of the GDP. That's the best we can do, whether the debt is 10 trillion or 16 trillion. For political purposes or out of ignorance, there a bunch of scare-mongers making it sound like this is Greece, which is far from the case.
To pay down the national debt plus interest over 50 years would require at least $2 million a year from every man, woman, and child in this country.
Romney isn't working and he pays 14% while the rest of us work and pay 28%. Rigged? You bet!
How is this relevant to my life?
profox, get your facts straight. The unemployment rate in Dec. 2008 was 7.2% and not 4.1 as you posted. As a matter of fact the lowest rate for the entire year was 4.4%. I wonder what it was by the time Obama took office one month later? Certainly higher since we were losing over 700,000 jobs per month. Did you really think noone would check your numbers?
Mitt's combined income tax and charitable givings were more than Obama's in both dollars and percentage of income (Spin away Globe!). He obviously values contributing to society.
Correction: Romney taxes were NOT higher than Obama's in percentage of income -- unless your version of new math makes 14% higher than 20%.
The relative wealth of Romney and Obama are so far from each other that comparing the amount of money each paid in dollars is disingenuous.
who-cares ... read my post please. Taxes plus charitable donations. Romney gave more back to society in both percentage of income and actual dollars.