The coverup is always worse than the crime.

Now all the news for the rest of the month will be about this.

Rip off that bandaid, Mittens. We know about your dog.

Hm, if a taxpayer submits a Form 4868 to request a filing extension it means they either expect to receive a refund, or they have to send in payment for roughly 90% of what they estimate they will owe.

I wonder which of these options the Romneys took?

Probably broke by now.

What a stupid thing to do -- right before the election remind voters how rich he is and how little he pays in taxes.

The Romney campaign is an amateur hour indeed.

If I were Obama's campaign manager I would have Obama re-release ten years of his taxes and then call on Romney to do the same. And then I would have someone in a chicken suit follow Romney around demanding he do it.

It gives them time to falsify stuff and to manufacture watertight proofs.

Sluday the Slock Market slell way below slirteen hundred. Slis slould slode well for Slepublicans.

--from the pages of The Slonion...hilarious!

Just because Romney CAN wait until October to release his taxes doesn't mean he will. He can now file his taxes at any point during the campaign cycle to maximize the advantage/ minimize disadvantage. It's a good strategic move.

Hell, he may even decide to pay more taxes this time & move his wealth back onshore... with what he's already paid out of pocket to run for prez, an extra 10 million on the tax return this year might be a good investment if it can provide a gotcha moment at some point in the campaign.

That may be the first time Romney's done something that I can relate to.

Comte: He sent them a check for $3.2 million.

Filing extensions is commonplace. Tons of people do it, especially if they have accountants do their returns for them (which I'm sure Romney does), and also especially if they have lots of itemized deductions (which I'm also sure Romney does).

I'd guess he probably files for an extension EVERY year, and would have done so even if he weren't running for office.

This is a wild goose chase Paul.

This may not mean anything. Maybe Ann just forgot to pick up the Turbo Tax the last time she was at Costco?

@10:

In which case, he better HOPE his taxable income for 2011 wasn't much more than $21.33 mm, otherwise the Dems are going to be all over his gold-plated ass from here to Election Day.

And while filing an extension may be commonplace, one would THINK that anyone running for national political office would GET the notion that publishing their tax records might have some beneficial effect on their campaign - unless of course, when it doesn't.

@12

I figured Ann just needs the extension because it's so time consuming adding and subtracting all those figures on her pad of notebook paper.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/pol…

If my tax return was 100+ pages and counting, I'd file for an extension also.

I'm thinking that he actually needs that extension in order to focus-group every line item on that form.

Hold on, it's still cooking!

And this matters WHY? He's a sociopath and a filthy fucking mormon sociopath at that! For christfuckers sake--quit caring about living shit like this--PLEASE!!!!??!!!

I'm guessing he's got a messy back and forth going between his accountants and his political advisers about which loopholes and off-shore tax dodges he should be using for the 2011 taxes. He's concerned that his usual methods might cost him the election, but his accountant has been doing them that way for years. Once they figure out the least awful way for all this to look, they'll release them.

Bailo, the fuck is this 'Slonion' bullshit? You fucking really like being fucking crazier than a thirteen-cat bag lady?

By delaying he loses, either the economy collapses and voters are bitter over his insane wealth or it gets better and voters won't vote for the weird Mormon dude.

It doesn't matter to people who will vote for Romney what he pays in taxes, and it doesn't matter to those who won't vote for him (because we already know he's a tax evader). So no one cares.

@20- My mom has over 20 cats and is saner that that guy.

Most people are saner than Bailo, a fact that he reminds us of with every post.

Why do you guys call him Bailo?

Filing mid-October would leave just a few weeks for an in depth investigative story about his tax avoiding ways based on his latest tax return. Moreover, no matter which course of action he chooses, he'll get hammered about how little he pays in taxes by Democrats for the next 5 month so it's probably better if these attacks aren't based on actual current numbers since he can pretend that it is all speculation.

New around here, aren't you 25?

That's his IRL name.

Actually, he's not going to get the vote of losers who think his wealth is the reason for their poverty no matter what. Sane people realize that Romneys wealth has nothing to do whatever with how well or poorly they personally are doing.

Couple of things, fyi, though.

First, the top few percent pay close to a third of all tax revenue in this country. The top 20% pay a staggering 75% of all taxes. A bit more than half of taxpayers pay no federal taxes whatever. So, except for retarded people like Stranger staff and far left whackjobs, tax fairness should focus on the losers welching off their more successful fellow citizens. Pay up or move to Europe, losers.

Second, this may shock you, but in a general way another persons financial success or failure isn't your problem. Or your business. Romney is doing well. Congrats. Go ye therefore and do likewise. You know, instead of whining like a bunch of babies.

A now for a reality check on taxes and former hedge fund guys based upon several decades working with hedge fund people and taxes.

Romney probably always files for an extension because not all of his information is available by April 15th. K-1 forms, PFIC statements, etc. if you want to get technical.

Last year his very complicated, high dollar return went out at the last minute. While I am VERY sure it was prepared diligently, complicated last minute returns are notorious for mistakes. Everyone is tired and stressed and just doesn't care about quality as much as they typically care.

This year, you can all look forward to a new IRS form that will cause massive comments about his 2011 tax return, Form 8938. Without boring you with the details, this form requires him to report some of his offshore WEALTH, in addition to his offshore income. If you got wound up about a million dollar income, what will happen when you find out the wealth needed to generate that million dollar income.

Now I have to get back to cranking out some last minute tax return extensions of my own.

@28
"The top 20% pay a staggering 75% of all taxes."

What is "staggering" about that?
Taxes are not based off of headcount.
Taxes are based off of wealth.
Does Mitt Romney have 75x more wealth than someone living on $30,000 a year?
Yes, yes he does.

"A bit more than half of taxpayers pay no federal taxes whatever."

That is correct.
It is irrelevant but it is correct.
They pay no taxes because the wealth they have falls below the cut-off for minimum taxation.
In other words, they are poor.

"Go ye therefore and do likewise."

So you believe that if everyone in the USofA was worth $250 million then there would not be a problem? Wouldn't that just lead to massive inflation as the kid working at Burger King was paid $250 million? That's some expensive burgers he'd be selling.

Why do you think anyone would buy burgers that were that expensive?

SB, what is Romney's current occupation?

@30: Shhh, it doesn't want to understand economics.

@30 and 32

Oh. So, the military protects Mitt Romney and not me? Customs officers and federal law enforcement have details just for Mitt Romney?

No. That isn't why he owes more for his citizenship.

Must be because the nation buiilds highways and court systems for the sole benefit of Romney.

No. They don't. Despite what the left believes in this country the law broadly applies to Romney or Gates just as it does to me. I pay my taxes or pay the penalties, and so do they. I obey the criminal statues or go to jail, and so do they. When I go to the airport I get screened and searched by incompetent idiots in violation of my 4th Amendment rights, and so do they. Returning from overseas I must prove my citizenship and the fact that I'm not smuggling things back, and so must they. I get the precise benefit and have the precise responsibilities of all these things Mitt Romney does. So why again does he owe more for those things than I? For the heinous evil crime of being wealthy?

The real reason we tax the wealthy at burglarious rates is simple. When you want money, you go where the money is. FDR was an ammoral un American asshole who realized this, realized that a more or less permanent voting block of beggars from the public coffers could be had by throwing populist notions around, and built his power base around those realizations. Johnson likewise realized that by calling his war on property rights the 'War on Poverty' he could make federal power nearly absolute, and did so using the same populist babble as the traitor FDR. The left just began to believe its own lies promulgated to defend this theft, this disenfranchisement of the wealthy.

'Tax fairness' and 'paying ones share' and all the pathetic psuedo economic theories idiots like Robert Reich espouse aren't worth arguing. They're like the pathetic lies about CATASTROPHIC GLOBAL WARMING IN WHICH WE'LL ALL BE DEAD BY AUGUST FROM RISING SEA WATERS AND MELTING GLACIERS AND LIONS AND TIGERS AND BEARS OH MY!!!!!!! If someone wants to believe manifest untruths so badly trying to force them to see what's actually real is too much trouble.

@33
"Oh. So, the military protects Mitt Romney and not me?"

You know that you should not be posting when you have not taken your medication.

But I will inquire anyway.
Exactly what do you think the military is doing with Romney?
Or is it something Romney is doing with the military?

And seeing as how you skipped out on the other discussion - are you claiming that you were born heterosexual and did not have to make a "choice" about it but anyone who claims to be born homosexual is lying and it was a choice for them?

Not only that but I don't need our current military to protect the money in my IRA and my 60 year old house, but the rich need it to protect their huge multiple houses with elevators for cars. Very little of the goods moving on interstates now or ever will belong to me so of course people who have 99% of the wealth should pay 99% of the taxes. There are people who don't pay federal income tax but everybody pays other taxes like sales, fuel, property tax or pays more for goods because the makers of these goods pay taxes.

SB, what is Romney's current occupation?

@ 8:
deck chairs on the Titanic.

@33: Suppose a venture capitalist invests in two companies. One shoots up in value, the other barely scrapes by. According to you, it's unfair that the investor expects to get more back from the first company.
The government invests in all of us. It provides us with security, education, and safety. Some of us make more money than others, and so the share they owe to society is larger in absolute magnitude. Seattleblues, have you ever heard of isometry. (Don't Google it, you newfag.)

@38

Were you to go to a stable where the bull resided and collect the stuff straight from the animals anus, you couldn't get any more pure in your bullshit.

The government (in theory) meets its obligations by providing an environment in which business can prosper. They don't do this as an investment but as a discharge of the duties laid down for them in our Constitution. In creating this theoretical level playing field they've reached the extent of their authority.

Now that the field is set, how the players do is their business. Play well and the reward is wealth. Play poorly and the reward is poverty. In either case it isn't the governments business, so long as the rules are being followed to keep the playing field accessible to others.

It's only in the bizzarro world of progressive economic theory that we actually punish those who play by the rules and succeed. It's only in that strange twisted subjective place that we reward those who sit on the sidelines sipping a beer with the winnings of those who play the game and play it well. And then the crowning irony, the supreme insolence, is to call the whole thing fair or equitable or pretend that the players owed the lazy bench sitters any damn thing but contempt.

@34

What post were you reading, out of curiousity? Romney and Gates get the exact same protection from external threats as you or I from the military. Other than ironically I never suggested they got more.

Their homes and yours and mine are protected by local police paid for by the local taxes. In my area, those are largely property taxes and service based ones like building permits. So to take your example, Mitt Rommey builds a house with a car elevator. To construct the home, he must pull a permit whose cost to him is based on the total construction cost of the project. Once built, the house and lot are given an assessed value and he is taxed on the value of lot and improvements.

All along the line fairness is perfectly maintained so far. He has a home worth $20 million dollars and pays for the kind of neigborhood homes like this are built in with property taxes. More police and fire services, better parks and roads and so on are purchased with that property tax money. I have a home worth $300,000 and pay much less in taxes for the kind of neighborhood this kind of value buys. (Which, incidentally I'm perfectly happy with.) If I ask for additional services, like permission to build an addition or a second house on my lot, I pay proportionately to the service I ask of my county or city. If Romney wants a car elevator, he does so as well.

In contrast, in pooreer neighborhoods government services are actually more extensive and more costly. Crime being higher police and courts cost more. Social services are more in use, as well as subsidizing of things like housing, food, education and so on.

If anything the poorer citizen should in pure fairness pay more for his or her citizenship, not less since they demand much more from the government. I happen to agree that below a certain income level asking for taxes is silly and counterproductive. But that's a practical matter, not one of fairness.

I like to see folks succeed on whatever level they can envision their successs. For some, like Romney and Gates, that's a very high level indeed. For some, like me, that's the money to enjoy life, pay my bills, save a bit for travel and retirement, and do what I love doing for a reasonable financial compensation. For some that's getting to the 5th of the month with the rent paid and the lights still on. Unlike liberals I see these as personal decisions though. I don't see another mans pursuit of his happiness as anyones business but his.

@36

Our current president is an attorney. Well, in theory. He hasn't actually practiced law except very briefly right out of college as he looked around for how to use politics to maximize his personal gain. His only other job in the legal profession was to poison college kids mind with a hatred of this nation and everything it stands for as a professor of Constitutional law. Then he was a politician who abandoned his duties to his constituency (though NOT the paycheck for those duties) to seek higher state office. Then he repeated that process seeking national office. And again seeking the office of the president. But he is an attorney.

So, being an attorney and professor of Constitutional law, he is uniquely able to vet bills for Constitutionality, yes? As it turns out, no. One of his most trumpeted 'accomplishments' is to help pass an unconstitutional demand that all citizens purchase a specific financial instrument whether that decision is good for them or not. Private property means nothing to him (unless, you know it's HIS private property.) He has made public statements that the Constittution, the one he swore to uphold, is fundamentally flawed.

By contrast, Romney is a businessman and sometimes politician. Of the two, I'd prefer someone who's demonstrated an ability to delegate and use personnel resources to accomplish a goal. I mean, that's kind of what a president does, isn't it? Yes, standing in front of a class telling impressionable kids how horrible is their country is a unique qualifier for president, but I respectfully submit that it isn't a very good one.

Look in the IRS Fines for non-payment of US taxes line.

That is where his fines for avoiding US taxes by illegal overseas tax havens will be in his 2004-2010 tax returns.

It's a whopping big fine, actually.

@40
"What post were you reading, out of curiousity?"

That would be your post #33 in this thread.

"Romney and Gates get the exact same protection from external threats as you or I from the military."

First off, speak for yourself. Some of us actually served in the military.
And secondly, WTF are you talking about? Do you think "military protection" is something you purchase by the bottle down at the local 7-11?

Are you taking your medication?
Your posts are NOT making any sense.

@39: Bulls live in barns, not stables, you nitwit.
Okay, you want to make it about what powers and responsibilities the Federal government has? The Federal government is on a mission "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity". Nothing in there about making things nice for business, Seattleblues; apparently the Framers did think that promoting the general Welfare was important, though, so they'd probably approve of a social safety net in theory. And what powers does the Federal government have? Well, among others, "to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
So yeah, the Federal government can tax income of any sort however it feels best. There is nothing in the Constitution to say that everyone has to pay the same lump sum or the same percentage. If you don't like it, too bad. Or you can lead a movement to change it, but unfortunately you're a very small minority here.
Now, there are plenty of poor people who work their asses off ten or twelve hours a day and can barely keep up. And there are plenty of rich people (though not nearly as many, of course) who can kick back, do no work whatsoever, and live off their money's interest. I agree; it is pretty whacked.

@41: "BLAH BLAH BLAH OBAMA IS A HORRIBLE PERSON BECAUSE FOX NEWS TOLD ME SO BLAH BLAH BLAH."

@44 and 45

I don't watch either Fox or MSNBC. If I want Dem or Repub propaganda I'll just go the DNC or RNC websites. At any rate, I don't own a television and wouldn't waste good money on cable if I did.

But I get it. You think we live in a country with a federal government that has no limits whatever to its power. You think the Constitution a blank check of authority on which Congress or the President can draw without restraint just as their ambition or desire drives them.

I don't agree with you. There isn't anything in the minutes of the Constitutional Convention or the private writings of the men who wrote the document to support your conclusion. The document as a whole doesn't either. But hey, believe what you want if personal liberty is so entirely irrelevant to you. You threaten everything the men and women who've sacrificed and sometimes died to protect from the writing of the Constitution on to now with your attitude of willing slavery to your government, but that's your right.

You might note in passing that I've nowhere commented on whether the feds have the authority to levy taxes. Clearly they do within Constitutional bounds. I speak merely to the system of thought which uses taxes to punish people for the sucess liberals so desperately envy.

@43

Posting while drunk is a really bad idea. FYI.

@46
"Posting while drunk is a really bad idea. FYI."

Maybe the problem is that you're mixing alcohol with your medication. Maybe that would explain your comments such as:

"Oh. So, the military protects Mitt Romney and not me?"

Again, exactly what do you think the military is doing with Romney?
Or is it something Romney is doing with the military?

"Romney and Gates get the exact same protection from external threats as you or I from the military."

Again, some of us actually served in the military.

Do you really think that "military protection" is purchased by the bottle or something?

Or is your only experience with the military watching movies and playing video games?

Do you have any idea how much a carrier costs? No? I didn't think so.
So what are you talking about with "exact same protection"?
Or is that the latest FOX News talking point that you've picked up?

No, let's go with your delusion for right now.
How many $1 bottles of "military protection" do you think every man woman and child in the USofA would have to buy on a weekly basis to fund our military?

Come on, tell me how many bottles per week. Each for $1.

@47

First, thank you for your service to this nation. What it has to do with this discussion escapes me, but thanks at any rate.

Now to the issue at hand. How hard is this, really? You're making a difficulty on something we agree on, for a wonder.

You, I, VL, and Mitt Rommey gain the same benefit from what our military does. On that we appear to agree.

See, this was where our military came into the discussion. The feds give us a unified face to present to the world, and a military force to defend our interests in the world. They give us policing agencies for things states can't or shouldn't do, like customs or interstate crimes. They give us courts to resolve interstate issues and federal criminal or civil issues. They give us a transportation infrastructure. Now, follow this like a laser. Are you paying attention? Yeah? Okay- Mitt Romney gets no more and no less benefit from these things than you.

So why do you think he owes more for them?

Just because he makes more money or owns more stuff? Then you admit that yours is essentially an unjust system of political thought?

But hey, I realize that reality sucks for a liberal, so take another swig of whatever you've been guzzling and come back with some new non-sequitor if you like.

@48
"What it has to do with this discussion escapes me, but thanks at any rate."

The point is that some of us sacrificed for the benefit you enjoy so ...

"You, I, VL, and Mitt Rommey gain the same benefit from what our military does."

No. Some of us do what our "military does". Some, like you, do not.
You receive the benefit of what we do while we make the sacrifice.
It's not that difficult a concept.

"Okay- Mitt Romney gets no more and no less benefit from these things than you."

People die out there. Those people do not get same benefits as someone, like you, who claims that the benefits are spread evenly. A dead guy does not come back to a nice house in a nice neighborhood. He's dead.

"So why do you think he owes more for them?"

Because the reality is not what you seem to believe. You cannot buy a $1 bottle of "military protection" at the corner 7-11.

That is why you skipped over the part about how much it costs to run our military. Because once you put real numbers out there you see that FOX News talking points are juvenile.

But we can go with your delusion. Tell me how many $1 bottles of "military protection" will every man, woman and child have to buy every week to pay for our military.

Mitt was born in Mexico. We need to see the birth certificate!

SB, 'businessman' is not really an occupation. Nor is 'politician'. Romney earned income last year. What occupation did he work at to earn that?

@46: I believe that the Federal government has limits to its power. Your opinion just happens to differ from mine on what those limits are. You seem to think that if it's not laid out explicitly that the Federal government has a certain power, that Uncle Sam has no business doing anything. Not so, my friend. As soon as ANY issue crosses state lines, it is the business of the Federal government. And apart from what the Constitution explicitly or implicitly prohibits, the Federal government can regulate its business however the legislators feel is best.
Seattleblues, just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's not Constitutional. I don't know why you act like any sort of authority on the issue, seeing as you are in no way educated in Constitutional Law. Oops, did I just get a little elitist? Perish the thought that we should entrust the difficult tasks to the people trained to do them!

@52

"You seem to think that if it's not laid out explicitly that the Federal government has a certain power, that Uncle Sam has no business doing anything." Finally, you begin to understand how our Constitution works! I thought you'd NEVER get it!

See, unique among foundational government documents at the time, our Constitution granted certain powers and laid certain duties on the federal government. Then, and this is what made it unique, it expressly reserves "all other rights and priviledges to the several states and the citizens thereof." That is, if it isn't in the Constitution as a federal power or duty it explicitly does not exist as a federal power or duty.

We even passed an amendment to the Constitution that established federal constitutional standards as being binding on the states. That is, if Washington DC is forbidden from abridging my rights, so is Washington state.

That is, until Wickard. Once federal law and Supreme Court oversight established the purely insane notion that a man growing corn on HIS land for HIS cattle is an interstate trade issue and the rightful domain of the federal government- well, we began the descent from being free citizens of a free country to becoming slaves in fact if not in name. That descent- from the treasonous FDR to the odious Johnson to the slimy Obama- is what conservatives are trying to stop. That evolution from liberty to voluntary servitute to our government is what conservatives find appalling.

You want to wear a chain with an iron collar rather than the mantle of a free citizen? Go right ahead. But don't try to fit that chain around my neck, M'kay junior? Don't try to forge the links of that chain for my kids, allrighty kiddo?

@51

I thought I wrote this before, but apparently hadn't.

It doesn't matter what Mitt Rommey does to make his money, if it's legal. That he's successful at delegating authority to attain his ends accross a wide range of business activities is a recommendation for his ability to be president, not a detriment.

It doesn't matter how much money he owns or makes. Frankly, it isn't your business. Make your own money or don't, that is your business, but the only reason tax records are demanded of politicians ever is showboating by the oppostion.

Out of touch with the common people, Romney? Maybe. But that isn't what the thrust of the attacks on him are. They are pure class warfare and covetousness. They are democrats using envy as a political weapon, detestably. Dems know their base is ignorant low skill low income workers they can manipulate with the basest human instincts. They know theft from those who do earn trumps demanding of their base that they go out and earn themselves. They know class warfare and lies about 'War on Women' and lies about candidates are useful political tools with their lowbrow base.

Not the company I like to keep, but hey, if it works for you pal....

@53: Key word "explicitly", brah. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the Federal government has the right to regulate the trade of helium over state lines, but that power is in there implicitly, by analogy. This sort of thing is what the Elastic Clause is for; it gives the Federal government some leeway to make laws NECESSARY AND PROPER to exercise its powers.
And you're willfully ignorant of how economics works if you're still banging on about that one example. The market for corn is not state-specific, and the corn trade crosses state lines. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Federal government to regulate it. Producing or consuming corn increases the total supply or demand and thus affects the interstate market. Thus, Uncle Sam can regulate the production and/or consumption of corn.
Bottom line, just because you disagree with it doesn't mean it's not constitutional. You are neither a scholar nor a judge; you have no say in the matter any more than I do.
Also, if you fear voluntary servitude to this great nation, you better get out. I serve this country how I can, and I am proud to do so.

@54: Out of touch with the common people, Obama? Maybe. But that isn't what the thrust of the attacks on him are. They are pure class warfare and fearmongering. They are Republicans using phobia as a political weapon, detestably. Reps know their base is ignorant low skill low income workers they can manipulate with the basest human instincts. They know demonizing those who think or act or look differently from them trumps demanding of their base that they go out and educate themselves. They know class warfare and lies about 'War on Terror' and lies about candidates are useful political tools with their lowbrow base.
FTFY

@54
"They are pure class warfare and covetousness."

What's the matter? You cannot put prices to your claims?
We've been through this. Go ahead and post how many $1 bottles of "military protection" will every man, woman and child have to buy every week to pay for our military.

But you won't, will you?

Because those numbers would show exactly how wrong you are.

SB, I guess I'm struggling with the fact that it speaks well of Romney that he is able to amass a small fortune every year without having a job or serving any positive purpose, but it speaks poorly of the government to amass a small fortune in order to better serve its citizenry. Are lottery winners successful people too? Is it fair for the government to take a portion of their legally obtained money that denotes their high level of success, just because? Are heirs to large fortunes successful automatically in life, regardless of their actual accomplishments or failures?

He might genuinely need more time to file his taxes. The absolute fucking mess in Congress this last year meant that the IRS couldn't provide the 2011 forms in time. I'd say there's a pretty high possibility that he doesn't even have his K-1s yet.