If you lose a billion dollars 30 years ago, and 30 years later you have 3.5 billion in the positive then I'd say you did pretty ****ing alright.

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

So you're saying that a guy who lost a boat load of money 30 years ago managed to recover, become independently wealthy, and then hold the highest office in the land..? That sounds like a success story to me.

I know plenty of farmers who do very well and claim very low profits (or even losses) every single year. Unless something illegal was done (and I don't know that it has), this isn't unheard of. For the record, our tax system sucks because it has all kinds of loopholes that require a special degree and constant CE to understand. Our tax code should be a simple, flat tax that the average person can figure with a calculator...it would end crap like this.

That's my 2 cents on it.

Kinda interesting to me that now the mainstream media seems to be recycling old stories to discredit Trump. They must be getting low on material.

From the New York Times from October 3, 2016:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

No one knows how much Trump is worth or how much he started with. Those of you who accept he has been a great success in business are speculating based on what you see on TV.

---

Actually, Booray, I think you have touched on the reason why Donald Trump does not want to reveal his tax returns. I am not sure he is worth quite what he has claimed. Yes, he is a narcissist. If he has claimed to be worth $10 billion and is only actually worth $5 billion, does that make him a failure? I don't think so.

---

Providing tax returns will not reveal net worth.

Iron Claw said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

No one knows how much Trump is worth or how much he started with. Those of you who accept he has been a great success in business are speculating based on what you see on TV.

---

Actually, Booray, I think you have touched on the reason why Donald Trump does not want to reveal his tax returns. I am not sure he is worth quite what he has claimed. Yes, he is a narcissist. If he has claimed to be worth $10 billion and is only actually worth $5 billion, does that make him a failure? I don't think so.

---

Providing tax returns will not reveal net worth.

---

True. In all honesty, I think it is pretty clear that Trump has a much better tax man than Bernie Sanders.

Florda_mike said:

---

midgett said:

---

Never have understood the debate on Obama's birth or Trump's net worth. They are already president. It ain't gonna change anything. Trump is wealthy. The amount, I don't know.

I recall in his first bankruptcy he negotiated a monthly allowance of like $300k. I was mad. If he's bankrupt, why give him $300k PER MONTH for living expenses?

Trump knew something his bankers hadn't learned. If the bank loans you $10,000, they own you. If they loan you most of their net capital you own the bank. They depend on you paying them back.

---

Good stuff!

You've read about him!

Last paragraph shows he's got a handle on our debt

I've looked at that debt and we've got a lotta good debt if you're a real estate man imo

Owing Fed is extremely negotiable!

Most all others can be easily settled or negotiated down by a great negotiator and we've got one at the helm. China doesn't have jack on us with what we owe em. He could eliminate their debt in tariff negotiations and that could be what he's setting up

---

He has grown our debt. How is that good? He promised to reduce it. Some people actually believed him. Lol

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

You seem to conveniently forget that all of the 2016 and prior Russian meddling happened under Obama's watch. Why did he not do anything? I will tell you why, - he had not clue that they were a threat. There are more than a handful of youtube videos that show Obama lecturing both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump on this topic.

Iron Claw said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Booray said:

---

No one knows how much Trump is worth or how much he started with. Those of you who accept he has been a great success in business are speculating based on what you see on TV.

---

Actually, Booray, I think you have touched on the reason why Donald Trump does not want to reveal his tax returns. I am not sure he is worth quite what he has claimed. Yes, he is a narcissist. If he has claimed to be worth $10 billion and is only actually worth $5 billion, does that make him a failure? I don't think so.

---

Providing tax returns will not reveal net worth.

---

Correct. I think his net worth is irrelevant. However his tax returns will show where his leverage is coming from since most banks will not lend him any longer since he defaults. See Deutche Bank and Russian $. That's what needs to be looked at. Conflicts of interest act....That is precisely why he need to disclose his returns in the first place. He doesn't want to disclose because it will show that his is conflicted in a big way and he is no where near successful as he claims. Might even show some he's a crook which is very likely as he is just a bad, bad dude.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

midgett said:

---

Never have understood the debate on Obama's birth or Trump's net worth. They are already president. It ain't gonna change anything. Trump is wealthy. The amount, I don't know.

I recall in his first bankruptcy he negotiated a monthly allowance of like $300k. I was mad. If he's bankrupt, why give him $300k PER MONTH for living expenses?

Trump knew something his bankers hadn't learned. If the bank loans you $10,000, they own you. If they loan you most of their net capital you own the bank. They depend on you paying them back.

---

Good stuff!

You've read about him!

Last paragraph shows he's got a handle on our debt

I've looked at that debt and we've got a lotta good debt if you're a real estate man imo

Owing Fed is extremely negotiable!

Most all others can be easily settled or negotiated down by a great negotiator and we've got one at the helm. China doesn't have jack on us with what we owe em. He could eliminate their debt in tariff negotiations and that could be what he's setting up

---

He has grown our debt. How is that good? He promised to reduce it. Some people actually believed him. Lol

---

He's also grown our economy by the trillions.

When are you going to give up the shtick? You talk like a member of the reeeeeeesistance and POTUS obviously lives rent free in your head.

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

so you suddenly found your sense of humor? Hypocrite, but expected.

And Republican campaigns have been hacked. It happened in 2008 and 2012. Obama did nothing. In fact, when Russia was brought up, Obama accused Romney for having dating foreign policy views. Maybe if Obama had done something in the 7 years before the 2016 election instead of waiting until the last few months before the election to take any action, this wouldn't have happened. I don't expect a democrat to blame a democrat for a major breach during his watch because that's not what you lemmings do.

How they're reporting it, how everyone is reporting it, is so disingenuous and uninformed. You already know this, but let me offer some insight. I am not a tax guy but I am into finance.

1.) They're saying trump "spent a decade in the red," and they're making him out to be a failure as a result. Well you know, Amazon spent like 2 decades in the red but that doesn't matter to an uninformed public. Nobody is really calling Tesla a failure either, and they are quite financially.. beleaguered at the moment.

2.) They're talking about all of Trump's failed ventures, as if an entrepreneur working real estate development in one of the most corrupt cities in the world is not prone to failure...? What they don't talk about is how many successful athletes, inventors, magnates and moguls try and fail zillions of times before getting something right. Trump is freaking President, which to many, would be worth all the failures.

3.) They're also talking about how Trump wrote off losses.. and how that somehow cheated the system. And... they're talking about Trump initiating bankruptcy, and how that's cheating creditors... Let me tell you something. Nearly everyone with turbo tax takes a standard deduction, and some claim actual expenses or losses to reduce their tax burden. But again, that doesn't matter to the low information voters who watch The View and other garbage. Regarding "cheating creditors," has anyone ever heard of interest rates? Creditors are keenly aware of Trump's chance of success or failure. There is an entire career field dedicated to assessing credit risk. They charge interest to make up for that possibility.

So here we go, we are going to spend the next few weeks listening to the lame stream media beat this dead horse, reporting directly in front of Trump tower-- a landmark achievement that these morons can only dream about.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

You seem to conveniently forget that all of the 2016 and prior Russian meddling happened under Obama's watch. Why did he not do anything? I will tell you why, - he had not clue that they were a threat. There are more than a handful of youtube videos that show Obama lecturing both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump on this topic.

---

How do you reconcile the competing narratives that, on the one hand Obama did nothing about Russian interference, while on the other hand he engaged in unnecessarily heavy handed investigatory techniques to try and stop Russian interference? They would seem to be mutually exclusive of each other. This is even further complicated by the true-believer Trumpist narrative that Russian interference never happened or was a Dem setup somehow to get at Trump...

Something tells me that the "Obama did nothing about Russia" narrative comes from a place of extremely bad faith, and is really just y'alls way of deflecting to avoid having to actually talk about what really happened

HuMcK said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

You seem to conveniently forget that all of the 2016 and prior Russian meddling happened under Obama's watch. Why did he not do anything? I will tell you why, - he had not clue that they were a threat. There are more than a handful of youtube videos that show Obama lecturing both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump on this topic.

---

How do you reconcile the competing narratives that, on the one hand Obama did nothing about Russian interference, while on the other hand he engaged in unnecessarily heavy handed investigatory techniques to try and stop Russian interference? They would seem to be mutually exclusive of each other. This is even further complicated by the true-believer Trumpist narrative that Russian interference never happened or was a Dem setup somehow to get at Trump...

Something tells me that the "Obama did nothing about Russia" narrative comes from a place of extremely bad faith, and is really just y'alls way of deflecting to avoid having to actually talk about what really happened

---

I'll just leave this here:

Oops

LOL - some fine reporting by NYTimes.

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

You seem to conveniently forget that all of the 2016 and prior Russian meddling happened under Obama's watch. Why did he not do anything? I will tell you why, - he had not clue that they were a threat. There are more than a handful of youtube videos that show Obama lecturing both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump on this topic.

---

How do you reconcile the competing narratives that, on the one hand Obama did nothing about Russian interference, while on the other hand he engaged in unnecessarily heavy handed investigatory techniques to try and stop Russian interference? They would seem to be mutually exclusive of each other. This is even further complicated by the true-believer Trumpist narrative that Russian interference never happened or was a Dem setup somehow to get at Trump...

Something tells me that the "Obama did nothing about Russia" narrative comes from a place of extremely bad faith, and is really just y'alls way of deflecting to avoid having to actually talk about what really happened

---

I'll just leave this here:

---

I'm honestly at a loss as to what you're trying to say here or how its relevant at all to the post you quoted. Firing Comey kicked off an Obstruction investigation, so what?

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

You seem to conveniently forget that all of the 2016 and prior Russian meddling happened under Obama's watch. Why did he not do anything? I will tell you why, - he had not clue that they were a threat. There are more than a handful of youtube videos that show Obama lecturing both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump on this topic.

---

How do you reconcile the competing narratives that, on the one hand Obama did nothing about Russian interference, while on the other hand he engaged in unnecessarily heavy handed investigatory techniques to try and stop Russian interference? They would seem to be mutually exclusive of each other. This is even further complicated by the true-believer Trumpist narrative that Russian interference never happened or was a Dem setup somehow to get at Trump...

Something tells me that the "Obama did nothing about Russia" narrative comes from a place of extremely bad faith, and is really just y'alls way of deflecting to avoid having to actually talk about what really happened

---

I'll just leave this here:

---

I'm honestly at a loss as to what you're trying to say here or how its relevant at all to the post you quoted. Firing Comey kicked off an Obstruction investigation, so what?

---

Why not read it?

They went with obstruction BEFORE Comey was fired. Obama knew everything.

I honestly can't believe you're still not understanding what happened here.

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

You seem to conveniently forget that all of the 2016 and prior Russian meddling happened under Obama's watch. Why did he not do anything? I will tell you why, - he had not clue that they were a threat. There are more than a handful of youtube videos that show Obama lecturing both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump on this topic.

---

How do you reconcile the competing narratives that, on the one hand Obama did nothing about Russian interference, while on the other hand he engaged in unnecessarily heavy handed investigatory techniques to try and stop Russian interference? They would seem to be mutually exclusive of each other. This is even further complicated by the true-believer Trumpist narrative that Russian interference never happened or was a Dem setup somehow to get at Trump...

Something tells me that the "Obama did nothing about Russia" narrative comes from a place of extremely bad faith, and is really just y'alls way of deflecting to avoid having to actually talk about what really happened

---

I'll just leave this here:

---

I'm honestly at a loss as to what you're trying to say here or how its relevant at all to the post you quoted. Firing Comey kicked off an Obstruction investigation, so what?

---

The jokes write themselves... You all just need to stop posting for a few months. Please watch to the end, and this is just 1% of the hypocrisy that is on film from the Dems.

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Didn't you know, that was clearly just a "joke" like the one Trump made? But seriously, precedent sets the rules, and 2016 precedent dictates that the GOP has exactly 0 ground from which to whine about hacks or leaks against them. Did y'all really think 2016 could go down the way it did, plus the ensuing cover-up and soft treatment of Russia by Republicans, without any repercussions going forward? I can't wait for the RNC to get hacked and for Republicans to suddenly find their patriotism. My expected response to that, and this, is dramatized below.

---

You seem to conveniently forget that all of the 2016 and prior Russian meddling happened under Obama's watch. Why did he not do anything? I will tell you why, - he had not clue that they were a threat. There are more than a handful of youtube videos that show Obama lecturing both Mitt Romney and Donald Trump on this topic.

---

How do you reconcile the competing narratives that, on the one hand Obama did nothing about Russian interference, while on the other hand he engaged in unnecessarily heavy handed investigatory techniques to try and stop Russian interference? They would seem to be mutually exclusive of each other. This is even further complicated by the true-believer Trumpist narrative that Russian interference never happened or was a Dem setup somehow to get at Trump...

Something tells me that the "Obama did nothing about Russia" narrative comes from a place of extremely bad faith, and is really just y'alls way of deflecting to avoid having to actually talk about what really happened

---

I'll just leave this here:

---

I'm honestly at a loss as to what you're trying to say here or how its relevant at all to the post you quoted. Firing Comey kicked off an Obstruction investigation, so what?

---

Why not read it?

They went with obstruction BEFORE Comey was fired. Obama knew everything.

I honestly can't believe you're still not understanding what happened here.

---

I read it, still don't see how it relates to what you quoted, which is admittedly itself a digression from the OP's topic of trump's extreme tax avoidance.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

midgett said:

---

Never have understood the debate on Obama's birth or Trump's net worth. They are already president. It ain't gonna change anything. Trump is wealthy. The amount, I don't know.

I recall in his first bankruptcy he negotiated a monthly allowance of like $300k. I was mad. If he's bankrupt, why give him $300k PER MONTH for living expenses?

Trump knew something his bankers hadn't learned. If the bank loans you $10,000, they own you. If they loan you most of their net capital you own the bank. They depend on you paying them back.

---

Good stuff!

You've read about him!

Last paragraph shows he's got a handle on our debt

I've looked at that debt and we've got a lotta good debt if you're a real estate man imo

Owing Fed is extremely negotiable!

Most all others can be easily settled or negotiated down by a great negotiator and we've got one at the helm. China doesn't have jack on us with what we owe em. He could eliminate their debt in tariff negotiations and that could be what he's setting up

---

He has grown our debt. How is that good? He promised to reduce it. Some people actually believed him. Lol

---

He's also grown our economy by the trillions.

When are you going to give up the shtick? You talk like a member of the reeeeeeesistance and POTUS obviously lives rent free in your head.

---

You post much more about the president than I do.

Much of this whole "tax returns" junk is about playing on general mass ignorance about tax law and even about what a tax return is actually all about. A tax return is a report that declares income (as the government defines income) and then shows declared deductions, credits, etc. to ultimately arrive at whatever the taxpayers "taxable income" is and if that ends up being a positive number, then the applicable tax rate is applied to arrive at the taxpayer's bottom line liability. If it's a negative number, then you have a loss - for income tax purposes - for which there are either carry-back or carry-forward options, etc. And reporting NOLs on tax returns happens frequently for high end, entrepreneurial tax payers and for corporations and doesn't necessarily indicate total failure or certain bankruptcy, etc. Also, for accounting purposes, the books for the entrepreneur or corporation might be quite different and it's all completely legal as we're talking about two different things here (again, something that's widely misunderstood due largely to the complexity and nature of our income tax laws).

As far as whether or not tax cheating or anything illegal is going on - that's what IRS audits are for and I'm sure somebody like Trump has been audited frequently if not continuously throughout most of his business career. If he's cheating, I have confidence the IRS will find it and there has been nothing to date that I'm aware of to indicate that has been or is the case.

And of course, as others have indicated, tax returns tell you exactly zero about the taxpayer's total assets and/or net worth, etc., which are much greater "success indicators".

So, bottom line, this is all just another attempt at making the POTUS look bad, or look like a failure, or appear dishonest while playing on people's ignorance.

Johnny Bear said:

---

Much of this whole "tax returns" junk is about playing on general mass ignorance about tax law and even about what a tax return is actually all about. A tax return is a report that declares income (as the government defines income) and then shows declared deductions, credits, etc. to ultimately arrive at whatever the taxpayers "taxable income" is and if that ends up being a positive number, then the applicable tax rate is applied to arrive at the taxpayer's bottom line liability. If it's a negative number, then you have a loss - for income tax purposes - for which there are either carry-back or carry-forward options, etc. And reporting NOLs on tax returns happens frequently for high end, entrepreneurial tax payers and for corporations and doesn't necessarily indicate total failure or certain bankruptcy, etc. Also, for accounting purposes, the books for the entrepreneur or corporation might be quite different and it's all completely legal as we're talking about two different things here (again, something that's widely misunderstood due largely to the complexity and nature of our income tax laws).

As far as whether or not tax cheating or anything illegal is going on - that's what IRS audits are for and I'm sure somebody like Trump has been audited frequently if not continuously throughout most of his business career. If he's cheating, I have confidence the IRS will find it and there has been nothing to date that I'm aware of to indicate that has been or is the case.

And of course, as others have indicated, tax returns tell you exactly zero about the taxpayer's total assets and/or net worth, etc., which are much greater "success indicators".

So, bottom line, this is all just another attempt at making the POTUS look bad, or look like a failure, or appear dishonest while playing on people's ignorance.

---

What it does show is that for that period of time, he was failure. Not how he portrays himself, hence he's a fraud and a liar. But, we knew about the lying part. Additionally, tell me where you he recieved $52M in interest income in one year? The bigger question is...where is the money coming from? That is why he is doing everything possible not to turn over those returns as the related schedules just might land him in jail.

J.R. said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Much of this whole "tax returns" junk is about playing on general mass ignorance about tax law and even about what a tax return is actually all about. A tax return is a report that declares income (as the government defines income) and then shows declared deductions, credits, etc. to ultimately arrive at whatever the taxpayers "taxable income" is and if that ends up being a positive number, then the applicable tax rate is applied to arrive at the taxpayer's bottom line liability. If it's a negative number, then you have a loss - for income tax purposes - for which there are either carry-back or carry-forward options, etc. And reporting NOLs on tax returns happens frequently for high end, entrepreneurial tax payers and for corporations and doesn't necessarily indicate total failure or certain bankruptcy, etc. Also, for accounting purposes, the books for the entrepreneur or corporation might be quite different and it's all completely legal as we're talking about two different things here (again, something that's widely misunderstood due largely to the complexity and nature of our income tax laws).

As far as whether or not tax cheating or anything illegal is going on - that's what IRS audits are for and I'm sure somebody like Trump has been audited frequently if not continuously throughout most of his business career. If he's cheating, I have confidence the IRS will find it and there has been nothing to date that I'm aware of to indicate that has been or is the case.

And of course, as others have indicated, tax returns tell you exactly zero about the taxpayer's total assets and/or net worth, etc., which are much greater "success indicators".

So, bottom line, this is all just another attempt at making the POTUS look bad, or look like a failure, or appear dishonest while playing on people's ignorance.

---

What it does show is that for that period of time, he was failure. Not how he portrays himself, hence he's a fraud and a liar. But, we knew about the lying part.

---

Dude, it's in his ****ing book: the art of the comeback.

Nothing is new here. Nothing that I didn't already know.

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

midgett said:

---

Never have understood the debate on Obama's birth or Trump's net worth. They are already president. It ain't gonna change anything. Trump is wealthy. The amount, I don't know.

I recall in his first bankruptcy he negotiated a monthly allowance of like $300k. I was mad. If he's bankrupt, why give him $300k PER MONTH for living expenses?

Trump knew something his bankers hadn't learned. If the bank loans you $10,000, they own you. If they loan you most of their net capital you own the bank. They depend on you paying them back.

---

Good stuff!

You've read about him!

Last paragraph shows he's got a handle on our debt

I've looked at that debt and we've got a lotta good debt if you're a real estate man imo

Owing Fed is extremely negotiable!

Most all others can be easily settled or negotiated down by a great negotiator and we've got one at the helm. China doesn't have jack on us with what we owe em. He could eliminate their debt in tariff negotiations and that could be what he's setting up

---

He has grown our debt. How is that good? He promised to reduce it. Some people actually believed him. Lol

---

Not a lotta time but simply put ......

I've looked at our national debt and have no fears about it as long as we have great negotiator in White House that's lived a life managing debt in order to grow

With Trump, we have good debt

With another clueless community organizer type like obama we'd be on shaky ground as he has no negotiation skills at all

Doc Holliday said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Much of this whole "tax returns" junk is about playing on general mass ignorance about tax law and even about what a tax return is actually all about. A tax return is a report that declares income (as the government defines income) and then shows declared deductions, credits, etc. to ultimately arrive at whatever the taxpayers "taxable income" is and if that ends up being a positive number, then the applicable tax rate is applied to arrive at the taxpayer's bottom line liability. If it's a negative number, then you have a loss - for income tax purposes - for which there are either carry-back or carry-forward options, etc. And reporting NOLs on tax returns happens frequently for high end, entrepreneurial tax payers and for corporations and doesn't necessarily indicate total failure or certain bankruptcy, etc. Also, for accounting purposes, the books for the entrepreneur or corporation might be quite different and it's all completely legal as we're talking about two different things here (again, something that's widely misunderstood due largely to the complexity and nature of our income tax laws).

As far as whether or not tax cheating or anything illegal is going on - that's what IRS audits are for and I'm sure somebody like Trump has been audited frequently if not continuously throughout most of his business career. If he's cheating, I have confidence the IRS will find it and there has been nothing to date that I'm aware of to indicate that has been or is the case.

And of course, as others have indicated, tax returns tell you exactly zero about the taxpayer's total assets and/or net worth, etc., which are much greater "success indicators".

So, bottom line, this is all just another attempt at making the POTUS look bad, or look like a failure, or appear dishonest while playing on people's ignorance.

---

What it does show is that for that period of time, he was failure. Not how he portrays himself, hence he's a fraud and a liar. But, we knew about the lying part.

---

Dude, it's in his ****ing book: the art of the comeback.

Nothing is new here. Nothing that I didn't already know.

---

I wouldn't be surprised if Trump has created more wealth than all us here combined!

To question anything of his business savvy is insane

contrario said:

---

So wait, HRC publicly asks a for a foreign government to dig up Trump's tax returns and then this story is published only days later. Wasn't the left in a tizzy when Trump did the same thing? But no outrage with HRC for this?

---

Any moron knows what Trump said at that moment was a joke for his crowd, just like what Clinton did was a joke for her following.

I am not calling you a moron, I know you get it, the morons don't.

Threads like this reflect not only the partisan divide we see today, but confirm that Trump haters really have gone into serious delusion.

Donald Trump is undeniably famous, rich, and successful as a businessman. None of that has anything to do with his qualifications for running to be President, and no, believing nasty rumors about Trump does not create grounds for demanding his tax returns. And anyone who has actually done taxes (the long form) knows there is only certain information included in returns, anyway.

It's spite and denial of reality that we see from the Left, nothing more.

Smart post

And DNC owned MSM is typically coming out with as much diversion as they can as they know they're fixing to be fighting incoming bombings soon

Democrats are evil liars constantly seeking a lie to cover they're last lies

Florda_mike said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

midgett said:

---

Never have understood the debate on Obama's birth or Trump's net worth. They are already president. It ain't gonna change anything. Trump is wealthy. The amount, I don't know.

I recall in his first bankruptcy he negotiated a monthly allowance of like $300k. I was mad. If he's bankrupt, why give him $300k PER MONTH for living expenses?

Trump knew something his bankers hadn't learned. If the bank loans you $10,000, they own you. If they loan you most of their net capital you own the bank. They depend on you paying them back.

---

Good stuff!

You've read about him!

Last paragraph shows he's got a handle on our debt

I've looked at that debt and we've got a lotta good debt if you're a real estate man imo

Owing Fed is extremely negotiable!

Most all others can be easily settled or negotiated down by a great negotiator and we've got one at the helm. China doesn't have jack on us with what we owe em. He could eliminate their debt in tariff negotiations and that could be what he's setting up

---

He has grown our debt. How is that good? He promised to reduce it. Some people actually believed him. Lol

---

I've looked at our national debt and have no fears about it as long as we have great negotiator in White House that's lived a life managing debt in order to grow

---

Well, that settles it then! Mike looked at our books and our $22 trillion debt is no longer of concern.

Sure, every reputable economist in the western world (both on the left and right side of the isle) universally agree it's one of, if not, the biggest crisis this country -and world- face, and sure our current president has said countless times it's a national emergency but don't worry...Mike's got this one!

J.R. said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Much of this whole "tax returns" junk is about playing on general mass ignorance about tax law and even about what a tax return is actually all about. A tax return is a report that declares income (as the government defines income) and then shows declared deductions, credits, etc. to ultimately arrive at whatever the taxpayers "taxable income" is and if that ends up being a positive number, then the applicable tax rate is applied to arrive at the taxpayer's bottom line liability. If it's a negative number, then you have a loss - for income tax purposes - for which there are either carry-back or carry-forward options, etc. And reporting NOLs on tax returns happens frequently for high end, entrepreneurial tax payers and for corporations and doesn't necessarily indicate total failure or certain bankruptcy, etc. Also, for accounting purposes, the books for the entrepreneur or corporation might be quite different and it's all completely legal as we're talking about two different things here (again, something that's widely misunderstood due largely to the complexity and nature of our income tax laws).

As far as whether or not tax cheating or anything illegal is going on - that's what IRS audits are for and I'm sure somebody like Trump has been audited frequently if not continuously throughout most of his business career. If he's cheating, I have confidence the IRS will find it and there has been nothing to date that I'm aware of to indicate that has been or is the case.

And of course, as others have indicated, tax returns tell you exactly zero about the taxpayer's total assets and/or net worth, etc., which are much greater "success indicators".

So, bottom line, this is all just another attempt at making the POTUS look bad, or look like a failure, or appear dishonest while playing on people's ignorance.

---

What it does show is that for that period of time, he was failure. Not how he portrays himself, hence he's a fraud and a liar. But, we knew about the lying part. Additionally, tell me where you he recieved $52M in interest income in one year? The bigger question is...where is the money coming from? That is why he is doing everything possible not to turn over those returns as the related schedules just might land him in jail.

---

First of all, the vast majority of successful business entrepreneurs that have been out there for decades (like Trump) have had down periods of time - it's common place. Secondly, it shows he understandably and appropriately took advantage of the tax law (utilizing depreciation write offs, etc.) as it existed at the time. Who cares where he was 30 or more years ago? The guy was obviously a wealthy, successful business man before running for POTUS and clearly remains one to this day. As far as any "related schedules" go, I repeat - that's what IRS audits are for (they have access to that information regardless of whether or not the returns are made public) and to date there is nothing to indicate problems or cheating, much less activity that "just might land him in jail".

Nice try, Junior, but it ain't flying......

BaylorBJM said:

---

Well, that settles it then! Mike looked at our books and our $22 trillion debt is no longer of concern.

Sure, every reputable economist in the western world (both on the left and right side of the isle) universally agree it's one of if not, the biggest Ossis this country -and world- face, and sure our current president has said countless times it's a national emergency but don't worry...Mike's got this one!

---

Most of us wait until the end of the workday to start drinking ...

Florda_mike said:

---

tommie said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Lost a Billion dollars. More than any other tax payer in the Country. lol . what a fraud

---

Trump always leaves others holding the bag. The American farmer is in real trouble.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-06/grains-soy-trump-tariff-threat-to-china-drives-ag-prices-lower

---

In 6-12 months tariffs will benefit farmers

Give it time to season

---

Huh?? It's been almost 14 months already, has cost the taxpayers over $12b in subsidies and every mid and long-term forecast show, at best, things will remain steady at far below historical averages.

Perhaps this more of the celebrated 'Mike Bookkeeping' method?!

Johnny Bear said:

---

J.R. said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

Much of this whole "tax returns" junk is about playing on general mass ignorance about tax law and even about what a tax return is actually all about. A tax return is a report that declares income (as the government defines income) and then shows declared deductions, credits, etc. to ultimately arrive at whatever the taxpayers "taxable income" is and if that ends up being a positive number, then the applicable tax rate is applied to arrive at the taxpayer's bottom line liability. If it's a negative number, then you have a loss - for income tax purposes - for which there are either carry-back or carry-forward options, etc. And reporting NOLs on tax returns happens frequently for high end, entrepreneurial tax payers and for corporations and doesn't necessarily indicate total failure or certain bankruptcy, etc. Also, for accounting purposes, the books for the entrepreneur or corporation might be quite different and it's all completely legal as we're talking about two different things here (again, something that's widely misunderstood due largely to the complexity and nature of our income tax laws).

As far as whether or not tax cheating or anything illegal is going on - that's what IRS audits are for and I'm sure somebody like Trump has been audited frequently if not continuously throughout most of his business career. If he's cheating, I have confidence the IRS will find it and there has been nothing to date that I'm aware of to indicate that has been or is the case.

And of course, as others have indicated, tax returns tell you exactly zero about the taxpayer's total assets and/or net worth, etc., which are much greater "success indicators".

So, bottom line, this is all just another attempt at making the POTUS look bad, or look like a failure, or appear dishonest while playing on people's ignorance.

---

What it does show is that for that period of time, he was failure. Not how he portrays himself, hence he's a fraud and a liar. But, we knew about the lying part. Additionally, tell me where you he recieved $52M in interest income in one year? The bigger question is...where is the money coming from? That is why he is doing everything possible not to turn over those returns as the related schedules just might land him in jail.

---

First of all, the vast majority of successful business entrepreneurs that have been out there for decades (like Trump) have had down periods of time - it's common place. Secondly, it shows he understandably and appropriately took advantage of the tax law (utilizing depreciation write offs, etc.) as it existed at the time. Who cares where he was 30 or more years ago? The guy was obviously a wealthy, successful business man before running for POTUS and clearly remains one to this day. As far as any "related schedules" go, I repeat - that's what IRS audits are for (they have access to that information regardless of whether or not the returns are made public) and to date there is nothing to indicate problems or cheating, much less activity that "just might land him in jail".

Nice try, Junior, but it ain't flying......

---

ahhh....sorry but it does LJ. I've been doing business for 30 years and have never shown a net loss for any year ever. Sure I've stinkers that I've written off, but his level of failure is bizarre. 10 yrs in a row of net losses. He is nothing but a con man and Carnival Barker who doesn't pay his bills. I know that for a fact. Why do you think he uses unconventional financing? That's right, he is a pariah in those circles because he walks. Oh, I'm in real estate too. I'm fairly sure I know how this works. Now, get back to your cube.