Grifters gotta griftâŚ
News at 11.
Well, just color me shocked and surprised.
Two observations:
- The photo that accompanies the story is a good illustration of how much T has declined physically in the past two years. Wow.
- The headline makes it sound like the committee was embattled and that this struggle perhaps contributed to the failure to follow the law. That isnât the timeline at all. They were unsupervised and uncontrolled.
Rigged election, manipulated vote tallies, illegal and criminal campaign, fraudulent inaugural committee, Russian agents and appointees in cabinet, Skanky-Manslut as Prehsitident, street smart architect/model/dancer/plagiarist and porn star as First Pornstar, sleazy silicone-stuffed vinyl inflatable doll daughter as First Lady, so-called son-in-law as the resident cuck⌠This is a legitimate election, a legitimate commander in chief?
âAt best, itâs sloppy reporting, and at worst, may be hiding some transgression,â he said.
These are not mutually exclusive possibilities.
The Trump inaugural committee did not report any âprogram service revenueâ on its tax return, effectively concealing the amount of cash generated from tickets and anything else that it sold
Of course not⌠why would they give more ammunition to the Emoluments lawsuits
âa failure that tax experts find perplexingâ Please STOP. There is nothing âperplexingâ about a con man pulling a con.
How about - since it is clear that the disclosures were incomplete we are looking into how deep the rabbit hole goes. HINT - itâs realllllllly deep.
Well,.thatâs a shockerâŚ
This isnât perplexing, itâs filing false information with the IRS. Oddly enough, the IRS, which reports to someone who owes his job to the guy at the top of the return, hasnât pulled the committee in for an audit.
So is the inauguration committee tax-deductible? Because that would be tax fraud on the part of all the donors.
Malfeasance Or Ineptitude?
Uhh both, duh!
âa failure that tax experts find perplexingâ
Just as orange is the new black, I guess âperplexingâ is the new âcriminalâ.
The inauguration Committee is set up as a non-profit organization and the income they receive would be considered tax-deductible.
Itâs more complex than that, because I believe that they have to pay taxes on âregular itemsâ, but not on donations. So if someone bought a $10,000 package and $2,500 was for transportation, hotel and other items, they would have to pay taxes on the $2,500 that was actually costs of good sold, but not on the additional $7,500 over and above that. Someone please correct me if Iâm wrong on that.
This is exactly the thing. When you make a contribution to a tax-deductible organization and they âgiveâ you stuff in return, you get to deduct only the part of the contribution thatâs in excess of the value of the stuff. So unless the committee provided separate deduction amounts for each tier of contribution and the donors used those amounts, the donor have filed erroneous (!) returns and should amend. If anyone involved knew about this distinction (which any bleeping CPA not willing to lose a license absolutely would) then the committee is among other things a vehicle for tax evasion just as much as Jack Abramoffâs phony charities.
I donât know anything about accounting but I sure do know that Trump might as well have walked around with a laundry basket for people to throw money in who wanted to play ball in the future. Thatâs all that inaugural committee was, a bribe-o-rama.
tRump inaugural committee and tRump in general are reinventing the way taxes and reporting to the Feds can be done.
And here we go again with a story about how clearly criminal activity is described merely as âperplexingâ or âtroublingâ or âunusualâ or âbreaks with traditionâ. When the hell are people going to understand that unless something is clearly ILLEGAL it doesnât matter what the freaks in Trumpland do; theyâre all miscreants of the highest order, bent on destroying the US from the inside. They donât care about public opinion, nor do they worry about how anything âlooksâ. Unless what they do it brazenly illegal AND unless law enforcement (or Congress) does something about it, itâs a non-story.
Malfeasance Or Ineptitude?
Iâll go with What is both? for $500 Alex
Mr. Capone? Telephone call for Mr. Al Capone!
The thing is itâs not established there was in fact a crime committed. This is a non-actionable way of telling you there could have been. They want to alert the public something strange happened without being sued into bankruptcy. Itâs not pointless or pusillanimous, itâs following the rules.