More stories

  • in

    'Fake news': Trump denies tax claims from New York Times – video

    Play Video

    0:51

    US president Donald Trump paid very little in income taxes in recent years as heavy losses from his business enterprises offset hundreds of millions of dollars in income, the New York Times reported on Sunday citing tax-return data. Trump denied the report, calling it ‘total fake news’ at a White House news conference
    Six key findings from the New York Times’ Trump taxes bombshell
    New York Times publishes Donald Trump’s tax returns in election bombshell

    Topics

    Trump administration

    US politics

    Donald Trump

    New York Times

    US taxation More

  • in

    Will the New York Times taxes report sink Donald Trump?

    Donald Trump

    His returns examined at last, the president stands exposed as a tax avoider and serial debtor. It raises serious questions – but also, most likely, the passions of his fervent supporters
    Trump’s taxes: key findings from the New York Times report

    Play Video

    0:51

    ‘Fake news’: Trump denies tax claims from New York Times – video

    From the moment he rode down an escalator in the marble-clad, gold-trimmed Trump Tower to declare his candidacy for US president, Donald Trump was selling himself as a successful businessman who could run a successful economy.
    It was an image cultivated with voters for a decade on The Apprentice, the reality TV show in which Trump sat in judgment on aspiring entrepreneurs and told most: “You’re fired!”
    On Sunday the mask was finally torn off. According to a blockbuster New York Times investigation into his taxes, the self-proclaimed billionaire, a personification of the hedonism and extravagance of the 1980s, has been losing more money than he makes.
    These are the three key points of the Times report:
    Trump is not very good at business
    Trump is very good at avoiding taxes
    Trump may have serious conflicts of interests with foreign powers
    Will any of it have a major impact on his reelection chances? Up to a point.
    Trump declared a staggering $1.4bn in losses from his core businesses for 2008 and 2009. He appears to have personally guaranteed loans totalling $421m, most now due within four years. The Times reported: “Should he win re-election, his lenders could be placed in the unprecedented position of weighing whether to foreclose on a sitting president.”
    Joaquin Castro, a Democratic congressman from Texas, told MSNBC the Times report “reveals what many people have suspected, which is the larger point that Donald Trump is a fraud, that he’s not what he claims to be.
    “He claims to be a successful, deal-making businessman who built himself up from the ground and his tax records reveal that he’s actually the opposite. He’s basically a deadbeat who doesn’t pay much in taxes.”
    Indeed, Trump paid no federal income taxes in 11 of 18 years the Times examined. In 2016 and 2017, his tax bill was just $750 – far less than almost every US citizen.
    It pointed to a wider story about tax avoidance by the wealthy elite.
    Elizabeth Warren, a Democratic senator, tweeted: “He knows better than anyone that there’s one set of rules for the wealthy and giant corporations and another for hardworking Americans – and instead of using his power to fix it, he’s taken advantage of it at every turn.”
    It is tempting to see this as terminal for Trump in the November election against Joe Biden. But we have been here many times before. The same was said after the release of an Access Hollywood tape in October 2016, where Trump was heard bragging about sexual assault.
    It is also worth remembering what happened in the first presidential debate against Hillary Clinton. The Democratic candidate suggested that perhaps Trump was not releasing his tax returns because he had paid nothing in federal taxes.
    He interrupted and said: “That makes me smart.”
    There were howls of outrage and prophecies that Trump must be doomed. Yet perhaps that remark resonated with some voters who reckoned that given the chance, they too would delight in getting around the rules in order to save a few bucks.
    Some of the rampant enthusiasm at Trump’s rallies just possibly comes from people who see themselves in him.
    When Trump grumbles bitterly about Barack Obama winning the Nobel peace prize while his own nomination received scant coverage, it seems to strike a chord with anyone in the crowd who feels forgotten, neglected or passed over.
    When Trump presents the story of a self-perceived “outsider” who does not talk like the educated elite yet still made it rich and married a model, these supporters seem to embrace the idea of the blue-collar billionaire as one version of the American dream.
    There are also large chunks of Trump’s cult who pay little attention to the New York Times or Twitter as it is.
    Trump’s tax affairs have been reported before – regarding the family business, for one Pulitzer prize-winning example from the Times, from October 2018. But the new Times investigation raises further, even more damaging questions.
    In his first two years as president, Trump received $73m from foreign operations, including $3m from the Philippines, $2.3m from India and $1m from Turkey. In 2017 he paid $145,400 in taxes in India and $156,824 in the Philippines – but just $750 in the US.
    The president has been notoriously outspoken in his praise for the leaders of the Philippines, India and Turkey.
    Does Trump’s substantial income from abroad conflict with his responsibilities as president? Did he put his personal interest ahead of the American people? Did he break the law?
    The Times has promised more stories to come. They won’t shake the Trump faithful, but they might chip away at enough voters to make an important difference.

    Topics

    Donald Trump

    Trump administration

    US politics

    US elections 2020

    US taxation

    US domestic policy

    Republicans

    analysis

    Share on Facebook

    Share on Twitter

    Share via Email

    Share on LinkedIn

    Share on Pinterest

    Share on WhatsApp

    Share on Messenger

    Reuse this content More

  • in

    Six key findings from the New York Times' Trump taxes bombshell

    Donald Trump

    The president pays little, faces hefty audit costs as well as loans coming due soon, and Ivanka is not in the clear
    Report: NYT publishes Trump tax returns

    Play Video

    0:51

    ‘Fake news’: Trump denies tax claims from New York Times – video

    The publication of Donald Trump’s tax records by the New York Times is one of the biggest bombshells to hit a 2020 election campaign already buffeted by a litany of scandals, a bitter fight over a supreme court nomination and a pandemic in which 7m Americans have been infected and more than 200,000 have died.
    The president’s taxes have long been the great white whale of political reporters in America as well as prosecutors keen to find evidence of wrongdoing. Democrats too were eager to seize on them as a potentially game-changing stick with which to beat the Trump campaign.
    The Times, with its shock report published on Sunday evening, appears to have won the race. Its publication of details from the documents could send shock waves through the campaign as the key first debate between Trump and challenger Joe Biden looms, in Ohio on Tuesday night.
    Here are its key findings:
    Trump pays little tax
    The Times reported that Trump paid no federal income taxes in 11 of 18 years the newspaper looked at. In 2017, after he became president, his tax bill was only $750. This is despite Trump often railing against taxes in America and ushering through a series of tax cuts that critics say mostly helps the rich and big business.
    The Times said of Trump’s immediate predecessors: “Barack Obama and George W Bush each regularly paid more than $100,000 a year.”
    A long audit – with potentially hefty costs
    Trump is involved in a decade-long audit with the Internal Revenue Service over a $72.9m tax refund he claimed, and received, after declaring huge losses. A ruling against him could cost him more than $100m, the Times reported.
    It added: “In 2011, the IRS began an audit reviewing the legitimacy of the refund. Almost a decade later, the case remains unresolved, for unknown reasons, and could ultimately end up in federal court, where it could become a matter of public record.”
    Ivanka helps reduce Trump’s tax burden
    The president’s oldest daughter, while working as an employee of the Trump Organization, appears to have received “consulting fees” that helped reduce the family’s tax bill, the Times said. Such a revelation might further tarnish the reputation of Ivanka, a senior White House adviser married to another, Jared Kushner, who often tries to distance herself from some of the biggest scandals of her father’s administration. She is widely believed to harbor political ambitions of her own after Trump leaves office.
    The Times reported: “Trump’s private records show that his company once paid $747,622 in fees to an unnamed consultant for hotel projects in Hawaii and Vancouver, British Columbia. Ivanka Trump’s public disclosure forms – which she filed when joining the White House staff in 2017 – show that she had received an identical amount through a consulting company she co-owned.”
    Trump businesses lose money
    The Times was brutal in its assessment of Trump’s businesses, about which he often boasts and on the back of which he sought to promote a carefully curated image as a master businessman. “Trump’s core enterprises – from his constellation of golf courses to his conservative-magnet hotel in Washington – report losing millions, if not tens of millions, of dollars year after year,” the newspaper said.
    It detailed how since 2000, Trump has reported losing more than $315m at his golf courses, with much of that coming from Trump National Doral in Florida. His Washington hotel, which opened in 2016 and has been the subject of much speculation regarding federal ethics laws, has lost more than $55m.
    Trump has a big bill to pay
    The newspaper also reported that Trump is facing a major financial bill, as within the next four years, hundreds of millions of dollars in loans will come due. The paper said Trump is personally responsible for many of those obligations.
    The paper reported: “In the 1990s, Mr Trump nearly ruined himself by personally guaranteeing hundreds of millions of dollars in loans, and he has since said that he regretted doing so. But he has taken the same step again, his tax records show. He appears to be responsible for loans totaling $421m, most of which is coming due within four years.”
    In a blunt summary of the problem, the Times speculated: “Should he win re-election, his lenders could be placed in the unprecedented position of weighing whether to foreclose on a sitting president.”
    Trump businesses profit from his presidency
    The issue of whether Trump’s businesses benefit from his position in the White House has been one of the long-running themes of reporting on the Trump presidency. The global nature of the Trump Organization and its portfolio of hotels, resorts and other interests has left Trump open to speculation that lobbyists, business leaders and foreign powers could spend money in them to try and peddle influence in the US.
    The Times report on his tax returns is clear that Trump’s businesses have indeed benefited from his political career.
    “Since he became a leading presidential candidate, he has received large amounts of money from lobbyists, politicians and foreign officials who pay to stay at his properties or join his clubs,” the newspaper reported, before detailing monies paid at his Mar-a-Largo resort in Florida, his Washington hotel and other locations.

    Topics

    Donald Trump

    Trump administration

    US politics

    US taxation

    US elections 2020

    Ivanka Trump

    Republicans

    features

    Share on Facebook

    Share on Twitter

    Share via Email

    Share on LinkedIn

    Share on Pinterest

    Share on WhatsApp

    Share on Messenger

    Reuse this content More

  • in

    Why is a Trump official charging taxpayers thousands for a 'girls’ night'?

    They say money can’t buy you happiness, but it can buy you a really expensive girls’ night – which is exactly what Seema Verma, the Trump administration’s top Medicaid official, has been spending on – and charging the taxpayer for it too.In 2018, Verma spent $2,933 organizing a “girls’ night” at a reporter’s house and charged it to expenses, according to a 17-month investigation conducted by congressional Democrats.Maybe the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) needed a little self-care, after all, the backlash she got for making it harder for poor Americans to access healthcare can’t be good for one’s complexion (which could explain this $345 moisturizer that Verma charged taxpayers for in 2018).But that’s just the problem: Verma has been in the spotlight for her expenses for a while – last year she also came under fire for expensing $50,000 for luggage she lost on a three-day trip. Then again, considering that practically the entire Trump family, including the president himself, have made a habit of expensing random stuff to the American taxpayer (remember Donald Trump Jr’s $76,000 Mongolian shooting trip?) perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising (heck, a $3,000 party seems paltry in comparison).But that’s not all that she spent. In fact, the congressional inquiry has revealed that Verma has spent more than $3.5m in expenses, spent at times improperly, to pay for consultants who helped her to pitch op-eds and wrote her Twitter posts. Her other expenses include a $977 consultancy fee, paid to a consultant who helped her to get an op-ed about Obamacare on the Fox News website; and over $13,000 on consultants who spent months helping her to win awards.Verma has rejected the idea that her expenses have been improper: she told a House committee in October 2019 that “all the contracts we have at CMS are based on promoting the work of CMS” and her expensing habits were “consistent with how the agency has used resources in the past”.Plus, she seems like a nice person. Verma’s father once described her as having sympathy for the poor because she used to pull over and give cash to the same homeless man on her way to work every morning – something he said he was “amazed” by. Let’s just hope she wasn’t expensing that too. More

  • in

    Trump signs memo to defund 'lawless' cities but experts raise legality doubts

    Donald Trump signed a memo on Wednesday that threatened to cut funding to Democratic-led cities that the administration has characterized as “lawless” and “anarchist jurisdictions”, using his office to launch an extraordinary – if legally ineffective – attack on his political opponents ahead of the November election.“My administration will not allow federal tax dollars to fund cities that allow themselves to deteriorate into lawless zones,” the memorandum reads. “It is imperative that the federal government review the use of federal funds by jurisdictions that permit anarchy, violence, and destruction in America’s cities.”The document compels William Barr, the attorney general, to develop a list of jurisdictions that “permitted violence and the destruction of property to persist and have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract these criminal activities” within the next fortnight. It also instructs Russell Vought, the White House budget director, to issue guidance in the next month on how federal agencies can restrict or disfavor “anarchist jurisdictions” in providing federal grants.Today @POTUS made clear that we will not continue to funnel taxpayer money to lawless cities that fail to restore law and order in their communities. We will explore all options. https://t.co/BDScgIG2uK— Russ Vought (@RussVought45) September 3, 2020
    The president has often suggested that his political opponents, including Joe Biden, want to defund the police departments, despite the fact that most Democrats, including Biden, have said they do not endorse that approach to police reform. Pushing hardline “law and order” rhetoric, Trump has also pushed baseless conspiracy theories about leftwing violence amid protests against police brutality and systemic racism while refusing to condemn rightwing and white supremacist vigilantism.The memorandum that the White House shared on Wednesday night, which specifically names Portland, New York City, Seattle and Washington DC as examples of jurisdictions might lose federal funding, is unlikely to result in any of those cities losing significant funding, according to legal experts. Congress determines how funding is distributed, and agencies cannot “willy nilly restrict funding”, said Sam Berger, a former senior policy advisor at the Office of Management and Budget during the Obama administration.The five-page memorandum “reads like a campaign press release”, Berger told the Guardian. “The first two pages are a bizarre diatribe – that’s not what a government document looks like.”Even if federal agencies are able to find justification to reduce funding to certain cities, perhaps via grants linked to law enforcement, any funding restrictions are unlikely to hold up to legal challenges, he added.“The president obviously has no power to pick and choose which cities to cut off from congressionally appropriated funding,” said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law scholar at Harvard, and recently the co-author of To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment. Trump “has no defunding spigot. The power of the purse belongs to Congress, not the Executive. Donald Trump must have slept through high school civics,” Tribe said in an email.New York governor Andrew Cuomo said the memo was “an illegal stunt”, noting that Trump “is not a king. He cannot ‘defund’ NYC.”This latest move from the president follows through on his growing disdain for American cities run by Democrats. During his speech at the Republican National Convention last week, Trump railed against “rioters and criminals spreading mayhem in Democrat-run cities” and spoke of “left-wing anarchy and mayhem in Minneapolis, Chicago, and other cities”. More

  • in

    Revealed: super-rich donate to Cuomo as he rejects tax hikes for billionaires

    Investigation shows governor’s political machine has received money from more than a third of New York’s billionaire familiesJoin us for a live digital event with former attorney general Eric Holder to discuss voter suppression in 2020, Thursday at 5pm ET. Register nowGovernor Andrew Cuomo of New York has stood firm against intensifying pressure to avert massive budget cuts by raising taxes on the many billionaires who live in his state. Related: ‘Egregious’ distancing violations at Chainsmokers charity concert – Cuomo Continue reading… More