Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

This had better be the last tax cheat Obama vouches for

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 02:38 PM
Original message
This had better be the last tax cheat Obama vouches for
This is getting really embarrassing. How is it that these people remember all these unpaid taxes AFTER THEY GET NOMINATED?! Doesn't his little questionnaire ask them, "have you ever failed to pay taxes?"

Obama: pay a damn CPA to vet these guys!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Skink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm gonna say Geitner didn't do it intentionally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Geithner was directly given money from the Int Monetary Fund to cover the employee tax

This was a clear case of taking the money and putting it in his pocket rather than paying the IRS. The IMF even has a finance specialist available to employees to help with these issues. Geithner apparently chose not to use him.

When audited Geithner only paid for the 2 years he was audited for; only when he new he was to be nominated did he go pack and pay the rest of his obligation ----an additional.


IMF Informed Geithner on Taxes----more at the Wall Street Journal


<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123194884833281695.html>


Geithner got his quarterly tax allowance statement telling him he was receiving money to pay his US employee taxes.

As an international body, the IMF doesn't withhold taxes for U.S. citizens, and employees are responsible for paying their taxes. The IMF pays employees additional tax allowances to cover federal and state income taxes, and the employer's portion of payroll taxes.

Mr. Geithner prepared his own federal-tax returns during the first two years he worked at the IMF, 2001 and 2002, according to the Senate Finance Committee report.

"The IMF informs U.S. employees about their tax allowance and what it covers and doesn't cover -- and that includes paying your payroll taxes," said Michael Mussa, a former IMF chief economist, who is now at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "The IMF doesn't leave this out."

An IMF booklet on taxes, which Mr. Geithner told the Senate panel he received, instructed employees that "you pay the employee's share of U.S. Social Security taxes."

Mr. Geithner's quarterly tax-allowance payments also included a statement of what the money was to be used for, and had an entry for "SE tax" -- meaning "self-employment" taxes. In a wrinkle in U.S. tax law, U.S. citizens at the IMF pay Social Security and Medicare taxes as if they were self-employed. Current and former IMF officials said that U.S. officials widely understood "SE tax" to mean payroll taxes.

Mr. Geithner "filled out, signed and submitted an annual tax allowance request worksheet with the IMF that states, 'I wish to apply for tax allowance of U.S. federal and state income taxes and the difference between the "self-employed" and "employed" obligation of the U.S. Social Security tax which I will pay on my Fund income,'" the Finance Committee reported.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InAbLuEsTaTe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. [self-deleted]
Edited on Tue Feb-03-09 03:13 PM by InAbLuEsTaTe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #5
25. So the IMF gave him $x for SE tax.

And he paid that to the IRS.

You find it improbable that he failed to realize that $x was not the full tax owed, but rather only the normal employer half of payroll taxes?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. How many tax problems have there been? Richardson wasn't a tax problem. Who else withdrew? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Killefer!
She withdrew today for failing to pay taxes for her nanny!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
26. 900 bucks for FICA!??! No really, the IRS doesn't go after people for this shit, this is the nominee
...nominees's claiming an issue not the IRS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
biopowertoday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #26
58. it was a domestic household problem- READ as a 'nanny problem"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #26
80. Worse. I think it was FUTA
Pretty sure she was paying her Sch "H" taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Tiger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. You make it sound like Obama
purposely is out there picking "tax cheats!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
79. You read it that way too
I`m grateful

I thought I was the only one
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. Tax cheats are headed off to jail. Daschle messed up big time
but let's stop calling folks cheats. I've fucked up my taxes before and had to pay money back. I wasn't cheating, I made errors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. If you could buy a house with your error
then you had no business doing your own taxes. I don't think Daschle had any business doing his own either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. that's fine...he fucked up...I don't think it was purposeful. He's gone
now so let's be done with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. I agree.
I have been the unwilling recipient of the rethuglican comments from folks around me regarding Obama's stimulus package, the Arts Council, tax evaders, and on and on. I do not solicit these comments and it is really getting on my nerves. I just want to ask these people how they were able to stay so silent as * made bad decisions over and over? How did they stay so quiet while illegal wars were waged. I am beginning to think that Obama needs to put the pedal to the metal and forget working with these folks. In addition to this I think he needs to separate himself immediately from folks who have lied or cheated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #4
22. Did you fail to report a huge chunk of income?
That's essentially what Daschle did.

Bake
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. The income was unannounced by his company, if DassHole was a tax person I'd hold him responsible but
...he wasn't and it was missed by his CPA.
Thx
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #22
31. He failed to report the intrinsic value of possessing a company vehicle.

There is a huge difference between "I didn't know I had to pay taxes on the money I was paid" and "I didn't know I had to pay taxes on the company car".

Normally, one does not pay taxes on a company car. The company does. The difference here is that he was not just driving the car on company business, but was allowed to use it full time for personal reasons as well.

Not that hard to fuck up.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. yEAH Little Blue. This had better be the last one or ELSE!!!
I say we get rid of Obama now. Why wait?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. You're right. He should continue picking embarrassments
to the administration. By all means!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InAbLuEsTaTe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
8. You're kidding right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. Knock off the fucking "tax cheat" bullshit already.
There is a difference between tax evasion and making a goddamn mistake on a return. A very big one.

I have not seen evidence of ONE SINGLE "tax cheat" during this entire process. Not one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Daschle made $180k mistake. I'm a tax CPA!
I know Daschle has tax CPA's doing his return. They should have noticed this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Why should they have noticed it?
If he didn't think to TELL them someone had let him use their car and driver why would they notice? And if he didn't think at the time "hey, wait... that car service they let me use probably counts as income" then why would he tell them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #16
28. +1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #16
34. Because his employer disclosed it to him in the form of a tax notice
Edited on Tue Feb-03-09 07:33 PM by LittleBlue
saying "your received XXX amount in non-cash compensation"

It's required.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. Ahem:
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/TOP%20STORY/2155060/

Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., and several others, noted that Daschle wasn't provided a 1099 IRS form by his employer to document that his use of a company car was a form of taxable compensation...


You were saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. That is an extremely common trick used to get out of paying taxes. It's bogus, and here's why
Edited on Tue Feb-03-09 08:38 PM by LittleBlue
First of all, it should be listed on a W-2, indicated in a box below the top 6 as other compensation. If that occurs, he would be required to pay because a copy would be sent to the IRS. The 1099 excuse is bogus, because 1099's are used for non-employees (Daschle was an employee); this includes customers, third party service firms, changes in shareholder percentages, etc.

Kent Conrad is not a tax accountant.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #37
40. Absolutely right again.
This stuff is rock-bottom BASIC. I'm just stunned that people don't know this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #40
54. Except he is wrong - Daschle was a consultant, not an employee
and Conrad started working for the tax commissioner in ND straight out of college and became ND's Tax Commissioner, before he joined the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #54
56. Oh, ick, that's even worse.
He worked regular hours as a consultant? With an office and a phone?

He probably also violated the rules of consultant versus regular employee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #56
63. Have you ever been in the headquarters of a major company?
Many high powered consultants have offices and desks. Not to mention, hours are not all that fixed for many - the agreement is on what they do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #63
72. Sure.
But there are many other criteria to consider to determine independent contractor versus employee status. Generally, providing an office, phone, equipment and office hours would not bode well for the contractor classification.

I wonder if Daschle filled out a SS-8. That would solve the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #54
75. It doesn't matter; he should be sent a 1099 as a consultant with ALL
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 07:41 PM by LittleBlue
compensation listed. He doesn't need to receive separate 1099's for each type of compensation, unless he is a partial owner of the company.

Excluding that compensation is an obvious error that any tax accountant could remedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #37
53. Conrad was a tax commissioner and is he is a leading expert
After graduating from college, he became a civil servant, working as an assistant to the North Dakota tax commissioner, Byron Dorgan, who later became his colleague in the Senate. Conrad made his first entry into politics when he ran unsuccessfully for the North Dakota Auditor's office in 1976. In 1980, Conrad succeeded Dorgan as tax commissioner. Conrad was state tax commissioner until 1986, when he ran for Senate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Conrad#Initial_career

In addition, only employees get W2s, Daschle was a consultant, not an employee, and he got 1099s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #53
76. Right, and as I've pointed out above, it should be included on the same 1099
that he received his 1099-MISC. It should all be added in.

The fact that Daschle knew it was not indicates he knew it was fraud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #36
52. Thanks - that would make it hard to include then
It looks like the 2 tax errors that led to these problems are both from errors of the employers. It looks like he just handed the forms he got to an accountant and that it really was "unwitting errors".

I wonder if the real reason is that this brought up how much he made from teh health insurance industry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #34
51. Have you read that he got this - I didn't see it and have wondered how he would even know the exact
value
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. Then you know that even a bad mistake is not the
same as willfully evading tax obligations, which is a crime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #19
29. +1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #12
39. Absolutely.
Commuter Vehicle Transportation
For a commuter highway vehicle to qualify for an exclusion, the following must apply to the
vehicle:
• It is provided by an employer, or by a third party for the employer.
• It is used for travel between employee residence (or parking lot) and the workplace.
• It has seating capacity for at least six adults (excluding the driver).
• Half of the seating capacity (excluding the driver) is occupied by employees.
• 80% of the mileage is used for transporting employees between residences, the
workplace and/or parking area. IRC §132(f)(5); Reg. §1.132-9(b)
Commuter transportation may include vanpools, and the vehicles may be owned and operated by
transit authorities or employees.
Dollar Limitations
The maximum nontaxable benefit in 2009 is $120 per month. The maximum applies separately to
each month. IRC §132(f); Rev. Proc. 2008-66

I mean . . . DUH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. How is it that people out here don't make the mistakes that the big boys do?
Why do I pay payroll taxes on my cleaning person and the folks in DC are unaware of the need? I would have ignored you but swearing in a post title is just unnecessary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Oh really? They don't?
If we put the population of DU through an audit process as thorough as the ones these guys are going through nobody here is going to come up owing anything? Really? On what planet are you posting from?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Caesar's wife.
Edited on Tue Feb-03-09 03:45 PM by WinkyDink
Not a new concept. One doesn't need to think Daschle "cheated" in order to be dismayed at his oversight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gcomeau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. But you DO have to think he cheated...
...to call him a "tax cheat". That is transforming error into deliberate criminal act. And then the OP took it further and implicated Obama in being complicit in defending that non existent criminal act. And that has been happening a lot around here recently. And it's pissing me off. People are running around here doing the Republican's propaganda legwork for them and not blinking an eye while they do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #18
30. People would pee on themselves if they had to pay taxes on unannounced reimbursements from thier...
...companies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #13
24. I have a close relative who has done something similar; they fixed it when contacted.
Edited on Tue Feb-03-09 04:57 PM by ClarkUSA
No harm, no foul. The taxman just wanted the money plus penalties, which were very substantial. No jail time, of course.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #24
32. Right, the IRS knows people make mistakes and the people who evade them pay a higher price
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
23. You're wrong about a number of things.
First, Daschle ordered his accountant way back in June 2008 to fix the mistake BEFORE HE GOT THE NOMINATION.
He didn't need to make the information public but did so out of a belief in transparency and because he had paid
up with penalties already.

Unless you have proof both men deliberately avoided paying taxes, then you are also wrong to call them tax cheats.
Both men made understandable mistakes and fixed it. Neither men did anything illegal, either. Get over yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
33. Yeap, Daschles company didn't announce the driver as income to him and Geitner made a common 1099...
...mistake
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #33
42. They don't need to.
It's Daschle's responsiblity to claim his taxable benefits. And this one was a WHOPPER! No person with any sense would "overlook" a car and driver.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #23
35. I'm a tax CPA. Accountants ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR TAX FORMS
They tell you clearly in the engagement letter than filing the forms correctly is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY!

You can't say, "well, I told my tax guy..." That's not a defense!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. If the I.R.S. has no problem with Daschle's mistake and paying up, why do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. They SHOULD have a problem with it.
And I guarantee, as a common person, you would not be treated with the same kid gloves as a US Senator on the Finance Committee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. You're wrong. What makes you as self-righteous as Rush Limbaugh, anyway?
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 09:44 AM by ClarkUSA
I have a close relation who made similar mistakes, paid up with huge penalties and the I.R.S. was fine with it.

Get over yourself.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #44
47. He's a cheat. Pretty simple.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. There is such a thing as making an understandable mistake and the I.R.S. knows it.
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 10:33 AM by ClarkUSA
You hate it that I disproved your pompous assertion, "And I guarantee, as a common person, you would not be treated with the
same kid gloves as a US Senator on the Finance Committee." You obviously have no clue about what or who you're talking about
but I've noticed that you do enjoy talking out of the side of your ass.

Good thing you are an "Off With Their Heads" type who fancies himself/herself judge, jury and executioner all rolled into one
anonymous keyboard petty dictator while mature professionals staff the I.R.S. Fortunately for Americans, your kind will never
get near the levers of power at the I.R.S. because their interest is getting people to pay up with severe penalties and not
prosecution, primarily because they realize, unlike you, that the majority of tax problems are simply mistakes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. Snicker.
Keep on, keeping on.

Anyone who has any knowledge of tax law, as Daschle obviously did serving on the Senate Finance Committee, would know about taxable benefits. I suppose he could be incompetent, but I don't think so.

Commuter Vehicle Transportation
For a commuter highway vehicle to qualify for an exclusion, the following must apply to the
vehicle:
• It is provided by an employer, or by a third party for the employer.

Neither were true, as Daschle knew.

• It is used for travel between employee residence (or parking lot) and the workplace.
• It has seating capacity for at least six adults (excluding the driver).
• Half of the seating capacity (excluding the driver) is occupied by employees.
• 80% of the mileage is used for transporting employees between residences, the
workplace and/or parking area. IRC §132(f)(5); Reg. §1.132-9(b)
Commuter transportation may include vanpools, and the vehicles may be owned and operated by
transit authorities or employees.

Dollar Limitations
The maximum nontaxable benefit in 2008 is $120 per month. The maximum applies separately to
each month. IRC §132(f); Rev. Proc. 2008-66
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #49
50. You're just another anonymous keyboard petty dictator who wants to chop everyone's head off.
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 11:44 AM by ClarkUSA
It seems the powerless often find irrational and ludicrous ways to feel powerful. That may explain the nutty
Republican talking point poutrage that has permeated DU about Daschle. In any case, Rush Limbaugh would
be proud of your pitchfork rantings against Daschle because it sounds so much like his own.

The I.R.S. investigated and found nothing illegal had happened, especially since Daschle voluntarily brought
attention to his mistake to the I.R.S. way back in June 2008 with legal testimony from his accountant. But
keep sniggering and huffing... oh, and no one cares what you think, although Sean Hannity would love for
you to call him up and share your "conclusions," I'm sure. :eyes:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #50
55. Silly accusations don't bother me 'tall.
Tax cheats do. It's beneath the office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #55
57. Then no wonder you enjoy making them ad nauseum about Daschle.
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 12:01 PM by ClarkUSA
The I.R.S. and President Obama doesn't think he's a "tax cheat".

Only you, media wingnuts and freepers do, apparently. Enjoy the next eight years here: It'll be interesting just how
many GOP talking points attacking Democrats you will mimic during that time.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #57
62. I dunno . . . I see a lot of other posters agree with me.
No GOP talking points here. Just common sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. Whether you can get followers is not a good metric for whether you are right
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #64
71. It's not a bad metric, either.
Just something that should be taken into consideration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. You're all birds of a feather... along with Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 02:31 PM by ClarkUSA
Daschle is a "tax cheat" = RNC talking point

No one in the MSM is using that term because it's incorrect. Repeat: Daschle did nothing illegal, according to the I.R.S. and Team O's
lawyers. Neither did my relative, who you also accused of being a tax cheat because you like plucking shit out of your ass. The fact
you keep repeating a patent falsehood based on zero evidence is an indication of how unethical you're being, kinda like the people
you are parroting: Republican wingnuts.

But keep on with that Republican-lite "common sense" of yours. It's nice to know which DUers are full of Drudge crap.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. LOL!
I don't think I've ever been on Drudge. But thanks for playing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. I look forward to you parroting Rush Limbaugh's next "common sense" attack phrase against Democrats.
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 03:03 PM by ClarkUSA


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. Okeedokee.
Now, I did listen to Rush once. Pre-1991 when I moved to Denver.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I think it's appalling when any office holder cheats on his taxes. You don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #70
74. What evidence is there that Daschle cheated on his taxes because the I.R.S. ruled that out?
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 04:35 PM by ClarkUSA
Answer: None... which is why both the I.R.S. and Team O's vetting team lawyers determined he did nothing
illegal after interviewing his accountant and looking over his past tax history, which has been spotless.

I think it's appalling when any office holder cheats on his taxes. You don't.

A tax cheat tries to avoid paying his taxes. A citizen who realizes he made mistakes voluntarily tries to
pay up with penalties before anyone at the I.R.S. notices and instructs his accountant to cooperate with any
investigation is a responsible American. Guess which category Daschle falls in?

Rush Limbaugh would be proud of the way you bullshit your way through a false argument. What's "appalling"
is how determined you are to promulgate patently dishonest Republican talking points about Daschle as if by
repeating "Daschle is a tax cheat" enough times makes it true. :eyes:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #38
77. It is not uncommon for the IRS not to seek charges
even if there is evidence of tax evasion.

Even if there is not, in many cases they don't even seek interest even if they are entitled to do so.

It is really a judgment call of the individual tax examiner who receives the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #35
46. While that may be true
A good accountant should also be asking of a person of Daschle's wealth and status, "Did you have any non-standard forms of income or expense, such as a company car, a nanny or housekeeper, country club membership, etc.?"

And, while Daschle is ultimately responsible for filing the tax forms, the accountant most likely put the whole package together and told Daschle to review and sign it and that he or she (the accountant) would submit the forms to the IRS and the appropriate state agencies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #46
78. Correct. And every CPA also sends out a packet of information called an Organizer
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 07:40 PM by LittleBlue
and one of those questions is exactly as you've stated: did you receive any non-compensation, including privileges or benefits for which no assets were transacted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #35
81. Depends on what services you offer.
If you do the bookkeeping, the information returns, and the tax returns, you might have some culpability after the passage of the Small Business Tax act of 2007.

http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2008/708/essentials/p40.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
43. Daschle is not my favorite person but tax cheat? I don't think so.
A tax cheat does not pay taxes, Daschle payed up once the problem was found. I think the problem is the tax system sucks. Its too damn complicated. I have never had problems but then again my husband and I don't make a whole lot..lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
45. After running such an airtight campaign, the vetting process
has been disappointing on these cabinet picks, to say the least. Did any Bush nominees in 2000/2001 have tax problems?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
biopowertoday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
59. Obama did vet them but he also said it was OK--but the people did not
say it was ok.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
60. Republicans are using this tax gotcha stuff to embarass Obama.
We shouldn't be exulting over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
61. Yeah....at one time I failed to pay taxes.
I fought it, and should have appealed it but at 21 I had my doubts on winning it. But all along I felt I was right, and then I knew I was right when a few years later they changed one word, the one and only word I was arguing over, and trying to convince me I was wrong . This was within the eligibility rules for tax deductions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
67. It's not Obama's fault that some people didn't come clean
Is Obama responsible for what Daschle DIDN'T TELL HIM?

Let's put it in your world. Say you have a friend who wants to get your recommendation for a job. You ask if all is cool and your friend says yes. You recommend them for the job. Then it turns out they were a thief at their last job and got fired and never told you. It's your fault?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
69. i'm sure he's working hard not to embarass you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
73. Or you'll what?
:silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
82. Most CPAs I know are die-hard FReepers
Most EAs I know are more "Democratic"

:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RollWithIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-04-09 09:00 PM
Response to Original message
83. I would hardly describe Daschle as a "Tax Cheat"
Edited on Wed Feb-04-09 09:01 PM by RollWithIt
He went to his accountant, raised the issue, and paid the debt owed plus penalties and interest. All of that a long time before he was selected for HHS. A tax "cheat" doesn't come back and turn himself in for an oversight.

Same for Geitner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC