Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
philosslayer (281 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 09:12 AMThe Kennedy Family and tax avoidanceI am a big fan of the Kennedy family in general and all they have done for this country. However, the attached article leaves a bad taste in my mouth. If you were to substitute "Bush" for "Kennedy", we would all rightfully be disgusted at the tricks and schemes used to avoid paying what would certainly be considered their fair share. But one example from the article: "Like politics, tax savvy seems to run in the Kennedy family. The most recent example is the 1998 sale of the family’s most valuable asset: the iconic Merchandise Mart, a towering retail space on the Chicago River that was once thought to be the largest building in the world. Thanks to a carefully crafted deal with Vornado Realty VNO +0.47%, the Kennedy family deferred – or possibly avoided completely – capital gains tax on nearly half the value of the sale." I'm interested in what others think. Yes, the tricks they have used to avoid paying the tax man are legal. But are they moral? Ethical? http://www.forbes.com/sites/carlodonnell/2014/07/08/how-the-1-billion-kennedy-family-fortune-defies-death-and-taxes-3/
greytdemocrat (2,118 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 09:18 AM1. Like you said...If this was "Bush" or "Romney" what would the responses be?
factsarenotfair (846 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 09:32 AM2. Standard Operating Procedure for the wealthy, just like John Kerry with his yacht. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/john-kerry-saves-500000-b_n_656985.html I guess I would consider it inevitable in a sociopathic economic system.
Punkingal (5,972 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 09:47 AM3. At least the Kennedy family believes in public service...Senator Kennedy's whole senate career was about helping the working class and the poor.* Many of those in the next generation have also done things to help others. The same cannot be said for the Bush family or the Romney family. The Romneys do tithe to their church, but i doubt they do much else. I can forgive the Kennedys for a lot, because every time there was an issue near and dear to my heart, I could count on Teddy being there, speaking about it, working on it, increasing awareness of it. I don't give a damn if he didn't pay a dime in taxes...he earned a pass in my book. the others haven't.
Gidney N Cloyd (12,164 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 09:53 AM5. Hm. Tax break on the Merchandise Mart vs Three Dead Sons in service to the country.I'm not sending any bill collectors.
dembotoz (5,981 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 10:04 AM6. when i drop off my tax stuff at the preparer i do not ask him to find ways to screw myselfi would think wealthy folks are the same.
Fla Dem (3,330 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 11:09 AM9. No surprise, and frankly if the law allows it they along with the Bush's are fools not to takeadvantage. I would suspect the Kennedy's do not personally handle each and every financial detail of each and every transactions. They, along with all wealthy people have skilled professionals doing that for them. I do know the Kennedy's do an lot for the poor and under privileged.* With my meager income (in comparison) I certainly take advantage of all the deductions allowed. Which really aren't that many. So yes, ethically, and morally I'm ok with it. If we don't like it, then change the laws.
Igel (20,170 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 02:22 PM12. Pretty much everybody engages in tax avoidance.I do. I avoid paying taxes I don't have to. That includes taking the standard deductions on my income taxes. It included taking the education credit, when I was in school. It includes deducting what I can for my job. I was annoyed when the charitable contribution deduction went away. That was a long time ago. When I was self-employed I deducted mileage expenses and equipment expenses. I could deduct a portion of the FICA tax that I paid, so I did. I tried to structure my income to spread out my income and avoid having it all concentrated in one year. Rush this invoice in December on year, delay billing in December during a really good year. That's tax avoidance. When I lived in a state with state income tax, I could deduct what I paid for federal income tax so I did. When I moved from that state to a state with no income tax, I avoided sending out invoices for almost two months. That way the income was credited to time I was a no-income-tax-state resident, and I had no pay no state income tax on it. That's structuring my finances for the purposes of tax avoidance. I prefer having what I pay towards my health insurance taken from my pay *before* taxes are paid on it, so I don't have to. I was glad when instead of giving me $1000 increase on my salary one year my employer bought out the health insurance increases--the $1000 went towards something that would have to be paid, but no FICA, Medicare, or income taxes came out of it. That's tax avoidance. I was moderately annoyed when our son was born. I was hoping to proper structure his arrival into the world according to the tax code. If he'd been born 50 minutes later, on 12/31, we'd have saved $1000 on our previous year's taxes. But, no ... If had the time and a large enough mortgage and other deductions I'd probably itemize and deduct my mortgage interest. But the standard deduction is a better deal for me, so I take the standard deduction. That's tax avoidance. When I was my mother's conservator, I watched the prices of the stocks and bonds I sold to pay for her caretaker. Why? Because I wanted to balance capital gains with capital losses. To avoid paying taxes. That's tax avoidance, but for my 84-year-old Alzheimer-patient mother. The "moral" difference between what I do and what the wealthy do is that what I do is okay but what the wealthy do is morally objectionable. Not necessarily because they do anything significantly different from what I'd do--but they're wealthy and they're doing it. We don't like them, so what they do has to be bad. We like us and we're good, so what we do has to be okay. We like to say it's the practices we don't like. Bull. It's the people we don't like. We just want to find excuses that make it not just personal ("I resent what they have because they have it") and make it principle. Why? Because there are wealthy people we do like (they make amends for the moral transgression of being wealthy) and because most of us would like to engage in the same moral transgression, even as we try to find ways to make something like our checkbook balance be a direct indicator of our moral rectitude. Instead of a prosperity gospel, some have a poverty gospel--do what you like, but if you lack $ it means you're a good person and God loves you because you're poor.
Throd (4,690 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 03:23 PM15. Not a Kennedy fanboi, but I try to minimize my tax bill as much as is legally possible.
laundry_queen (6,921 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 03:25 PM16. Here's the thingwhen someone gets their accountant to do their books, they often don't know the various ways taxes can be avoided. The accountants do, and many believe their job is to save as much money for their clients as is legally possible. So they do. They know every single deduction and loophole and use them. Unless instructed to otherwise, that is what tax accountants do. I'm not saying I agree with it, but it's just what it is. One of my tax profs (accounting major here) said she was totally stunned when she had a client that told her to not use all of the loopholes. He wanted nothing to be misconstrued (I gathered, though she didn't say, that he was prepping for a public/highly visible job) and he had always done that. My tax prof said she had never, in her 30 years of doing taxes, encountered someone, wealthy or not, who wanted her to not take advantage of all the loopholes and deductions. So, some people do this but it is rare. It's probably rarer to find an accountant who would mention this is an option with his or her clients. And it's likely most clients, rich or poor, don't even understand how this works. So I don't fault the Kennedys for how their fortune is being managed...that's what accountants and advisors are hired to do and it's unlikely that the family is intricately involved in every single decision about how to manage taxes. At least the Kennedys fight for those who aren't as fortunate as they are.* That counts for a lot.
Fla Dem (3,330 posts) Sat Jul 12, 2014, 11:09 AM9. No surprise, and frankly if the law allows it they along with the Bush's are fools not to take advantage. I would suspect the Kennedy's do not personally handle each and every financial detail of each and every transactions. They, along with all wealthy people have skilled professionals doing that for them. I do know the Kennedy's do an lot for the poor and under privileged.* With my meager income (in comparison) I certainly take advantage of all the deductions allowed. Which really aren't that many. So yes, ethically, and morally I'm ok with it. If we don't like it, then change the laws.
Alford, as a teen-ager, was procured and then essentially pimped by the President and his aides. By her account, Kennedy asked her to perform oral sex on an aide while he watched. She did, and their contact continued for more than a year; it ended soon after she turned down a request to “take care†of Ted Kennedy.
Most if not all those wonderful tax dodges for the evil rich were written by and passed for the evil rich democrats in congress.
So-o-o-o-o ... 1%ers are only eeeeeee-vile if they're not Liberal-Progressive 1%ers?
Could someone please list 10 things that Ted did to help the working class and the poor? Such things may in fact exist. If so, I'd like to see them, and I'm too DUish to nadin them for myself.
Senator Kennedy's whole senate career was about helping the working class
Chivas Brothers is a leading employer with 1,600 staff
