One last thing before I shift to preparing for tomorrow's class: the extensions.
This suggests 2 questions: (1) How (or why) did he get extensions? (2) Why did he pay $1m in taxes and then request a refund? 1/
Question 1 first: you know how April 15th is Tax Day? (Or, rather, other than this bizarro year we're living in it's Tax Day?)
Turns out it's not. Or at least it's not Tax _Filing_ Day. 2/
See, every taxpayer qualifies for an automatic 6-month extension on filing. That is, as long as you send the necessary form to the IRS, you don't have to file your tax return until October 15!
So why does anybody file their tax return on April 15? That takes us to Question 2. 3/
So Question 2: you may not have to file your tax return until October 15 (if you send in the form that gets you an automatic extension), but your taxes are due on April 15.
So irrespective of when you file your return, you need to pay your taxes by April. 4/
Now for normal people (me and, I'm assuming, you), that's not really a big deal. Almost all of the money I earn is wage income from my job. So I can figure out how much I earned on Dec. 31, and my employer will send me a W2 by the end of January. 5/
But wealthy people--people like Trump (or, at least, people like Trump is allegedly)--often own partnership interests. And as I explained in a previous thread, partners pay taxes on their share of partnership income. 6/
But partnerships don't always send partners information about their share of partnership income in time for April 15. So on April 15, a partner in a partnership may legitimately not know how much they owe in taxes. 7/
So often they'll pay an estimated tax amount by April 15 and, if they overpaid, request a refund by October 15.
Anyway, this is neither an apologia for nor a condemnation of Trump's taxes; it is, I hope, some context for stuff that seems weird. #TrumpTaxReturns 8/8
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Today #HunterBiden filed a suit against the @IRSnews alleging that the IRS unlawfully disclosed his tax return info.
So I thought I'd run through the complaint and take a look. (Note that there may be a big break in tweets--I have a meeting shortly.) 1/storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Central to the suit is an allegation that two IRS agents regularly went on network and cable news to discuss audits and criminal investigations against Biden and that this behavior violated the tax law.
The Code provides for not-insignificant civil damages against those who violate it. (Note that largely this applies to federal and state employees and officers, not normal citizens.) 3/ taxnotes.com/research/feder…
Because I have no idea how it applies to me as a professor. Essentially, the training talks about flagging red flags as a financial institution, and especially in dealing with customers.
But here's the thing: even if the university is covered (which I assume it is? 2/
only the training never explained how?), *I* don't deal with student funds. They don't come to me about withdrawals or money or anything like that.
And that absolutely doesn't mean I don't have some kind of Red Flags Law obligation! 3/
I'm thinking I'm going to live-tweet this complaint about Ensign Peak Advisors. Because on the first page it says this: 1/
That's decidedly not true. Currently, the IRS audits about 0.41% to tax returns. That number shoots up for the very wealthy and the very poor, but for the vast majority of Americans, they're never going to face an audit. 2/ trac.syr.edu/reports/706/#:….
I suspect the audit rate for tax-exempt orgs is similarly miniscule. And for religious auxiliary organizations like EPA? Next to zero (if you can be any more next to zero). 3/
There is literally nothing good that can come from @USNewsEducation ranking elementary and middle schools, but there is a ton of potential harms, ranging from discouraging teachers from teaching where they're needed to convincing wealthy and white parents that 2/
they need to sequester their kids from certain schools and neighborhoods.
This is literally the most inequitable and harmful news I can imagine hearing from @USNewsEducation. 3/
I get that Turley likes writing about things he doesn't understand. And I sincerely hope he enjoyed writing about wealth taxes because he very clearly doesn't have a clue what he's writing about. A short thread: 1/
First thing: it's hard to argue that a 2-3% tax is "soaking the rich." The S&P has a long-term average return about 9%.
Now admittedly, people with >$50m aren't investing *all* of their wealth. But their investing a lot of it. 2/
A 2-3% tax will make their money grow more slowly but, unless they're beyond terrible investors, will neither touch principal nor eliminate asset growth. 3/