Mitt Romney clearly has a tax-return problem: he has them, but despite calls from his own party to release the materials, he still refuses. Maybe the Republican would be willing to strike a deal?
Republican media consultant Alex Castellanos thinks Romney should trade 10 years of tax returns for "10 years of birth certificates" from President Obama. That's deeply dumb, but the idea of striking some kind of agreement on this may have some value.
Jim Messina, the Obama for America campaign manager, sent a letter this morning to Romney campaign manager Matt Rhoades, offering a proposed deal.
"I am writing to ask again that the Governor release multiple years of tax returns, but also to make an offer that should address his concerns about the additional disclosures. Governor Romney apparently fears that the more he offers, the more our campaign will demand that he provide. So I am prepared to provide assurances on just that point: if the Governor will release five years of returns, I commit in turn that we will not criticize him for not releasing more–neither in ads nor in other public communications or commentary for the rest of the campaign.
"This request for the release of five years, covering the complete returns for 2007-2012, is surely not unreasonable. Other Presidential candidates have released more, including the Governor's father who provided 12 years of returns. In the Governor's case, a five year release would appropriately span all the years that he has been a candidate for President. It would also help answer outstanding questions raised by the one return he has released to date, such as the range in the effective rates paid, the foreign accounts maintained, the foreign investments made, and the types of tax shelters used.
"To provide these five years, the Governor would have to release only three more sets of returns in addition to the 2010 return he has released and the 2011 return he has pledged to provide. And, I repeat, the Governor and his campaign can expect in return that we will refrain from questioning whether he has released enough or pressing for more."
This strikes me as an overly-generous offer -- since Romney has already released the 2010 documents, and swears he'll get around to releasing 2011 one of these days, Team Obama is basically only asking for three years' worth of returns. Romney disclosed 23 years of materials to John McCain's campaign, but Messina is saying the questions will stop if Romney simply provides tax returns for a few more years, not 23.
One assumes Team Romney will turn down the deal -- three years is more than zero -- and the questions will persist. Maybe, at some point, Romney will even come up with an explanation as to why the tax returns have to remain secret.
Update: As expected, Romney rejected the offer.
Leave a Comment:
hilarious.
simply hilarious.
It's an absolutely reasonable offer. Willard has been running for President since 2007....how come he can't simply release the 2007-2012 returns?
because....
HE'S ON THAT AMNESTY LIST.
That's why the 2010 return is INCOMPLETE..
I agree, Williard is on the Amnesty list. To release his returns showing that he may have "paid" a nominal penalty, and yet he's probably lied anyway might start some serious investigation by the IRS. Notice Williard always says that "he's paid all of the taxes that are legally owed" - not "the federal taxes" but "legally owed taxes" which in translation means "he hasn't really paid all of the federal taxes on all of his money"! No, it may be a "reasonable request", but WE aren't living in "reasonable" times.
Defenders of Romney's refusal to provide several years of tax records should keep in mind the precedent that Romney is creating for future presidential elections as well local elections. By defending his political strategy of refusing to provide substantive financial documentation, you are condoning this strategy for every politician in every future election, and you are surrendering your right and the right of furture generations to know. Keep that in mind.
I'm curious, why doesn't Anonymous just hack into whatever computer system Romney's accountant has in order to leak the returns? Yes, it's illegal, but that's never stopped them. Yet, I'm sure they have better things to do with their time, I just wonder...
@kaneblues, this is already happening. http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=277352
Thompson says he won't release additional tax information
8/16/2012
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Tommy Thompson Wednesday rebuffed Democrats' call for him to release a decade's worth of tax returns, as Dem opponent Tammy Baldwin has.
He said during a campaign stop at Husco International Inc. in Waukesha that if he were in government for the last 10 years, he would release them.
"I have not been in the government. I've been in the private sector," Thompson said. "The answer is no."
Pressed further, Thompson asked "why should I?" and quizzed a reporter if he would release his.
just a correction Benen...
HE DID NOT RELEASE THE COMPLETE 2010 TAX RETURNS.
it's only a PARTIAL.
go watch Lawrence O'Donnell....he and David Cay Johnston explain that over and over.
Too "reasonable." Looks like Messina learned his boss' negotiating tactics. The tax returns should go back to at least 1999, the year Mitt Romney "retroactively" retired from Bain.
No, this is perfect. It undercuts Romney's growing reliance on 'he's making personal attacks' nonsense, because it does show the president as reasonable.
The problem for Romney has to be that he had to take that 'amnesty' about his Swiss accounts because he committed a felony by not reporting them. If he doesn't provide the five years (that cover the amnesty period) then I think it will be a very clear indicator that he did receive this amnesty.
Has not the President been reasonable all along?
Romney's stripes are cemented in a truth-free zone. He won't stop crying that Obama is making personal attacks, regardless of facts or lack of evidence. Romney doesn't pander to honesty, he panders to that ever present "base", who revere their personal opinions over facts.
Yes, jjm, I agree he almost certainly took the amnesty. Still the public needs to see the "retirement" era.
And this smells of the Republican tactic of being stubbornly brazen spitting against decency and tradition and the Obama/Democratic tendency to let an issue slide ever-more toward what the Republicans want. Remember the debt ceiling? A heck of a lot of people believe Obama is responsible for the credit downgrade because they believe the crap they hear out of chest-beaters. After all, nobody could be pounding their chest about something if they were that obnoxiously wrong, right? One way to get away with something is to do it in broad daylight.
And there's a really good answer to Romney's charge Obama is making personal attacks. Romney's personal attacks against Obama are running about 100:1 in quantity and maliciousness. Expecting to see the tax returns is not a personal attack.
You can just imagine the Romney counter offer being he'll now release one full year and cherry-pick the year along with a charge that it's just nobody's business and he's being gracious for what he is offering.
Too "reasonable." This could actually embolden Team Romney on the issue. But I guess we'll see.
Disgusted ... I agree with everything you say. Still, Romney isn't even going to release 2007-2009, because that's where his main problems lie. There's the potential "amnesty" issue on Swiss accounts. Also, those returns would show whether or not there were carrybacks of 2008-2009 losses.
I've been skeptical of Reid's statement about ten years of "zero tax" returns, but when the carryback provisions come into effect, Romney may have gone back a long way, zeroing out tax liabilities for past years.
Still, we won't know until we see the returns. Which we're not going to see.
Maybe a better tack for Messina would have been simply to charge that Romney needs to release the tax returns so that Americans could be sure he wasn't on the amnesty list.
I think that would have been playing it the right way. Lots of pressure. Don't let up. Watch Team Romney howl over it and every time they do, charge Romney again with the obligation of showing he's not on the amnesty list. And keep telling the country they have a right to see if Romney has been honest all the way back to "retirement."
Messina can still do that now that Romney has declined Messina's offer. I sure hope they keep the pressure up. Squeeze that lyin' sack of shhit's balls.
This is going to get interesting. It's obvious that Mitt R-Money has been encapsulated within a bubble of yes men his entire life, and has never really been criticized for anything he's ever done.
Now he's in the limelight and he's not handling it too well. I say, Obama keeps needling this guy, day in and day out about taxes, offshore accounts, Bain, etc. Sooner or later he's going to go ape@!$%#. If he doesn't crack soon, he certainly will during the debates when a man with African descent has the audacity to challenge his piety.
On a related note, I wonder if most people know what Mormons think about Africans.
I was thinking the same thing. It's going to be like the Nixon-Kennedy debate where Nixon looked all sweaty, sick, and flustered. There'll be less sweat and sickness, but I actually think that Romney will be so pissed about his DOA campaign and the fact that his Yes Men have done him such a disservice that he'll snap under the pressure of the debates and say something really stupid.
Just look how angry he was during the whole "Corporations are people!" incident, he was quite clearly only a few moments away from losing his temper with those people, he was almost shouting at them. Not a very good demeanor for someone who wants to be PotUS. I couldn't imagine Obama yelling at hecklers like that.
Obama : Romney :: Louis CK : Michael Richards
What exactly was Ann talking about in her interview? She said every time they release something they get attacked. What have they "released" besides one incomplete year of taxes? They've hidden or destroyed everything from the Olympics, Bain, governor of Mass and now his taxes.
Willard, where are your taxes? What are you hiding from us in all those all those years?
Why would she refer to it as "ammunition" if there's nothing there? Why continue to hide something when you insist there is nothing to hide?
And - looking through the 203 pages of Mitt's partial 2010 return, why are there some pages, particularly those related to foreign investments, where the typeset is different from most of the rest? Could it be that those have been doctored prior to being released?
Here's a counter offer. Romney releases TEN years worth of returns and Obama releases ALL of his college records. This will never happen because this has never been about Obama being born in Hawaii. It is about what citizenship he claimed. AND if he had all or most of his college bills paid as a FOREIGN exchange student. Guess what? he was never eligible to run for this office. This will shut them down at LIGHT SPEED. Romney releases ALL of his returns AND throws in his college records for fun and Obama and Co. will just walk away in silence.
The grown-ups were having a conversation, dear. Take your unicorns and wishes and go play in the garden with the rest of the children.
Sigh...
Hey Gene, did you know Elvis and Jim Morrison were spotted at the Shoney's buffet in Middleton Ohio last month??!? With Bigfoot and batboy?
Seriously! i read it on the Internet! It must be true!!
And you think anyone is going to trust the Obama campaign, it's minions, and the MSM? Really?
If the Obama guys were really serious they'd offer Obama's college documents in exchange. But apparently Obama has as much or more to hide than Romney.
#8
The only defense to the issue of Romney's tax returns is to ask yet again for President Obama's college documents.
Please explain why the college documents are relevant.
Give ol' shooter a break , it's the only ammunition he's got (judging by the 472 previous post using it )
How many Presidents have released their college transcripts? None.
How many Presidents have released many years of tax returns? All of them since, what, the 1970's?
Shooter, you are the epitome of white-noise stupidity. Please cleanse yourself and any offspring you have from the gene-pool, and do humanity a favor.
maphi,
the college docs are relevant...
As I've said before, I trust Romney because I trust the IRS. On the other hand, it turns out a good bit of Obama's autobiography is fabricated, associations with "interesting" characters are either denied or glossed over, and almost every time Obama speaks without a teleprompter he offends Americans.
Oh, and Romney needs no defense. He's done what's required. All this is just Obama's campaign clinging to a life ring before getting sucked under by the undertow of arrogant incompetence.
This argument is another example of how silly this campaign has become. With all the issues out there - jobs, deficit, debt, entitlements, Afghanistan, etc. - we are down to tax returns and college transcripts. I come to this blog to see how progressives think. I just hope it could be less one sided. Surely, the Obama admin has had some failures. Why not discuss them?
What the f uck are you talking about? Obama has a net positive approval rating, and I can't remember the last time that he actually made a gaffe. Romney has a net negative approval and he and his campaign make stupid gaffes all the time.
Shooter, you are dumb. Dumb as f uck. The dumbest dumb f uck to have ever dumbf ucked.
@Shooter Re: #8.4
http:/ /articles.latimes.com/2012/may/28/news/la-pn-college-transcripts-replace-birth-certificate-for-obama-detractors-20120526
{delete space between first two //}
Tax returns and school transcripts are private.
Mitt Romney is running for a public office that makes policy regarding taxes. That is why tax returns are relevant.
You have not yet explained how President Obama's course loads or grades are relevant.
http:/ /abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/born-kenya-obamas-literary-agent-misidentified-birthplace-1991/story?id=16372566#.UC5R992PW0c
Right. Do you really expect anyone to believe Obama never, ever, not once saw the bio his Agent put out? Really? And where pray tell would this scapegoat gotten the impression Obama was born in Kenya?
Meanwhile Romney is following the rules. If you don't like what Romney is doing you're going to have to blame the rules not Romney. I've never said Obama was dong anything illegal, but, there isn't anyone to backstop the opinion everything with Obama is kosher. like Romney does with the IRS. All we have is Obama's word and that's worth exactly zero.
@Tom Re: #8.5
I (and others) have expressed some issues with some of the actions and policies of the Obama Administration. These include the Drone program and the "Kill List".
However, it is hard to have a discussion about issues when the opposition seems to seem bound and determined to drag us back to policies that sent us over the CLIFF! And the comments they post seem so often to be nothing more than spit-wads.
@Shooter Re: #8.8
The quote states that she edited the bio. It doesn't say how long it took to discover the error. It also does not state the extent to which the incorrect error was circulated before the error was discovered.
She made an error and that it was a simple mistake. How does that deserve the term "scapegoat?
I have never thought Mitt Romney did anything "illegal" with his taxes.
One of the big issues we face is the tax code.
When someone is asking to be lead the effort to make tax code changes, we deserve to know how he would personally benefit from these changes.
If there are any potential Conflict of Interest problems, we need to know them now and Mitt Romney can explain them.
We have more than President Obama's "word". That is what college degrees are for, that is what passing the bar exam is for, that is his teaching record is for.
Perhaps you can help get the answers I posed in #12.
That bio was used for 17 years then scrubbed in 2007. That tells me Obama knew about it.
Conflict of interest? Please. What ever Romney proposes it's assumed he's in the .01% and subsequently his benefit is calculated on the basis.
As for Obama's college career we have the same question the left has about Romney. What are they hiding? Romney has money stashed overseas? Good for him. Did he do anything illegal? Nobody seems to think so, so it's none of their business.
Sure this is a distraction, kept up by the left.
Reasons to see more of Romney and Ryan's tax returns:
1. Ryan said they want to have an open discussion to find out what tax loop holes they want closed. To do that we need to know what loop holes are being used by people in your brackets.
2. Romney has an IRA that is According to Romney’s disclosure documents, the candidate has between $20.7 million and $101.6 million parked tax-free in his IRA. There are limits to the amount of money individuals can contribute to their IRAs. Federal law capped annual pre-tax IRA contributions at $2,000 and annual 401(k) retirement contributions at $30,000 with a company match as the Journal notes. How did his get so high?
3. Does Paul Ryan stand to make money from his stakes in four businesses that lease land to energy companies which would benefit from $45 billion in tax breaks and subsidies in his proposed budget.
4. On September 18, 2008 the day of the meeting with Fed Chairman Ben Bernane and Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and congressional leaders were informed that they would have to approve a bailout to avert a complete meltdown of the financial system, coincidentally on that very same day
you sold stocks of several major banks that day, while purchasing stock in
Goldman Sachs which was Paulson’s old firm. Where they the same banks that were in trouble? Did you have preminission and sold the stock and reinvested in Goldman Sach before you learned of the problem? Which major bank stocks were sold that day. There is an article posted on AlterNet by Lynn Parramore –
8/14/12 www.alternet.org
5. During Romney’s tenure as a Marriott director, the company repeatedly utilized complex tax-avoidance maneuvers, prompting at least two tangles with the Internal Revenue Service, records show. In 1994, while he headed the
audit committee, Marriott used a tax shelter known to attorneys by its
nickname: “Son of BOSS.” A federal appeals court invalidated the maneuver in a 2009 ruling, siding with the U.S. Department of Justice, which called Marriott’s transaction and attempted tax benefits“fictitious,” “artificial,” “spectral,” an “illusion”and a “scheme.” Marriott had argued the plan predated government efforts to close such shelters. Employing another strategy, Marriott legally avoided hundreds of millions of dollars in income taxes thanks to a federal tax-credit program criticized and allowed to expire y Congress. Marriott has also shifted profits to a Luxembourg shell company. During Romney’s years on the board, Marriott’s effective tax rate dipped as low as 6.8 percent, compared with the federal corporate statutory rate of 35 percent. www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-22
- Did Romney use any of these schemes on his personal returns?
Re: 8.9 Maphi. I agree. Most alternative posts are off topic, or derogatory. It just seems no intelligent debate can be had. Either people go into who lied, or some insulting comments are passed.Benin puts out a topic. Discuss it without denigrating people. There are logical reasons for not returning to the past, but, also, logical reasons to not go to Keynes today. Let's discuss these intelligently and respectfully.
even if he is on the amnasty list, he did what was "legally required" of him, eventually. That basically is how he has run his entire business/political life. This man already has his presidential legacy before he has one guest spend the night in the Adelson bedroom. (amended tax returns, shredded documents, destroyed hard drives, foreign accounts, shell corporations, retroactive retirements)
no, if he is on the AMNESTY list, that means he did something that was ILLEGAL that required AMNESTY
Romney's Team already turned it down:
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/romney-campaign-manager-turns-down-obama-camps-tax
I would rather Obama's campaign hadn't gotten involved in this. It feels like capitulation. Romney comes back with a counter-offer of 1.5 tax returns and Anne makes another grand statement about liberals being mean.
The responsibility to comply with the tacit standard was all on Romney, Obama's campaign should have stayed out of it since he gave over his tax returns without a hissy fit or having Michelle publically whine about conservatives being mean.
Here is what I need to hear from Mitt Romney:
The facts as I know them - please correct me if I am wrong:
As one of the small group of very wealthy people, you have paid a smaller percentage of your income than many people who are just getting.
You are supporting additional tax cuts for those - including yourself - in this group.
The argument you make is that these tax cuts are for the "Job Creators" - that with tax cuts you will have even more money to create jobs with and we will all benefit from the new jobs.
The Request:
Please provide the evidence that you are indeed a "Job Creator" and explain what additional jobs you plan on creating with any additional income if we lower your taxes further.
I don't want to hear vague generalities or "talking pints". I want hard data. If you can do this by releasing your tax returns and pointing out the job creation evidence that will be OK.
If you don't want to release your tax returns, then please provide the data some other way.
Finally:
As business expert, I'm sure that Return On Investment is something you are good at determining.
We have decided through the current tax code that the "investment" of tax cuts for the wealthy "Job Creators" will strengthen our economy and our country will prosper.
What is the ROI for the tax cuts for the Job Creators - starting with yourself?
You might as well try to get blood from a stone.
So WHEN is Romney going to release his 2011 return that he promised? November 5th?
Nevermber Neverth.
I view the Democrats' offer to Romney as a foolish -- and, yes, utterly dumb -- move. Why should the Democrats try to neutralize Romney's distress over his refusal to disclose his tax returns? That is an issue that has sufficient momentum to exasperate, frustrate, and very likely defeat the Romney camp's aspirations to win the presidency.
In my opinion, this illustrates why Democrats are so inept at electioneering. Here they have an extraordinary opportunity to keep the income tax issue alive and they are offering their opponent an opportunity to wriggle out. The Democratic strategists just can't stop offering gifts to their adversaries. This is clearly a dumb move on Jim Messina's part, and I hope the country will not have to suffer the consequences of this dumbness when the election returns come in on November 6.
Uh, dude, they knew that Romney would turn down the offer. That's why they put it out there. It's just red meat for Democrats with no downside for their standing. Learn2Politic.
I respectfully disagree, Patrick.
As long as Romney withholds his tax returns, the Dems have red meat handed to them without lifting a finger or capitulating to this deranged rich guy.
Obama's campaign promised not to be "mean" to Widdle Willard if he produces his tax returns? Do you think Romney will promise not to lie about his treatment at the hands of liberals? Yeah, like he can stop lying, period.
The pressure should have come from everywhere else BUT Obama's campaign. They should have just stayed out of that hornet's nest.
Still think so now that Romney has refused the offer? I see it as brilliant. It keeps Romney's absurd secrecy in the spotlight, and I believe the offer was made knowing it would be rejected. I'm guessing the Obama camp has a very good idea what's in those tax returns.
NeedsMoreCoffee - I enjoy most of your comments a lot, but maybe you should have a bit more java today. The Obama campaign didn't offer not to criticize Willard, just to refrain from criticizing him for refusing to release more tax returns... if he agreed to release the few they asked for... which they knew he wouldn't.
It emphasizes Willard's arrogance, immaturity, and suspicious behavior, and keeps it right at the top of the news cycle, where it belongs. I like it.
;-)
"There's an old saying in Minnesota—I know it's in Utah, probably in Minnesota—that says, 'Fool me once, shame on, shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again.'"
- Mitt Romney on why he won't release his tax returns.
People - Despite the surreal nature of US Politics, this IS NOT A GAME! Really! I hate to bring this up but when a Fascist Movement in any country begins its moves, it does so with idiotic and foolish seeming laws, issues and changes. Even in Nazi Germany, the first things done were considered silly, small and of no importance. Things like bad mouthing and banning authors and certain music. Then people were lulled into believing they could protest and laugh at the idiocy and silly "registrations" and lines of people waiting to get "checked" for this or that. The Birth Certificate flap was exactly what is used to rally the maniacs. There is no way to play with this Tax thing. ROMNEY is like any crass modern CEO who has NO interest in the little people - the workers - the liabilities to the corporation. VOTERS are NOT assets to Romney and he barely tolerates them. Just like the typical CEO of the nasty corporations today. Workers (voters) are liabilities - not Assets! I am sure Romney actually thinks it would be better for the country (meaning the people he considers equals) if Voters had nothing to do with getting his next job. He certainly wouldn't want to invest in a company where the WORKERS got to tell him what THEY wanted!
All this garbage about Romney hiding things and raising suspicion....what about all the secrecy around the Obamas and their sealing all the records around their education and their law licenses...if that doesn't raise suspicion on what they are hiding nothing else will. Tit for Tat. Why was Michelles license revoked? Who paid for the education of the poor little boy from Indonesia; what were his grades; did he really attend classes at Columbia - his program classmates don't recall him attending one of their classes...if Romney's tax info is relevant so are the Obama's records that they paid millions to seal from public knowledge.
Yeah rufus - from the moment of his birth, through his childhood years, into high school and college, and beyond, it has all been a giant conspiracy designed to make Obama President so he can take away your guns, Bible, and Medicare. It must be if Fox says so.
you totally missed the point....if Romney is being accused of not being transparent for not releasing his tax records, then it is only fair to accuse Obama of not being transparent for sealing ALL of his personal records. The fair trade from the Obama campaign would have been, Obama will unseal all his personal records if Romney reveals his prior tax records. Don't be so maddowed in your view of the real world.
Not quite - you want Obama to release ALL of his personal records for Romney to release his tax records. Your words. I'd say a fair trade would be for Obama to release ALL of his personal records if Romney releases ALL of his personal records. That would include not only his tax records, but his records as Governor, head of the Olympics, his time at Bain, and so on.
Let's face it - everyone has something in their past that they would prefer stay there. But when you seek public office, there are certain things that need to be shared if you want to gain the trust of the electorate. Income tax returns, especially for someone so wealthy, are one of those things. Certainly more than a driving record or college transcripts from 30 or 40 years ago. Frankly I don't care if Romney refuses to release more. It's his choice if he wants to reduce his chances of winning. Even if he came out now and proved everything was on the up and up, he's already lost my trust by holding out. Not that I would vote for him anyway, but I have a feeling this is how some moderates and independents are feeling by now.
On a recent RM show, there was a clip of Rommey explaining why people have accounts in the Cayman Islands. He said that these accounts were a way for non-citizens to invest in the US and not have to pay taxes. The follow-up question by the reporter should have been - "Are you a non-citizen?" The Cayman Islands allow independently wealthy people to become citizens by either investing in the islands or by showing they are wealty. So, is the Governor (and his family) have dual citizenship and avoid paying taxes on a large part of his (their) income?
See rules on Cayman citizenship below.
Residency for Persons of Independent Means
For foreign nationals not
wishing to work in the Cayman Islands but simply wishing to have the right to
reside, there are alternative options. In particular, one can apply to the Chief
Immigration Officer for a Residency Certificate which is valid for 25 years and
is renewable.
In Grand Cayman, proof
of an annual income of at least CI$150,000 without the need to be engaged in
employment in the Cayman Islands is required and an investment of CI$750,000 (of
which CI$250,000 must be in developed real estate). The “remaining” CI$500,000
must be invested in a company or property - and simply holding assets with a
broker or monies in a local bank account (whilst encouraged) do not count for
these purposes. Investing in a local business, or even one which has shares
publically traded such as Caribbean Utilities or Cayman National Bank, can
count. Most often, applicants will simply buy a substantial home and immediately
meet the requirement. However, it is entirely permissible for an applicant to
buy two CI$400,000 investment properties and live in one and rent the other, or
alternatively live in rental accommodation and rent out both their properties.
An alternative could be to buy (say) three CI$250,000 condos and live in one and
rent two out (being a landlord of up to two rental units requires no licensing
and the income counts towards the required financial standing). There is
presently no need to actually invest the full amount - acquiring CI$750,000 of
property with a mortgage on 80% is presently permissible. As long as at least
CI$250,000 is in developed real estate, the balance can be in any local business
and/or any developed or undeveloped real estate.
The process of
applying for a Residency Certificate is relatively straightforward and
permission can usually be granted within six weeks of application. Legal fees
for this process are unlikely to exceed US$2,500.
There are alternatives
that do not require an actual investment in a property. For example, starting a
company engaged in exempted business (i.e. as an agent for overseas operations)
and then hiring yourself as a principal on a work permit can make you resident
without having to buy property and has the advantage of permitting you to work.
Again, such a solution generally takes about six weeks for qualified applicants
and the legal fees for that (including incorporation, trade and business
licensing and work permits) would likely be closer to
US$15,000.
To become resident in
Little Cayman or Cayman Brac, proof of an annual income of CI$75,000 without the
need to be employed in the Cayman Islands and an investment of CI$250,000
locally, of which at least CI$125,000 must be in developed residential real
estate. There is a one-time fee payable on grant of
CI$20,000.
5. Certificate of Permanent Residence for Persons of
Independent Means
In June of 2012 a new
category was created by an update to the legislation; it offers the right to
permanently reside for persons of Independent Means. Unlike the traditional
25-year certificate for such persons, the new Certificate of Permanent Residence
for Persons of Independent Means can be amended to allow the holder to work in
the Cayman Islands and can enable the holder to eventually apply for the Right
to be Caymanian.
The
effect will be to allow a limited number of persons who meet the income and
investment requirements to gain Permanent Residence with the Right to Work
(described below) without needing to first establish eight years of prior legal
and ordinary residence in the Cayman Islands.
In order
to qualify for the certificate of Permanent Residence for Persons of Independent
Means, applicants will be required to have invested a prescribed sum in
developed real estate and possess sufficient financial resources to maintain
himself and his dependents. An applicant will also need to
demonstrate that he and his dependants are in good physical health and of good
character. Details of specific requirements will only be known once the
accompanying regulations have been published and are understood to include an
investment with a particular level of equity in a home. Latest indications are
that the Regulations are being drafted and will come into effect soon. The
number of these types of certificates will be restricted to an annual quota to
be set by the Governor. However, to date, no annual quota has been
determined.
6.
Certificate of Direct Investment
Wealthy individuals who
are in a position to invest a substantial sum in an employment generating
business or businesses in the Cayman Islands may wish to participate in an
incentive scheme intended to attract investors and their
dependants.
Such
persons may, provided they can demonstrate a personal net worth of in excess of
CI$6,000,000 and an investment (or in some cases, imminent investment) of a
minimum of CI$2,400,000 in an employment generating business (or businesses) on
the Island, apply to the Chief Immigration Officer for a Certificate of Direct
Investment.
Approval-in-Principle Certificates (valid for six months) are available
prior to applying for a full certificate. Full certificates are valid for 25
years and are renewable on application, at the discretion of the Chief
Immigration Officer. Such a certificate entitles the holder to reside in the
Cayman Islands and to work in the business or businesses in which the holder has
invested.
The
spouse and dependent children (where applicable) of the holder of a Certificate
of Direct Investment will, on successful application, be granted a Direct
Investment Holder’s (Dependant’s) Certificate, generally permitting them to
reside in the Islands for the duration of that certificate.
The
application fee is CI$1,000 with a further CI$20,000 payable on issue of the
certificate.
7. Residency Certificate (Substantial Business
Presence)
Also introduced in June
2012, the Residency Certificate (Substantial Business Presence) is a new type of
certificate. It is now available to persons who either own a ten per cent share
in an approved category of business or will be employed in a senior management
capacity within such a business. In each case, the business must have a
substantial presence in the Cayman Islands. It is designed and intended to be
less onerous than the more established option of a Certificate of Direct
Investment, and is not limited to owners.
An
Approval-in-Principle Certificate, valid for six months and renewable at the
discretion of the Chief Immigration Officer, is available to individuals who
have not yet met either of the requirements but who nevertheless propose to meet
them within the six-month validity period. Holders of either the
Approval-in-Principle Certificate or the Residency Certificate (Substantial
Business Presence) are entitled to reside in the Cayman Islands and work in the
business in which they are an owner or are employed in a senior management
capacity.
Full
details of the requirements will not be available until the accompanying
regulations have been passed. It is anticipated that their publication is
imminent.
Having been raised a Mormon and surrounded all my life by the culture; I have heard on more than one instance that some wealthy Mormon folks are very anxious to keep the real amount of money they make a secret. It is required by the Mormon faith that you contribute 10% of your gross income as tithing to the church. Failure to do so will keep you out of the top tier of the kingdom of God.
However, not being disuaded by this threat, I have been told that it has been asked by people having the need to know about their true income (spec home builders for instance) to keep it a top secret because they don't want the church to know that they did not fully pay their 10%.
I have a notion this may be the case with the Romney's -
Uh-Oh - Mitt's got some 'splainin' to do then. From his (partial) 2010 tax return:
Adjusted Gross Income: $21,646,507.
Contribution to the Church of Latter Day Saints (from Supplement to Schedule A, page 139 of 203): $1,525,000.
1,525,000 / 21,646,507 = 7.045%. Heck it's not even 10% of their taxable income.
To borrow a line from Rick Perry...Oops.
Which is it?
1. Mitt and Ann value their privacy more than they value the Presidency.
2. Mitt's tax returns will cost him votes because:
__a. Mitt's extraordinary and obsessive use of tax-avoidance practices will turn off voters.
__b. Mitt's amending his tax returns to make him "retroactively eligible" to have run for Governor of Massachusetts will demonstrate his arrogance and sleaze, and indicts him as a possible felon.
__e. Mitt's "never paid less than 13%" includes amended returns that were originally zero taxes.
__d. Mitt took advantage of an IRS amnesty program (another sleaze factor).
3. All of the above
Well of course he's not going to accept that offer. Obama's campaign can promise they wouldn't lay into him for it because . . . well, let's face it, the rest of us would in a heartbeat.
What do you guys think about us innundating the Romney campaign with all our tax returns? Redact out our SSNs and send 'em over. As many years as we can easily get our hands on. Transcripts are free from the IRS. I think the massive amount of mail alone would become a news story--and we can also provide the Post Office with some needed income.
Why isn't Romney being audited by the IRS, if for anything else, deducting expenses for a horse?
If they're not going to perform an audit then I'm buying a horse.
Romney has said that he's been audited by the IRS. Makes me wonder if that's one of the reasons why he won't release more. Maybe those audits found problems and he had to pay penalties, back taxes, and/or be on the amnesty list.
Sadly, the only horse I can afford to buy is probably in the "mystery meat" products I sometimes pick up at the Dollar Store (where I do more of my food shopping these days than I usually care to contemplate).
o.O