Democrats bombard Romney with tax haven attacks

None of the GOP/TP are.

It's why they are so popular among conservatives.

You see, you don't need any smarts at all to screech that anything the other team does is "taking away our freedoms!!"

Do you really think Romney is richer than John Kerry? Romney is a mere millionaire like Obama. Kerry is a billionaire and Democrats loved him in 2004. Let's quite with the envy already. Romney and Obama are both millionaires and neither have broken any rules according to the IRS. The problem isn't what the Democrats think Romney did illegally. The problem is what the tax code allows to be done legally.

I mean this guy just is NOT smart.

You mean like running for president with a two decade long association with a racist mentor? This is just inside baseball. Obama is the worst president in American history - worse than Jimmy Carter even. He does not deserve to be re-elected. He has been a miserable failure in all that he has done. He will sling any mud necessary to win. He will run the most negative campaign in American history ( OK, at least since 1800) and he will probably lose anyway.

A Vanity Fair report less than a week ago shifted the focus back onto Romney’s millions tucked away in Switzerland and in offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda.

The Vanity Fair article was written by Nicholas Shaxson.

He was recently put up for a book award.

The UK's first book award celebrating radical, leftwing writing has been launched,

The Bread and Roses award for radical publishing – named after the slogan chanted in 1912 by striking textile workers in Massachusetts, who struck for "bread, and for roses too" – is looking for books "informed by socialist, anarchist, environmental, feminist and anti-racist concerns",

Nicholas Shaxson's exposé of tax havens Treasure Islands complete the lineup.

Organisers are hoping the Bread and Roses prize will bring radical non-fiction to a wider audience, as well as encouraging the publishing of more radical titles and rewarding "exceptional" work. "Radical movements need radical books and we are delighted to be promoting the wonderful range of inspiring and informative books being published today, through the Bread and Roses prize," said award trustee Mandy Vere of News from Nowhere Bookshop.

The winner will be announced on 1 May, International Workers' Day, at the Bread and Roses pub in Clapham, London.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/06/bread-and-roses-shortlist-announced

SushiSake3: You see, you don't need any smarts at all to screech that anything the other team does is "taking away our freedoms!!"

Since you support Obama, are you for the National Defense Authorization Act? Who is the one "taking away our freedoms!!???"

President Obama Signed the National Defense Authorization Act - Now What? by Erik Kain @ http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/01/02/president-obama-signed-the-national-defense-authorization-act-now-what/

“The most important point on this issue is the same as underscored in the prior two points: the “compromise” reached by Congress includes language preserving the status quo,” he continues. “That’s because the Obama administration already argues that the original 2001 AUMF authorizes them to act against U.S. citizens (obviously, if they believe they have thepower to target U.S. citizens for assassination, then they believe they have the power to detain U.S. citizens as enemy combatants). The proof that this bill does not expressly exempt U.S. citizens or those captured on U.S. soil is that amendments offered by Sen. Feinstein providing expressly for those exemptions were rejected. The “compromise” was to preserve the status quo by including the provision that the bill is not intended to alter it with regard to American citizens, but that’s because proponents of broad detention powers are confident that the status quo already permits such detention.”

NDAA unconstitutional: Federal judge bans Obama from indefinitely detaining Americans @ http://rt.com/usa/news/ndaa-judge-obama-forrest-295/

The Obama administration responded nine days later by asking Judge Forrest to reconsider her ruling, adding that, in the interim, the government would interpret the injunction to mean that only the few plaintiffs listed on the lawsuit would be excluded from indefinite detention.

None of the mud that these Democrats sling can undue what the latest jobs report made depressingly clear to millions of Americans. This administration does not understand how to create wealth, how to create jobs, or that having one is, strange as it must sound to a progressive lefty, central to the identity and self-worth of most Americans old enough to work. So they attack Romney's choice to shelter his earnings elsewhere. But these attacks come on the heels of a verdict on nationalized healthcare that empowers Democrat proponents of a new, very un-American, all-powerful state to raid your bank accounts and confiscate your passport if any of the bureaucrats at the now greatly expanded Internal Revenue Service decide you owe them more money than you paid in taxes.

Romney is the poor version of Kerry. Why wasn't there such similar attacks on Kerry? Oh, yeah, he was on the media moguls' side. Media bias is painfully obvious.

Typical attack posts by the rightwing posters here. Do not dispute the facts, attack the messenger. The Stormin Morman has his assets hidden all over the word to avoid paying US taxes on his massive wealth that was created in the US. Its typical of the 1% to avoid paying taxes making working americans pick up the tax burden.

Regarding jobs, Romney and Bain are one very big reason why jobs have been outsourced in the USA. Romney and Bain funded the exodus of jobs from the USA and make millions doing so, which Romney now hides in phony accounts all over the world. Perfect. Screw the USA job market and then screw the US budget by hiding your wealth. Its shameful, but these folks have no shame obviously. That is why they destroy US jobs to make more money for themselves.

Only people with millions of dollars to hide in offshore accounts should vote for romney. Anyone else is just cutting their own throats as he will protect his own and make the 99% pay and pay and pay and by the way may help move your job to Mexico. Start studying Spanish if Romney wins.

Regarding jobs, Romney and Bain are one very big reason why jobs have been outsourced in the USA.

You cannot even qualify this ridiculous statement. You are little more than a cheerleader, "zurcronium."

zurcronium: Regarding jobs, Romney and Bain are one very big reason why jobs have been outsourced in the USA. That is why they destroy US jobs to make more money for themselves.

They are not the only companies in the US that have outsourced jobs overseas. Democrats are also destroying the US job market when they outsourced too. It is short sighted to pick on Romney or the Republicans when we all know business owners regardless of Republicans or Democrats are going to have to do what is best for the business. Would you rather lay a few people off or go bankrupt and lay everyone off? Besides, Obama have given hundred of millions to companies, and some have went belly up which have caused job losses and hundred of millions (taxpayers money) losses too. Who doesn't know how to run a successful business??? What about Obama defends his record on these companies???

These are just a few examples, and there are more.

Ener1, Parent of Obama-Backed Green Company, Files for Bankruptcy By LEE FERRAN and MATTHEW MOSK @ http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/ener1-parent-obama-backed-green-company-files-bankruptcy/story?id=15456414

House investigating bankrupt solar company backed by Obama bundler and DOE loan by Joel Gehrke @ http://washingtonexaminer.com/house-investigating-bankrupt-solar-company-backed-by-obama-bundler-and-doe-loan/article/2501251

...Abound Solar, a now-bankrupt solar company that received a $400 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy, to testify before Congress about the DOE subsidy... The bankruptcy announcement comes after Abound laid off 280 employees in March. The DOE loan guarantee was projected to create 1200 permanent jobs.

Good chance to post this again (the thread the other day was a bit stale).

Mitt Romney owns an individual retirement account worth as much as $101 million.

That amount is astoundingly high, given that employer/employee joint contributions are capped at about $30,000 a year.

It appears that Romney has made use of a loophole which allows a contribution to an IRA of investments of undetermined value - and if they later exceed that $30,000 cap, well, lucky you! Thus, Romney was able to set up shell companies of "undetermined value," incorporate them into his IRA, and then determine their value as he felt fit.

Good for him for finding this loophole! He has been doing what capitalists should do, which is to maximize profit - in this case with the beneficiary being himself. It does not matter if the "spirit" of the law has been broken - that IRAs were set up so that people in their peak earning years could set aside retirement funds that could be taxed at the lower income of their retirement years, and that such a ridiculously large amount goes way beyond what is required for this purpose - no, the point is, if a loophole exists to enlarge your profit, and if you or those you employ are able to identify it, take it.

He'll pay the taxes on that income eventually, as required by law - though at a lower rate, as he'll be retired and earning nothing else. He will, as he has always stated, adhere firmly to the laws as they are written. Also, in doing so, he will avoid as much as possible contributing to the United States. Good for him. He is a businessman, and a Republican.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/24/us-usa-campaign-romney-ira-idUSTRE80N04E20120124

@zurc, your post sounds like you're saying "my money is my money and your money is my money, too."

The fact is that people learned to internationalize their assets ages ago to protect themselves and their families' futures from the confiscatory practices of social redistributative regimes. People like Romney pay more in taxes EVERY year(under state threat of violence including imprisonment) than you or I will likely earn in a lifetime, assuming you actually even work.

You might want to check into the financial portfolios of the Dems as well, if you think only repubs have done it.

Laguna,

that IRAs were set up so that people in their peak earning years could set aside retirement funds that could be taxed at the lower income of their retirement years, and that such a ridiculously large amount goes way beyond what is required for this purpose

He'll pay the taxes on that income eventually, as required by law - though at a lower rate, as he'll be retired and earning nothing else.

Not true at all actually.

Jonathan Rikoon, a lawyer at New York's Debevoise & Plimpton LLP who advises private-equity-fund executives on estate planning, said Mr. Romney's reliance on a tax-deferred retirement plan for so much of his wealth could end up costing him. An IRA allows a small immediate tax savings, plus deferral of taxes, he explains. But income from the account, when eventually withdrawn, will be taxed at the higher ordinary-income rate, not the lower capital-gains rate that might have applied if Mr. Romney had held the investments outside the fund.

Mr. Romney's retirement account wasn't a Roth IRA, on which he would already have paid taxes, according to the campaign aide. He is required by law to begin withdrawing funds from his account beginning in 2017, when he reaches age 70½. Those withdrawals will be treated as ordinary income, which currently is taxed at a maximum federal rate of 35%. (For most Americans, IRAs make sense because their savings are so modest their retirement income won't likely trigger high tax rates.)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204468004577168972507188592.html

Romney financing firms that recruited jobs away from the USA is common knowledge.

Romney can do whatever he wants with his money as a private citizen. As president he answers to higher requirement. If he becomes President it will be his job to hunt down tax cheats just like him to pay their fair share.

Any other comments? Any one else care to dispute the truth of this matter? Romney is a tax cheat and has profited from destroying american jobs for decades. And he does not have the moral quality to admit this to the American people. He will not even open his complete tax records like his Dad, when he ran for President, had the guts to do. If you want more on this just check out what the republican candidates for President said about Romney during the primary run. They were scathing, called Romney a vulture capitalist.

Good old Romney -- do one thing while promising you'll prevent it as president. This guy's been screwing the US for a good while, and now expects further rewards than he's already gotten through ill gain.

Only fourteen posts so far yet our radical conservatives feel the need to bring up John Kerry, Jimmy Carter, the Bread and Roses award for radical publishing (WTF?), the National Defense Authorization Act, the omnipresent "Media bias" and obviously, BH Obama. Truly amazing fellas.

Romney has been manipulating the system for years. Every bit of scrutiny from now until November is merited. Sorry about that....

Bread and Roses award for radical publishing (WTF?),

Exactly my thoughts when I found out who actually wrote the Vanity Fair hit piece on Romney. This Shaxson fellow sure is one heck of an objective journalist.

Madverts: We both know full well that, as with Republican hopefuls, their fans at home cannot focus on the subject at hand, only deflect in order to try and make said hopefuls look... well... hopeful.

Apparently Sail, the man that penned the Vanity Fair piece is a full-time writer and researcher for the Tax Justice Network, an expert-led group focused on the harmful impacts of tax avoidance, tax competition and tax havens (remind you of anyone in particular?).....

I'd say in light of his resumé he's pretty well qualified to shed light into the murky waters of Mr Romney's offshore investments that for some reason you're sol willing to defend.

I'd say in light of his resumé he's pretty well qualified to shed light into the murky waters of Mr Romney's offshore investments

His resume includes:

So here’s to the highly talented and influential Occupy movement, and my wishes that the global movement goes from strength to strength. And if you’re interested in futurology, take a look at this article highlighting the scale of the challenges now facing the U.S. movement, and the hopes that it can prosper.

http://treasureislands.org/three-coherent-powerful-blasts-from-occupy/

The Tax Justice Network will be dedicating the next edition of its flagship newsletter Tax Justice Focus to the theme of Occupy. And the Occupied Times – in which I had an article recently – will continue.

http://treasureislands.org/farewell-occupy-lsx-long-live-occupy-lsx/

Think he might be a little biased in his reporting toward the evil 1 percent?

"Think he might be a little biased in his reporting toward the evil 1 percent?"

I doubt he could ever hope to achieve your own level of bias, Sail.

The guy belongs to an international, non-profit association that investigate and call for transparency of the 1% as you call them (more like 0.00001%) that manipulate the system for their own personal greed, Mr Romney being a life-long member of the exclusive club.

I know Romney has the hardcore partisan vote - I guess he'd have to be caught on YouTube having sex with a chicken dressed in a latex Nazi outfit before many would turn away from their myopic partisan support (and even then perhaps not).

You're going to have to accept the attacks on Mitt Romney’s use of offshore tax havens and his constant refusal to release more tax returns in order to explain himself to the American people are not only perfectly justified in an election cycle, but are going to be severely damaging to his campaign.

Attack the article not the writer.

Oh, and your Shaxson fellow has written on global business and politics since 1993 for the Financial Times, Reuters, the Economist and its sister publication the Economist Intelligence Unit, International Affairs, Foreign Affairs, American Interest, the BBC, Africa Confidential, African Energy, and others.....

I think the Occupy movement was hijacked by anarchists and lowlifes which in turn was seized upon by the media, but the basic principle of your Average Joe (like me) being pissed off with the banks, traders and governments for allowing this global meltdown to occur stands true, and is the reason people find offshore-hoarders like Romney in today's economic climate particularly repugnant.

Zurcromium said Its typical of the 1% to avoid paying taxes making working americans pick up the tax burden.

Yep.... Thats why the 1% pay OVER 50% of ALL the taxes. What about the over 50% of the "working" population that pays NO TAX? They sure are scamming; YEA RIGHT!

"What about the over 50% of the "working" population that pays NO TAX?"

Everybody pays tax. Even the lowlifes that sponge off the system that have never done a day's work in their miserable lives. Why do you think European countries have a particularly high sales tax (around 20 percent)?

Wonders what they have for "the October Surprise"? Wish I did not have to hear this stuff since can not vote.

Perhaps he should change his campaign slogan to:

Vote Romney. I have not been proven guilty of violating the letter of arcane financial laws designed specifically to benefit the super-wealthy, as narrowly defined by high-priced lawyers.

Oh, and Sailwind , regarding his $100 million+ stuffed into an IRA: You seem to suggest that his action was driven either by a desire to give more to the IRS than he possibly could or that it was an act of stupidity, while his entire life history would point in the opposite direction (at least, as far as the latter is concerned, regarding holding on to his money). Occam's razor, my friend: he (or, more likely, his legion of financial advisers) have some plan for this, no doubt. But seeing as he can't squeeze out a coherent sentence on such crucial issues as immigration, tax reform or foreign policy, there is no use hoping for him to open a crack of light into his byzantine financial affairs. Don't worry - and he's told us this himself in as many words - he'll clarify all upon his election.

If this does not give you cause for concern, you need to cut back on the Kool-Aid.

Just read today's Krugman, who mentions much of the same: sure, there are potentially legitimate reasons for what at face value seems like unnecessarily complex, if not extremely bizarre, financial transactions, but we will never know them because Romney refuses to divulge them. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/opinion/krugman-mitts-gray-areas.html?_r=1&hp

The article also contains a painful comparison of Romney and his father - all the more painful because, as I've mentioned before, the psychological issues linking the two; they are much as those that linked the two Bushes.

Oh come on - is anyone on the left naive/stupid enough to believe that the wealthy in their own party don't do the same things to protect their assets and wealth?

is anyone on the left naive/stupid enough to believe that the wealthy in their own party don't do the same things to protect their assets and wealth?

The left have a double standard. It has nothing to do with being naive or stupid. The left on other websites and in person are more honest in their opinions then the ones on JT.

Carl Rove was initially invited to speak at a Romney fundraiser but could not because his PAC, American Crossroads, campaigns for Romney and federal law prohibits such coordination. Instead, he appeared at an adjacent hotel at the same time under the sponsorship of Solamere Capital, the private equity firm founded by Tagg Romney, the eldest Romney boy.

Later trying to explain this latest blatant finessing of law, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said that the campaign "is fully aware of what the law requires, and we follow both its letter and its spirit."

I'm tellin' ya, this is rapidly becoming the de facto Romney campaign slogan, intentionally or not.

zurcronium:

Its typical of the 1% to avoid paying taxes making working americans pick up the tax burden.

When you have paid more than a tiny fraction of the taxes that Romney has paid into the US Treasury you might have something to bitch about. The man was successful, he helped rescue many, many businesses that otherwise would have gone out of business and he understands economics. Obama doesn't know anything about what it takes to stimulate growth. At his point during the Reagan recovery, millions of new jobs had been created and the economy began a boom that ascended to upwards of 7% a year at one point. So in other words, Obama has "failed to save or create" millions of jobs and has failed to prevent millions of Americans from remaining in poverty. Obama is a failure.

So what if Romney has invested overseas? Don't you think all rich people invest overseas in some way or another? With Obama's attacks on successful Americas and his un-American re-distributionist mentality, anyone of means would be stupid not seek to protect themselves. If America wasn't out to get people for being successful no one would have any reason to seek tax havens. You don't get rich in the first place by being stupid.

Reminds me of how that billionaire and zillionaire (and hypocrite Democrat) John Kerry moved his yacht out of state to save on taxes. Liberals are okay with folks on their own side being so "selfish".

Everybody pays tax. Even the lowlifes that sponge off the system that have never done a day's work in their miserable lives. Why do you think European countries have a particularly high sales tax (around 20 percent)?

I think we all know that what okimike67 was saying is that thanks to Obama (and W) over 50% of Americans do not pay any Federal income taxes. None! The US has the most progressive income tax in it's history when you look at the percentages of taxes paid by income groups. Such high levels of progressivity are what generates such severe fiscal problems during recessions (see California as the worst US State example). Liberals love progressive taxation but it is another dumb idea when it comes to sound economics and fiscal management.

If Romney has committed a crime, don't you think Obama would have had the IRS put him in prison by now? Folks can complain all they want but sometimes the problem isn't what is illegal, it is what is legal. Obama could have changed the laws when he had complete control over the Federal government for the first two years of his presidency. He didn't so stop your whining and move on to what's important - like the 40% of the governments budget that is controlled by the Chinese.

Laguna,

You claimed regarding Romney's IRA that he would get a lower tax rate:

He'll pay the taxes on that income eventually, as required by law - though at a lower rate, as he'll be retired and earning nothing else.

You were wrong, he'll pay the maximum federal rate of 35% on it when he has to start withdrawing the funds at age 70 and 1/2 in his case.

Now in response to being wrong on your assertion you've stated:

Oh, and Sailwind , regarding his $100 million+ stuffed into an IRA: You seem to suggest that his action was driven either by a desire to give more to the IRS than he possibly could or that it was an act of stupidity, while his entire life history would point in the opposite direction (at least, as far as the latter is concerned, regarding holding on to his money).

Just for clarity I suggest nothing of the sort for his actions in investing so much of his earned capital into an IRA account. I merely pointed out that you where wrong and posting information that wasn't actually factual.

Madverts,

Attack the article not the writer.

Happy to. The Vanity Fair article is nothing but rehashed tripe full of innuendo and murky dealings better suited as gossip. It is more in line with an Obama press release and its talking points that was written for a lap dog media then any sort of an actual objective article.

"Obama press release and its talking points that was written for a lap dog media then any sort of an actual objective article"

Sorry to break this to ya Saillwind, but Mr Romney is doing all the damage on his own and fanning the flames of gossip by refusing to reveal the truth about his investments time and time again.

It's only fair to speculate such refusal to disclose records of his offshore dealings that he’s hiding something he doesn't want the American people to know.

The longer he withholds the uglier this is going to get.

Hate to break this to you Madverts,

but Mr Romney is doing all the damage on his own and fanning the flames of gossip by refusing to reveal the truth about his investments time and time again.

His personal finance profiles goes all the way back to 2006 as required by law, enjoy the link there are thousands of pages of his personal finance records

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/candlook.php?CID=n00000286

It's only fair to speculate such refusal to disclose records of his offshore dealings that he’s hiding something he doesn't want the American people to know.

So Mr. Romney even though you've released all of you personal finance records to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics since 2006 and we find that you are fully compliant........When did you stop being a crook?

Sailwind,

The uproar is that there isn't full disclosure from the Cayman's, not that he has failed to disclose anything. You're not breaking anything to anyone, not even boredom.

The President filed his 2011 return in April. Romney has requested a six-month extension to file his 2011 federal income taxes, which goes beyond the November 6 general election. No surprise there eh?

Why does he need an extension of six months?

Is he grasping for time for his army of chartered accountants to fiddle the figures?

Or is what those of us that are not wearing partisan blinkers expect - that the offshore dealings he's unwilling to disclose are far from transparent and will be heavy ammunition for the opposition?

Adverts,

You were saying something in your last post?

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has filed for a six-month extension to file his 2011 taxes.

The deadline to file this year is on April 17th, but the IRS grants six-month extensions for those who request it. According to the IRS, 10.5 million people filed for an extension last year.

Romney spokesperson Andrea Saul said Romney will file and publicly release his 2011 return "when there is sufficient information to provide an accurate return." She said it would be before the November election.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57413969-503544/romney-files-tax-extension/

laguna

Oh, and Sailwind , regarding his $100 million+ stuffed into an IRA: You seem to suggest that his action was driven e either by a desire to give more to the IRS than he possibly could or that it was an act of stupidity, while his entire life history would point in the opposite direction (at least, as far as the latter is concerned, regarding holding on to his money).

I did a little research on his act of stupidity regarding his IRA.

For estates subject to the estate tax, inheritors of an IRA will get an income tax deduction for the estate taxes paid on the account. The taxable income earned (but not received by the deceased) is called "income in respect of a decedent."

"When you take a distribution from an IRA, it's taxable income. But because that person's estate had to pay a federal estate tax, you get an income tax deduction for the estate taxes that were paid on the IRA. You might have $1 million of income with a $350,000 deduction to offset against that," says Choate.

"It's not necessary that you were the person who paid the taxes. Just that someone did," she says.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/04/03/eight-pitfalls-to-avoid-with-inherited-ira/

He's taking care of his wife...........Nuff said.

Sailwind,

"the IRS grants six-month extensions for those who request it. "

You're just further proving the case that Romney and those like him are playing the system to the limit to bend the rules and pay less tax, and kidding yourself that the timing's a coincidence. Do you honestly expect me to believe people who have the kind of money Romney has need time (let alone 182 days) to sort their finances out? 2011 is seven months and eleven days ago.

I don't understand this strange point of view that you have that persists in arguing .001% of the population that are uber-stinking-rich have some divine right that only Republicans understand to pay less tax. These people use an array of intricate systems in which the US tax code confers advantages to this tiny elite in order for them to hoard their wealth under different rules to everyone else. It's pretty obscene to those that don't have a quarter of a billion. They should be paying at least as much tax as everyone else since they're earning more than everyone else, the change in tax cuts for the rich Democrats are demanding are hardly some screaming marxist commie-tax for pete's sake.

Whether you want to hear it or not, a lot of Americans struggling to feed their kids are going to be taken in by the Democrats angle of economic fairness and the fact that a few fat-cats like Romney are not paying their fair share. Leadership skills I'd say are pretty important for anyone running for office. I'd say the Swiss accounts, and the reluctance to give full disclosure from the Bahamas is setting a bad example and losing him votes. If I was an American with a family in the $80K tax bracket and paying the same tax rate as Romney on 27 MILLION through exclusive privileges, then I don't think I'd be voting for a party defending these elitists.

There is nothing wrong with using the law to pay your "fair" amount of taxes. Everyone tries their best to pay the least amount of taxes that they legally owe. Not even big government Liberals like John Kerry willingly pay higher taxes than they can get away with (like avoiding taxes on his yacht). The problem is that the law is so complex and unclear that even if you try your best to comply with the tax laws you can still be found guilty and subject to harassment because there is no one in American that understands the tax code. It's impossibly!

If Romney has broken the law you can be sure that the IRS would be on him to get "their money" out of him. The tax laws allows GE (chaired by Obama's political supporter and "jobs czar") to pay virtually nothing in taxes! This is crony capitalism as it's worst. Tax reform is needed in the worst way to make it both fairer and more efficient. That would create private sector jobs and stop Obama and all other politicians from rewarding their supporters in return for campaign money.

If I was an American with a family in the $80K tax bracket and paying the same tax rate as Romney on 27 MILLION through exclusive privileges, then I don't think I'd be voting for a party defending these elitists.

The Democrat party did not change the laws when they had full control of Congress. You want to know why? Because they use the tax laws to extract campaign contributions from large corporations. Any tax system that isn't simple to understand and treats all citizens and industries the same as any other is corrupt.

" Any tax system that isn't simple to understand and treats all citizens and industries the same as any other is corrupt."

This is the excuse for Romney and his ilk not paying their fair share on their multi-million earnings?

Heh, I told you it was a divine right only understood by radical republicans that don't have a pot to piss in.

The democrats are going to pimp the economic fairness angle, as Romney continues to fumble around failing to give full disclosure. Good luck pushing that to all the Americans that are struggling right now.