Posted on 08/22/2004 4:41:19 AM PDT by visagoth
Gerard Jackson
BrookesNews.Com
Theresa Heinz Kerry likes taxes so much she thinks the little people should pay even more. She doesn't put it like that, of course. But what is one to think when the "sexy" Theresa Heinz Kerry supports increased taxes for others while drastically slashing her own taxes.
Several months ago I was discussing Theresa Heinz Kerry and her fortune with a friend who had personal experience in that particular field. He reckoned that her assets were yielding an annual average return of at least 8 per cent. Well bless my soul, her latest financial reports reveal she is now worth from $1 billion to $3.2 billion.
This means that Mrs Theresa Heinz Kerry has, at the very least, doubled her wealth since 1994, amply confirming my friend's assessment of the return on her capital. Assuming assets of $1 billion, the lowest estimate of her fortune, then an 8 per cent return would yield a cool $80 million for the year.
Yet Theresa Heinz Kerry put her hand on her heart and declared with the kind of sincerity that only a bleeding heart Democrat has the nerve to muster that she only earned $5.1 million for 2003. Of this $5.1 million she paid $750,000 in taxes. This is an effective income tax rate of 14.76 per cent — or is it?
If her actual income for that year was $80 million then her effective tax rate plummets to a ludicrous 0.938 per cent! But is this really possible? It sure as hell is.
The vast majority of Americans are unaware that the Byzantine tax code with its labyrinth of loopholes has made income taxes for the super rich like Theresa Heinz Kerry largely optional.
The two major tax loopholes that Theresa Heinz Kerry could exploit to drastically reduce her taxable income are trusts and 'charities'.
Income can be sheltered in trusts where it remains untouched by taxation until it is spent. In the meantime the value of the trusts continues to rise. 'Charities' are also a favourite dodge of the leftist elite.
When most people think of charities they imagine orphanages, school grants, medical foundations, etc. However, in the leftist world of the likes of Theresa Heinz Kerry leftwing political organisations also count as charities. For example, using the Heinz Family Philanthropies and the infamous Tides Foundation, she has been able to channel tax-free funds into anti-American, anti-Israel and even pro-terrorist groups. (One of the beneficiaries of her largess, the Ruckus Society, is planning to disrupt the GOP's New York convention).
That Theresa Heinz Kerry has deliberately circumvented the law in the name of charity in order to finance these vicious groups is in itself an immoral act, and one that bears investigating by the IRS.
However, what we are dealing with here is her attitude toward paying taxes. I am not going to argue that by minimising her taxes she behaved immorally. What is immoral about her actions is her support for higher taxes for the little people while she drastically reduces her own tax liabilities.
Critics will claim that her tax shenanigans have nothing to do with her husband. Balderdash. She is not only helping to fund his campaign she also shares his views on taxes, especially when it comes to not paying them.
Massachusetts residents are given a limited choice every year on how much to pay in income taxes. The state's top rate was 5.8 per cent before being lowered to 5.3 per cent. Since 2001 residents have been able to choose between the old rate and the lower one. John Kerry chose the low rate.
Additionally, it has been reported that last year John Kerry proposed tax legislation that created a loophole specifically designed to benefit Heinz Foods Co. and therefore his wife.
Yet Theresa Heinz Kerry and her hubby have got the nerve to categorise those who reach the $200,000 earnings bracket as rich. So rich, in fact, that Kerry would raise their taxes. Now consider the morality of a woman who has used loopholes to enjoy an effective tax rate of 14.76 per cent, or maybe even 0.938 per cent, rooting for a 30 per or more effective tax rate for people whose net worth is a tiny fraction of one per cent of her own fortune.
Bear in mind that these potential victims of political spite are also denied the tax loopholes that this woman has shrewdly exploited, despite the fact that it takes them a year to earn what her investments probably yield in a day.
The taxes that Theresa Heinz Kerry supports are taxes on capital, which amounts to taxes on economic growth. Without growth high-paying jobs will gradually disappear, social mobility will shrink and poverty will spread. What Theresa Heinz Kerry is attempting to do is strike at Americans' aspirations and future prosperity.
Any wonder I now believe that wealthy persons should not be allowed any say in raising taxes unless they themselves are prepared to reduce their own standard of living to the same level as those upon whom they propose to increase the tax burden.
Theresa Heinz Kerry is not alone in her hypocrisy: Teddy Kennedy, Corzine, Frank Lautenberg, etc., are right up there with her. Theresa reminds me of the moronic and filthy rich Edwin Janss, founder of the leftwing Janss Foundation, who said that "when the revolution came, the houses of his neighbours would be people's palaces". Naturally, his house would be the exception.
Gerard Jackson is Brookes' economics editor
(One of the beneficiaries of her largess, the Ruckus Society, is planning to disrupt the GOP's New York convention).
And sometimes I just wonder if part of it isn't just a little bit of jealously, where they feel that they're where they want to be, and don't want anyone else, like the "working class" to make it to their level.
Mark
If there is anything that pizzzzes me off more than anything in this world about liberals, it`s this opposition rich liberals have to tax cuts! "Tax cuts only help the rich"...Well excuse me you freggin` azzwipe, but someone who is worth billions feels taxes like they feel a mosquito bite while wearing a suit of armor.
Try paying off a 10 grand tax bill while interest builds up month after month while trying to make ends meet on a 30 to 40 grand yearly salary all because you screwed up saving money while trying to get a buisness off the ground. The IRS don`t give a damn if your making zero bucks in 2004. If you made money in 2003 they want that tax money no matter what. For every rich liberal who is against tax breaks, I`ll show you 20 middle class people who are totally screwed because of taxes. Taxes are absolutely meaningless to the rich. They don`t exist. It doesn`t affect them one way or the other if they go up or down. A billionaire paying a million dollar tax bill is peanuts to them, like paying 2 bucks, a tip to a bartender.
So when I see someone who is worth billions saying they are against giving the "little people" a tax break, all I can say is $%#$ YOU! Right here pal!! You don`t know squat and you have one hell of a nerve telling the government to take my money when you got enough money horded away to support 20,000 families!
>>Assuming assets of $1 billion, the lowest estimate of her fortune, then an 8 per cent return would yield a cool $80 million for the year.
We don't require people to estimate their net worths each
year and pay taxes on the increase.
How much of the $1 Billion was likely sold or transferred
during the year, resulting in a tax liability? I might guess less than 10 percent... so her $5 Million taxable income might be about right...
The bigger issue is what percentage of that $5 MILLION INCOME
does John Kerry SAY that a 'rich person' should pay? After all, isn't that the PRIMARY WAY he intends to fund his 'new society'?
This article is a PERFECT example of why the rich will
never pay significantly more, even if Kerry is elected.
>>Since 2001 residents have been able to choose between the old rate and the lower one. John Kerry chose the low rate.
THAT PART is very funny! Kerry SAYS the rich should pay more,
but he CHOOSES to pay less.
These SOB's make more in one year than most of us make in an entire lifetime. THAT is obscene.
We call on Mrs Kerry to use her status with the Tides Foundation as a supporter of the Ruckus Society to use her financial influence to stop them from disrupting the Republican National Convention.
As you know, the media will savage a conservative who is caught commiting what would traditionaly be considered an immoral act. The latest case is the press assault on Ryan in Illinois based on his divorce records. And yet the media allows liberals (e.g. Clinton) to skate on these same moral issues. This apparent hypocracy drives people on the right crazy.
But the people in the media argue that the double standard with regard to moral issues is in fact fair. The argument is that since conservatives make an issue of morality and liberals do not it is fair for the press to hold conservatives to a higher moral standard. And therefore savaging conservatives for moral failings and giving the libs a pass is not hypocritical of them.
But the real hypocrites are the self important worthies in the press for the following reason. The people in the media know full well that the Dems are demagoging when they chant the mantra "the rich don't pay their fair share of taxes". They know what your article so clearly points out. They know that the taxes paid by the rich having nothing to do with their incomes. Income taxes are only paid by the middle class. The income tax is irrelevant to the Heinz-Kerry class.
If the press really held their claimed objectivity they would be savaging Kerry and Theresa on their unwillingness to release their tax returns. The press would be savaging them with the same ferocity they would use on a Republican caught screwing a dog in a public restroom because they know that Heinz-Kerry are not paying taxes commensurate with their true income. Raising taxes on the rich is a key element of the Kerry campaign. All the Dems run on this. And yet the Dems get to demagogue the issue without a peep from the press about their glaring hypocracy on the issue.
Don't look for it, however. It ain't gonna happen. It won't happen because the major media have reduced themselves to be nothing more than whores of the DNC.
Want to join in the fun? Click the logo to donate to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth!
If 14% tax rate is good enough for Mama T, then it's good enough for me!!!! Bumper Sticker maybe???
ping
The story of Mama T's tax shenanigans should hit home with those voters who excuse Kerry and the RATs of just about everything else. Come April 15, they can think about the Heinz/Kerry's who doubtless will be cavorting about in one of their many mansions, on perpetual vacation. They sure won't be residing in the WH.
Good idea, and we can send some along to all members of Congress.
It's high time we replaced apathy with pro-activeness over this issue of taxation.
Mama T's on the board of all sorts of interesting charities and foundations. I bet her day to day expenses are all written off as charity related, therefore deductible.
The only fair thing to do is to wipe out the tax system as we know it. Fair tax! Fair tax! You can't possibly get out of paying sales tax (oops - non-profits can...hello, again, Tides Foundation!)
bmp
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
