Do you think there is a conspiracy at the IRS to undertax her?
The potential for Theresa's fortune influencing public policy is very real and we have a right to ask for full disclosure so that we know if John Kerry is being influenced by her holdings.
Really? Where is that written in the law? Where are we awarded that right?
"To get rich" is shorthand, by the way.
We are left to guess, aren't we?
The IRS only enforces the laws. I'd assume that her tax strategy is a legal one but what I'd like to know is how can Kerry advise us to sock it to the top 2% when they are guilty of evading the intent of their own policy?
Kerry talks of the top income earners doing more for America, doing their fair share, but then he evades his own opportunity to pay more?
Typical liberal jive.
It's called it divestiture. It's also being ethical. In this case it is his spouse's wealth, not his. This case is a probably first, where the spouse brings obscene amounts of money into the marriage.
So, is this pile of money, which admittedly belongs to the spouse, a valid reason for Kerry to skirt the requirement of divestiture?
Legally? yes it is, but ethically? no. It's going to leave a cloud over his head if he gets elected.
It's just the same with the form 180 that he refuses to sign. The issue is "trust me" when we all know that this is not a sound basis for a politician's relationship wehn it comes to money.
"Trust but Verify" seems more appropriate here.
Maybe you can understand this. When this butthead stands before me and says we are going to tax the richest 1% and that man and his wife are in the richest 1% and using every tax dodge money can buy and paying less of a percentage than I do in taxes: That man is a lying sack of Doo doo.
I suggest you go to ActivistCash.com and look up Tides Foundation, Ruckus Society and others to get the answer as to why we need to be worried about how much $$ Tah-ray-zah has.