comment: >
  
  What about Jarred? Do you suppose he paid taxes on the two billion he “borrowed” from Qatar?
context: He wrote off the Stormy payment. Trump really does not care >
  
  He doesn't care because he knows there are no consequences.  He knows he is above the law and that is why he acts the way he does. >
  
  He’s been doing this shit on his taxes for probably a long time. The tax code is like 75,000 pages long, that’s a lotta hoops you can jump through. I’m not a trump fan, but if they want people like him to pay taxes there is definitely a way, but they won’t do it because they’re all benefiting from the same shit he is. >
  
  Yeah, fucking restart the tax code.  Progressive tax bracket, no exemptions, tax summary comes from the government annually and citizens can challenge if they do decide. >
  
  Can I vote for you? >
  
  No, because I have biPolar and we all have seen what can happen when someone with power goes manic. >
  
  What's the worst you're capable of? You clearly have some brains and empathy. Unless you think you're likely to nuke New Zealand because of those damned hobbits, could it be worse than the scraps we currently have on the table? 
  President fardough 2024 >
  
  I did become a cult leader during a manic episode before I was diagnosed, just saying.
  I would be more worried about trying to imprison all billionaires until they relinquish 90% of their net worth to balance income inequality.  Manic me would be a tyrant if it ever happened while I had power. >
  
  
  
  Last president has a creepy cult, maybe you can make cults cool again
  
  
  Imprisoning billionaires seems like a net positive. The only people complaining are the ones who actively put us in these situations. 
  
  
  I mean, you clearly feel like you aren't right for the job, which probably means you're way more qualified than a majority of the dipshits that run trying to empower themselves. >
  
  Lol, I do agree we should be putting those in power who do not want power, but draw the line at someone who literally can become a maniac.
  In mania, you feel like a god, you feel you have been granted some supreme wisdom and power, you think at crazy speed, don’t need sleep, things seems so clear and profoundly simple.  Anything seems possible.  Again, anything seems possible.
  May decide to try to cure cancer, or maybe see a way to decrease the global population, or maybe decide to try to eliminate a people.
  I don’t feel we are monsters but we have them inside of us, and unmedicated & untreated it is a roll of the dice what the next manic episode will be focused on.  Scary part is we can be lost for months, focused on something our minds get fixated on and just pursue it till we hit a wall. Come out of it thousands in debt, started a successful company, or a cult.
  The real f’d part my friend is you remember it all, the feeling, the shame, the guilt, and you were truly only along for the ride.
  I pity people like Elon/Kanye even though it is their fault for not seeking treatment when they bounce out. >
  
  I'm so glad I paid over 36k worth in taxes while billionaires get refunds and minuscule payments.
  I don't mind paying even more if I could be guaranteed that it's going to help out anyone who's genuinely struggling.  But it's probably going to go to some corporate welfare. >
  
  Right?
  It's kind of like how we have a "healthcare market", but we're just subsidizing people to rip us off. 
  Hell, it's also like how the USDA buys produce and destroys it to keep prices high "for farmers".  We literally subsidize waste, greed and nothing else in this shithole country. >
  
  Privatized profits, socialized losses. Any company that has full time workers on food stamps is a welfare queen. >
  
  About 7-8 years ago, my niece got a job at wal mart. Part of her initial training included how to apply for Medicaid and food stamps. >
  
  Did she also have to watch the anti-union propaganda video as part of her training? I had to watch that one \~20 years ago. >
  
  all that and more nowadays, walmart employment even comes with an additional chance of being involved in a shooting or hostage situation as we saw last week 🤮 >
  
  My ex-husband hasn’t paid income tax in over 30 years, makes $60-80,000 a month for 5-6 months a year and has since at least 2000. At that time, he owed $150,000 in taxes and has evaded them every year since. The IRS took $5,000. from me when I went back to work and was separated from him because I filed. He owes state taxes, too, to at least 4 states. NOTHING ever happens to him. He puts everything he owns in his girlfriend’s name so they can’t take it. 
  If someone like him can get away with it, certainly Trump will. As do every other megarich  SOB. >
  
  It'd be really funny when his GF realizes that since everything is her name, he doesn't really have shit and she can keep it all if they break up. >
  
  You would think, right! But she’s been with him for almost 15 years now and she is none the wiser. And he treats her like dirt. I used to feel sorry for her because she is from a really small town in AL, and she was so naive. But, 15 years? Yeah, good luck with that. >
  
  I mean if she were to find things were in her name, money has a way of making people figure things out... >
  
  If billionaires can walk away without paying taxes due to stock or profit losses, I should be able to deduct any money I lose gambling. That’s not a joke; it’s the same shit. >
  
  Can I?
  “The amount of losses you deduct can't be more than the amount of gambling income you reported on your return. Claim your gambling losses up to the amount of winnings, as ‘Other Itemized Deductions.’” >
  
  I mean you wanted it to work exactly how it works for investments and you can’t use losses to offset more than your gains there, either >
  
  You can absolutely offset more than your gains, up to $3k a year, and if a given year is more than that, you can claim it on future taxes. >
  
  This article is a little odd. He keeps making statements like:
  
  But what Trump did again and again and again—taking expenses for businesses with no revenue—is so simple that jurors should have no trouble understanding the issues were Trump to be indicted by a federal or New York state grand jury.
  
  As if simply filing a Sch C (or similar state form) only claiming losses without revenue is itself illegal. It isn't. It is a red flag that the business doesn't exist though.  
  That is what happened in the New York case, as the article itself explains:
  
  Trump produced no receipts, no invoices, no work papers — nothing indicating the 1984 consulting business was more than a figment of his imagination.
  
  That was the actual problem. When they called Trump on his bluff, he had no cards. He appeared to be literally making the businesses up. That is what is illegal. 
  Especially since the losses don't exist at all in that situation. You can't get ahead through tax avoidance by purposely creating businesses to lose money. Because you'd actually be losing the money then, which would be greater than the amount you are "saving" on taxes. 
  So, for what has been released so far, the Sch Cs aren't some kind of proof that Trump made fraudulent claims. It is highly likely though. If he was actually audited or investigated and forced to provide proof of theses losses, it wouldn't be shocking if he had none because they're made up. Or that some were connected some other scheme. Same thing with the other issues addressed. 
  I just don't get why articles can't be clear about this. The title and many of his statements are misleading for no good reason. >
  
  2015: net operating losses of over hundred million -> donates 20 million to charity >
  
  I'm not sure why losses from his businesses would make it impossible for him to give money to charity. The tax returns don't really document how much money he has in the bank at any time. 
  Do I think he really gave $20 million to charity, or that he did with no self-dealing involved? No, but what we have now doesn't show that yet. >
  
  There's very little things that you can find on tax returns that would 100% conclude impossible. If the returns are accepted its already passed the hard stops. It sounds unlike anyone, especially Trump, would donate that amount on a bad year. 
  It more sounds like what someone else has suggested and massively overvalued or cycled money through donations >
  
  Trump committing crimes isn't news, although I still appreciate the author's work and OP for posting. My only point is that Trump is the most obvious white collar crook of all time, but he's allowed to get away with it.