Billionaires Buy Governments to Avoid Paying Their Fair Share in Taxes

Spread the love

Original article by BOB LORD of Inequality.Org republished from Common Dreams under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

U.S. President Donald Trump smiles at House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) after speaking about the passage of tax cut legislation at the White House in Washington, D.C. on December 20, 2017. (Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

In legislatures, the courts, and our executive offices, we have a system rigged in favor of the ultra-rich, rigged by everything from acts of Congress and judicial rulings to IRS budgets and audit policies.

By all appearances, former U.S. President Donald Trump has cut a sweet deal with a dozen or two of America’s richest billionaires: Finance his campaign and he’ll keep their federal taxes super low—or even lower them—once he’s sitting back in the White House.

How much do billionaires like this deal? This much: In April, hedge fund billionaire John Paulsen held a Palm Beach fundraiser for Trump that brought in $50.5 million. Immediately after Trump’s late May conviction on 34 felony counts in Manhattan, Timothy Mellon, the grandson of the classic plutocrat Andrew Mellon, ponied up $50 million. Miriam Adelson, the billionaire widow of Las Vegas kingpin Sheldon Adelson, appears eager to kick in as much as $100 million.

This past spring, meanwhile, billionaires Elon Musk and David Sacks reportedly held a secret dinner party for Trump, with attendees including the illustrious deep pockets Peter Thiel, Rupert Murdoch, and Michael Milken.

The rich themselves have actually become more brazen about avoiding taxes. Just try to stop us, they seem to be saying.

America’s billionaires clearly see politics as one route to ensuring they pay as little as possible at tax time. But they don’t just make their presence felt at election time. America’s rich have their thumbs firmly on the scale of all three branches of government. In legislatures, the courts, and our executive offices, we have a system rigged in favor of the ultra-rich, rigged by everything from acts of Congress and judicial rulings to IRS budgets and audit policies.

Some of this rigging we can all easily see. The dividends and long-term capital gains of the ultra-rich have for decades faced a maximum tax rate barely half the maximum rate applicable to other forms of income. And the investment income of the rich, unlike the paychecks of working people, faces no Social Security tax.

In 2017, the first year of the Trump presidency, intense lobbying efforts helped rich business owners to a special tax rate for their business income. In 2018 alone, according to ProPublica, that special rate translated into a $67 million gift to Mike Bloomberg, whose personal wealth now reportedly exceeds $100 billion.

But these glaring privileges the rich enjoy at tax time only tell part of the billionaire tax story. Other parts get precious little attention. In 2004, for instance, lawmakers in Congress enacted a penalty for the failure to disclose potentially abusive tax avoidance transactions on tax returns. The penalty on the surface looked substantial: 75% of the tax sought to be avoided. But Congress capped the penalty at $100,000, a move that turned the penalty into a minor nuisance for billionaires seeking to avoid millions of dollars in taxes.

In our current rich people-friendly tax climate, IRS staff who want to do the right thing face tough going. Recently, for example, one former IRS staffer, Michael Welu, went public with his concerns that the IRS itself has both official and unofficial policies that end up treating audited rich taxpayers much more gently than small business owners.

“I was putting butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers in jail,” Welu told the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, “but the big stuff we really wanted to go after was being ignored.”

Welu found the upper management of the IRS division tasked with auditing the super rich—and the corporations they run—distinctly uninterested in investigating America’s richest and their “most egregious, ridiculous schemes” for avoiding taxes.

IRS officials like Michael Welu do occasionally speak out. But only tax wonks truly have any real sense of how much obscure tax code penalties and IRS audit policies favor the rich. And most of those tax wonks work for the rich.

The rich themselves have actually become more brazen about avoiding taxes. Just try to stop us, they seem to be saying.

Take the recently decided Supreme Court case, Moore v. United States. Working through an array of right-wing organizations, the conservative mover-and-shaker Leonard Leo attempted to use a challenge to an obscure one-time tax as a vehicle to preempt Congress from ever taxing the wealth or unrealized gains of the ultra-rich. Ultimately, the court decided the case without ruling on whether the rich can be taxed on their wealth or unrealized gains. But the opinions that four of the nine justices handed down made it clear that they stand prepared to do the billionaire bidding should a direct challenge to a tax on the wealth or unrealized gains of billionaires come before them.

Billionaires now have at least three Supreme Court justices firmly in their pockets. Reporting by ProPublica has revealed the massive gifts that have been flowing from Harlan Crow and other billionaires to Justice Clarence Thomas as well as the generous gifts that billionaire Paul Singer has been sending Justice Samuel Alito’s way. Justice Neil Gorsuch has had his entire career, including his appointment to the court, funded by the billionaire Philip Anschutz.

Those three justices, along with Justice Amy Coney-Barret, have now made it patently obvious they will not allow billionaires to be taxed on their unrealized gains or their wealth. Does anyone really think the billionaires won’t have the crucial, majority-making fifth vote from Justice Brett Kavanaugh when they need it?

Republican members of Congress are showing even less shame than our Supreme Court justices. Last year, these GOP lawmakers held the country hostage in negotiations to increase the country’s debt limit. Their price for agreeing to raise the debt limit, thereby avoiding a default on the country’s debt? They demanded—and won—a reduction in a scheduled IRS budget increase that would been used to increase enforcement moves against rich taxpayers.

The purported motive for this legislative hostage taking—“concern” over the federal deficit—made for an absurd justification. The proposed increase in the IRS budget would have been recovered, several times over, through increased tax collections. The IRS budget reductions the Republican lawmakers extracted will, in fact, only increase the federal deficit. But those reductions will serve a political purpose. They’ll protect the GOP’s richest patrons from tax enforcement.

The mainstream media, to no one’s surprise, did a miserable job of exposing this Republican dishonesty in the debt limit negotiations. But at one point in our recent past a courageous soul did emerge to expose the rot in our tax system. What happened? The ultra-rich and their henchmen in Congress make sure that this soul faced a punishment far more severe than any punishment ever meted out to those few rich Americans who actually get caught evading their taxes due.

That courageous soul, Charles Littlejohn, worked as an IRS contractor. He leaked tax return information related to Trump and America’s billionaires to TheNew York Times and ProPublicaProPublica used that leaked information to write over 50 stories about billionaire tax avoidance, embarrassing and angering many of our richest in the process. Two of them even brought lawsuits, one against the IRS and the other against Littlejohn’s employer.

Ultimately, Littlejohn pled guilty to one count of unauthorized tax return information disclosure, a crime that carries a recommended sentence of four to 10 months. But 25 Republican members of Congress, undoubtedly at the behest of their billionaire patrons, wrote the judge in the case and urged the harshest possible sentence of five years. The judge obliged, stating in her sentencing remarks that Littlejohn posed a graver threat to democracy than the January 6 rioters. As tax law professor Reuven Avi-Yonah has noted, Littlejohn is now serving a sentence far harsher than any imposed on rich Americans convicted of tax evasion.

Littlejohn’s extreme sentence did not reflect the one single count of unauthorized tax return information disclosure he pled guilty to. That sentence reflects his “crime” of exposing the tax avoidance of the billionaire class.

Try this thought experiment: Imagine if Littlejohn had released the return information of 1,000 or so taxpayers with modest incomes to ProPublica. Imagine that ProPublica had then publicly detailed all the tip income that servers and bartenders among these taxpayers had failed to report and all the social meals that small business owners in the sample had claimed as business expenses. If Littlejohn had then pled to one count of unauthorized disclosure, would 25 members of Congress have intervened? Would the judge have imposed a sentence over six times the maximum recommended in federal sentencing guidelines?

Doesn’t it become dangerous to society when the punishment for a crime depends on who the victim happens to be?

We are now living that danger. Our billionaires sit firmly in control. And they will do whatever it takes to make sure they never pay tax at an appropriate level—even if that means locking a human being up for a preposterously long time just to send a message.

Original article by BOB LORD of Inequality.Org republished from Common Dreams under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.

Continue ReadingBillionaires Buy Governments to Avoid Paying Their Fair Share in Taxes

Clarence Thomas Finally Reports Gifts He Says Were ‘Inadvertently Omitted’ From Disclosures

Spread the love

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

“The fact that he omitted the plane to Indonesia and the yacht… leads me to believe he and I have very different interpretations of his disclosure responsibilities, and that’s a problem,” said one campaigner.

Far-right U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has officially—and belatedly—disclosed two luxury vacations gifted him by a billionaire Republican megadonor as eight of the nine high court judges released their financial disclosure statements on Friday.

Thomas’ 2023 disclosure includes food and lodging during 2019 trips to Bali, Indonesia and Bohemian Grove—a secretive, men-only retreat in Mendocino County, California—paid for by billionaire real estate developer Harlan Crow. The trips and other gifts for Thomas—including yacht excursions, flights on private jets, and private school tuition for the justice’s grandnephew—were first revealed by ProPublica last year.

In his 2023 disclosure, Thomas claims information about the 2019 trips was “inadvertently omitted at the time of filing,” and that the justice “sought and received guidance from his accountant and ethics counsel” as he prepared this year’s report.

This fits a pattern: In 2011, Thomas attributed his failure to disclose his wife’s income to a “misunderstanding of the filing instructions.” In 2023, he said he “inadvertently failed to realize” that he needed to publicly disclose a real estate deal with Crow.

“The fact that he omitted the plane to Indonesia and the yacht around Indonesia leads me to believe he and I have very different interpretations of his disclosure responsibilities, and that’s a problem,” Gabe Roth, executive director of the watchdog Fix the Court, toldThe Washington Post.

The justices’ disclosures also show that three members of the court—Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Neil Gorsuch, and Ketanji Brown Jackson—received six-figure payments for book deals.

“Each justice would be capable of earning 10 times their current salary in the private sector, so it’s reasonable for them to want to boost their income as authors, especially those with inspiring life stories,” said Roth. “This may be an unpopular opinion, but I don’t see anything ethically compromising about it so long as the justices don’t use their offices to hawk books, they speak to ideologically diverse audiences on their book tours, and they recuse from petitions involving their publishers.”

Jackson also took four tickets to a Beyoncé concert worth over $3,700.

“Justice Jackson is ‘Crazy in Love‘ with Beyoncé’s music. Who isn’t?” Supreme Court spokesperson Patricia McCabe told The Washington Post.

But Roth said that “next time… Justice Jackson should pay for her own Beyoncé tickets.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor was paid $1,900 to voice an animated version of herself on the PBS children’s show “Alma’s Way.” Justice Elena Kagan was reimbursed for travel, lodging, and food by Notre Dame Law School following a speech she delivered there last September. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh did not receive any gifts last year, according to their disclosure forms. Justice Samuel Alito was again granted an extension to file.

The justices’ disclosures came a day after Fix the Court published a database listing 672 gifts worth nearly $6.6 million that current and former Supreme Court judges received, mostly since 2004. Thomas accounted for 193 gifts with an estimated value of more than $4 million that were identified by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.

The disclosures also came in the same week that Congressman Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) introduced the Supreme Court Ethics and Investigations Act, which would create a Supreme Court Office of Investigative Counsel tasked with investigating ethical improprieties and reporting them to Congress.

A code of conduct officially endorsed by the Supreme Court last November was widely panned as a toothless public relations stunt.

Thomas’ gifts from wealthy donors—and his failure to report them—have driven calls for his recusal from some cases and even his resignation or impeachment.

Responding to Fix the Court’s database, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) noted Friday that former Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas “resigned in shame” in 1969 “over a payment that was less than a tiny fraction of what Clarence Thomas has taken from his billionaire pals.”

“Republicans are protecting this obvious corruption by blocking any attempt to hold Thomas accountable,” Wyden added.

Citing a “moral failure,” the nonpartisan group Veterans for Responsible Leadership asserted Friday that “Clarence Thomas needs to face impeachment.”

“Failing to disclose those gifts is an acknowledgment he knew it was wrong,” the group added. “The character of the court needs to be above reproach, so he must be shown the door.”

Original article by BRETT WILKINS republished from Common Dreams under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0).

Continue ReadingClarence Thomas Finally Reports Gifts He Says Were ‘Inadvertently Omitted’ From Disclosures