Tax

Orange man not paying his greens?

The New York Times has run a hit piece on Trump’s tax records. The paper noted,

The New York Times has obtained tax-return data extending over more than two decades for Mr. Trump and the hundreds of companies that make up his business organization, including detailed information from his first two years in office. It does not include his personal returns for 2018 or 2019. This article offers an overview of The Times’s findings; additional articles will be published in the coming weeks.

Drip feeding news is a good strategy as it takes heat off Biden’s basement dwelling and the civil unrest which has been literally been burning the Democrats due to their lack of condemnation. The media circus will run with it non stop.

Although the Amy Coney Barrett Senate SCOTUS confirmation hearings will no doubt be another farcical character assassination which will blow up in the Democrats’ faces.

For the record, if Trump ‘evaded‘ taxes, we would have no issue whatsoever with any punishment that fit the crime. However, ‘avoidance‘ is what any sane rational individual/corporation does, as Kerry Packer reminded us in 1991.

While no surprise, media outlets have blindly forwarded the ‘tax bombshell,’ without seeming to question the validity or reliability of the tax sources which the NYT is basing the claims. Then again why would they? Orange man bad. Destroy at all costs. Worry about facts later.

Are these anonymous and undisclosed sources similar to those which accused him of calling slain soldiers, “suckers” and “losers“?

The NYT wrote,

In response to a letter summarizing The Times’s findings, Alan Garten, a lawyer for the Trump Organization, said that “most, if not all, of the facts appear to be inaccurate” and requested the documents on which they were based. After The Times declined to provide the records, in order to protect its sources, Mr. Garten took direct issue only with the amount of taxes Mr. Trump had paid.”

His taxes could well have been leaked by NY State attorneys investigating him. That in and of itself is a criminal offence.

For the NYT, if Trump loses office thanks to this hit job, it will matter not if the details were fabricated because the incoming government would view it as the ends justifying the means.

Almost three years ago, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow hailed she had Trump’s 2005 tax return which showed he paid $38m tax on $150m income.

Fast forward to November 3rd, 2020.

Are voters going to be more concerned with how much tax he has or hasn’t paid or whether he is going to be more able to get the economy back on track as the record pre-COVID showed quite clearly as evidenced by the most recent SOTU? Jobs and economic prosperity matter. Period.

Ultimately voters still elected a man who was on tape bragging about grabbing female genitalia. With that in mind, is avoiding taxes more of an election issue than crotch cupping?

We are 40 days away. Paying only $750 in income tax is optically terrible. No question. Although he isn’t drawing a salary.

Given the allegations, the services of this tax accountant seem rather skillful. If he has merely taken advantage of the tax laws, that is about as American as it gets.

Let’s wait until we see more of these claims. Perhaps Trump releases some of his TC returns to put the media’s lies on display.

Who would have guessed gun crime would get out of control?

Surely those bright spark Democrat mayors in NYC, Chicago, Portland and Minnesota can work out that defunding the police might cause a spike in crime and gun violence? That curtailing what actions are at the disposal of the police would hand these cities over to the criminals.

There have been 777 shootings in NYC in 2020, one more than the 776 that took place in 2019.

Murders in Chicago more than doubled compared to the same month last year, according to the Chicago PD. In 2020 there have been 430 homicides. In July, murders are up 139%YoY.

In Minnesota, gun violence is up 72%YoY. Mayor Jacob Frey said., “Year-to-date this has been a higher shooting victim total than the last five years, with 288 victims. The next closest is 2016 with 178.

In Portland gun violence is up 4-fold. From July 1-13 there have been 42 shootings vs 11 in the same period last year.

And guess what, NY State Governor Andrew Cuomo has admitted concern that wealthy taxpayers could leave NY for good.

Roadway Moving President Ross Sapir has said his company has experienced its busiest season ever since it was founded. United Van Lines CEO Marc Rogers also said over 60% of those leaving NY are earning north of $100,000.

Tax collections have plummeted during coronavirus, falling 42% in June. Losing the wealthy for good could leave gaping holes in the budget. Cuomo might argue they left over COVID-19 but soaring gun crime is hardly an inducement to return after the pandemic passes.

Still, these Dems keep assuring us, “we’ve got this under control.”

Democrat Party Official admits to receiving bribes to stuff ballot boxes with multiple votes

The DOJ has charged 73-year-old Domenick J. DeMuro, a Democratic Party elections judge who admitted to taking bribes to stuff ballot boxes with multiple votes in favour of Democratic candidates in 2014, 2015 and 2016 in South Philadelphia. DeMuro pleaded guilty.

We note in recent days that Trump has been questioning mail-in voting actions in states like Michigan on the grounds of the risks of voter fraud.

In 2005, former US President Jimmy Carter (Democrat) and former Chief of Staff James Baker (Republican) were tasked with an independent review under the banner of the National Commission on Federal Election Reform.

The Commission on Federal Election Reform’s conclusions were:

  1. Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” The Carter-Baker Commission argued that national voter identification was needed to prevent real ballot fraud (especially as absentee voting could lead to double voting across states by submitting by mail and voting on election day) and to keep public confidence in the election process.
  2. The Carter-Baker Commission recommended a move toward nonpartisan election administration. They recommended professional election administrators were appointed by governors which were approved by a supermajority vote of state legislators. The supermajority requirement would ensure legitimate bipartisan support for the election administrators.
  3. Twenty-seven states require or request some form of ID to vote. Supporters of this policy argue that if voters identify themselves before voting, election fraud will be reduced. Opponents of an ID requirement fear it will disenfranchise voters, especially the poor, members of minority groups and the elderly, who are less likely than other voters to have suitable identification. The Carter Center in 2008 noted that in three states with voter ID requirements — Indiana, Mississippi and Maryland — only about 1.2% of registered voters lacked a photo ID.
  4. The Commission offered a proposal to bridge the partisan divide by suggesting a uniform voter photo ID, based on the federal Real ID Act of 2005, to be phased in over five years. To help with the transition, states would provide free voter photo ID cards for eligible citizens; mobile units would be sent out to provide the IDs and register voters.

Alas, it was a wonderful study that hasn’t progressed much as electoral fraud remains a partisan battleground.

Here is an interesting video discussing views on voter ID laws. Just shows how ignorant some liberal-minded Americans are with respect to minorities.

We should remind you that 25 states (mainly Democrat) are working to pass a law that requires presidential candidates to release their tax returns in order to appear on the ballot. This law is specifically designed to keep Trump’s name off given his resistance to disclosing them.

One has to wonder why state legislators feel they must intervene and take away the democratic rights of voters to determine whether a candidate’s tax returns (specifically Trump’s) were a big enough issue for them. Obviously above their pay grade.

How many more DeMuros are out there?

ACF threatens Tennis Australia with Corporations Act

It was only a matter of time. The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) has regurgitated a report it wrote on the increasing risks of heat stress on cricketers during Boxing Day tests by applying it the Australian Open tennis.

It chose the same partial voice to undertake the study.  The Monash Climate Change Communication Research Hub (MCCCRH) openly states that it “conducts social research and leads impact focused projects to build media and policy infrastructure that adequately addresses climate change in Australia.”

Not balance. Just agenda based.

The main points were as follows:

“The MCCCRH finds”:

“Australian tennis is already experiencing the impact of climate change, with smoke from bushfires and extreme heat driven by climate change increasing health risks for players and the likelihood of match disruptions.

Haven’t we worked out that dreadful bush management is a root cause, not climate change? That despite 57 inquiries into bushfires since 1939 we still haven’t learnt how to maintain our bush land despite aborigines being successful custodians for 1,000s of years before climate change was even a thing? Incompetence seems to be the issue, not climate.

“Tennis authorities should consider a series of actions to protect players, such as extending the length of the tournament — to allow games to be cancelled in the hottest part of the day if it’s too hot on court — or moving the event to November or March.”

Has the ACF considered some players are fitter than others? Shouldn’t the players determine such things with TA, not a bunch of alarmists with an axe to grind?

“Climate change threats may soon represent ‘material financial issues’ for Tennis Australia and its directors, who could face liability under the Corporations Act for failing to adequately address and report these risks.

Do we really need to have the ACF resort to threats via the Corporations Act to shame Cricket Australia and Tennis Australia (TA) with unsettled science? Does it realize that corporations reporting on climate change has fallen to 14% from 22% over the last decade? 1000s of Aussie directors are already well aware of their risks without having the ACF throw the rule book in their face. So they disagree with you.

Will the ACF insure the risk of lost revenue if its alarmism they predict fails to eventuate? If the ACF is so confident in its prophecies it should have no qualms backing such a notion. Put its science where its mouth is.

On page 16, TA got a slap on the wrist for having ANZ as a sponsor because it supports the fossil fuel industry at $7.70 for every $1 it does on renewables. Could that be because of the relative risk profile, ACF? Does ANZ dictate to TA what it must do with the tournament other than contractually honour advertising exposure? Does TA have any rights to tell ANZ how it, a bank, deploys shareholder capital? No.

Although we do note the ACF commended TA for joining the UN Sports for Climate Action Framework and urges it to raise its voice for strong, meaningful climate action from our government.

The ACF should demand that TA restrict the Australian Open to players who walk, cycle or sail to the tournament. As the UN sports body states,

“Sport is not just a victim of climate change; it is also a contributor, through greenhouse gas emissions.

What better way to mitigate the dangers and show the very actions that will stop the climate emergency dead in its tracks by making the tennis players ditch fossil fuel derived transport of any sort to any future events and give up their carbon rackets and naphtha based synthetic clothing.

In closing, FNF Media hopes for the sake of consistency, that the ACF will guarantee it will publish a report on professional skiing competitions where skiers may have to brave record cold temperatures to compete? If such an event comes to pass, we can guarantee it would never see the light of day. After all we just had the coldest maximum summer temperature in history at Thredbo late last year.

By the way, here is the Melbourne forecast for the tournament and the peak temp hit in 1939.

Här är årets värsta slöseri 2019!

It seems the Swedes don’t share Greta Thunberg’s enthusiasm for forking over taxes to save the planet. In 2014, the Swedish national government spent 5.2 billion Swedish krona (US$547mn), It will double to 12.6 billion krona (US$1.3bn) for the upcoming 2020 budget.

The Swedish Taxpayers Alliance wrote,

The government has more than doubled the appropriations for climate policy, but despite this, emissions no longer decrease. In 2018, emissions even increased. That is why climate policy has been voted the worst waste of the year.

Everything you missed from the 4th debate

Tulsi Gabbard is the only nominee with any credibility. The rest look a complete clown show. Enjoy. Elizabeth Warren claims she has been in 70,000 selfies. Got to be an election winner on that alone.

Interesting to see that former President Obama has endorsed scandal clad Justin Trudeau in Canada but he won’t say one word to back the “best VP in American history” Joe Biden. Let’s hope Obama’s predictive powers extend to Canada as they have Brexit and Trump.

Japanese consumer confidence waning as consumption tax hike starts tomorrow

Japan consumer confidence.png

As the 10% consumption tax rate kicks in from October 1 in Japan from the current 8%, it is worth reflecting on the sorry state of consumer confidence. We are back below 2014 levels. While the sales of Japanese rugby jerseys and huge consumption of beer by gaijin at the Rugby World Cup may provide a brief respite, the trend remains distinctly negative.

Note that consumption tax has been the biggest portion of government revenue since 2014 and is on track to be 37% of the total in 2019, followed by individuals and the lazy corporate sector. Japan’s small-medium enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of employment, comprising 70% of the labour force and 97% of all corporations. Yet 70% of SMEs pay no tax at all.

From an individual level, the top 0.7% of earners in Japan pay 30% of the tax bill, up from 20% in 1974. The bottom 50% have seen their tax contribution fall from 10% to around 2.8%. The top 8% pay around three-quarters of the total.

With Japan running a ¥100 trillion (US$1tn) national budget, the Ministry of Finance needs to sell ¥40 trillion (US$400bn) every year to plug the budget deficit.  The hope is that the consumption tax will lower the dependence on having to debt finance to such extremes.

Bin Shaming

The bright sparks inside the City of Adelaide Council believe that “bin shaming” residents into correctly separating rubbish is the way forward to save the planet. Not only will they replace perfectly good plastic rubbish bins with see-through plastic bins made from fossil fuels but tell us the other merits.

Adelaide City Councillor Robert Simms said, “having transparent bins would be helpful to people fishing for cans and bottles to recycle for 10c a pop as part of the state’s container deposit scheme.”

Such genius! Imagine being one of the 25,000 residents waking up at 2am in the morning because someone was rummaging through their bins to save the planet. Just what they want the council to do.

Ratepayers don’t need sanctimonious lectures from activist councillors to tell them how to behave. What is the bet these bins start to get incredibly grimy after repeated use? Never mind they’ll just produce more.  Afterall pretending to care about the planet is more important than doing anything truly meaningful to mitigate climate change. The only transparency in this program is the space between the ears of the council.

CM is currently running through NSW council budgets to look at trends in their spending. The first cut looks damning.

Alberta cancels carbon tax

Alberta United Conservative Premier Jason Kenney has repealed the carbon tax placed by his predecessors. It was a key election promise and he has vowed to challenge any attempt by Ottawa to force adoption of a federal carbon tax.

In Alberta, Jason Kenney of the United Conservatives gained 63 seats from 25 at the last election handing victory over incumbent Rachel Notley of the New Democrats which fell to 24 seats from 52.

In Ontario, Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives surged from 28 seats to 76. His main rival, incumbent Kathleen Wynne of the Liberals fell from 58 to 7. He also repealed the carbon tax soon after election.

Justin Trudeau is fighting a losing battle if he thinks a carbon tax will help his re-election.

People want jobs not useless taxes which achieve nothing.