Representative Paul Ryan promised last week that he would release two years of tax returns, the same amount as Mitt Romney. Romney's running mate committed to releasing his taxes for that period last weekend, and he has come through, with this 2011 and 2010 taxes now available for the public to view. Of course, Governor Romney hasn't released his actual tax returns yet, but just an estimate for 2011, so Ryan is one-up on him there.
Ryan paid a higher tax rate than running-mate Romney, 15.9% percent in 2010 and 20% in 2011, on $215,417 and $323,416 in income respectively, which comes to $64,764 in 2011 and $32,233 in 2010. Both Janna and Paul paid a higher tax rate than Mitt Romney, or wife Ann.
The Romney's tax returns for 2010 and 2011 were released in January, showing that the republic nominee had $40 million in income for the past two years and paid 13.9% in 2010 and 15.4% in 2011. Responding to critics about his inflated income, Romney said that he would not "apologize for having been successful." Romney may not want to apologize for being successful, but he won't get much sympathy for it, either, as his income for the last two years could run a small country.
Mitt Romney has been under pressure from the Obama campaign to release more than just the two years he did release, but has not done so, saying that the Obama campaign would rather concentrate on the tax situation than the issues. Romney has stated that he has paid no less than 13% in the last ten years.
Last year's income put the Janna & Paul Ryan in the top 3% of Americans, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Do you think the Romney campaign is hiding something by only releasing two years of tax returns, or do you agree with them that people shouldn't be focusing on their taxes, but on the issues instead?
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 43
Is that tax rate the effective tax rate? Income tax rate? The capital gain tax rate? Or What??? This is the same game that was plaid months ago when Obama said that he should not pay smaller tax rate than his secretary.
The fact is that a company can make a profit and it pays tax at a high rate, then what is left over is considered to be net profit and dividends are then paid to share holders like Mr. Romney when he pays a smaller rate (capital gains rate). Thus the money is double taxed. This rate is low so that people like Mr. Romney invests his money in a company. Those companies supply goods and services. The people who manufacture those goods or perform those services are employed and pay tax too as income.
What Romney is doing is legal or else I am willing to bet that the IRS would have said something by now.
You can blame Romney for paying a lower rate, but if it is the rules, should you not be blaming those who wrote the rules, or had a chance to change those rules and chose not too?
To say that it is unfair that a corporation pay taxes on its revenues and then it's owners also pay tax and their profits or dividends is no different than to say it is unfair if its employees are taxed on their paycheques. After all, the money the corporation pays its employees with "has already been taxed". Ludicrous at all levels.
If Mitt Romney's business dealings are returning him $20,000,000 a year and he is paying $2,600,000 a year in taxes it is nonsense to claim that he would not engage in the same business dealings if he had to pay on the order of $6,000,000 or even $10,000,000 a year in taxes. Who would give up income of ten or fourteen million dollars just to avoid giving six or ten million to the government? You are still much further ahead to earn the money and pay the higher tax rate than to not earn the money at all.
The only reason anyone is even suspecting that Romney might have broken any rules is because he continues to keep the facts hidden. Why? His wife says it is to avoid giving his critics more ammunition. If by that she means merely more fodder to discuss tax unfairness, and not the revelation of truly nefarious doings, then it makes no sense. The issue remains in the news cycle as long as it remains a mystery.
And discussing Romney's tax rate is entirely fair because of the proposals that he and Ryan are making to further reduce taxes for people like them. Americans should be able to see a case study of how those tax rules play out, and what better case than those who want to change the rules?
Anyone could see how the tax policy is implemented, the makeup someone and pick some random capital gain and start running the numbers. Not sure if Canada has calculators but we do and they are really not hard to use if you can’t run the numbers in your head. Romany doesn't have to tell you his numbers if he does not want to... In fact I really don’t think he has to give you any tax returns at all. I would say he is be generis by giving you what you have.
Regardless, if you want to change the driving laws, you don’t go out and publicly ridicule the drivers. Contact those who create the laws! That’s how we do it in the US.
No, they don't, Rory. Renters do not pay property taxes and I would bet that many states allow the elderly to get an exclusion on some of their property taxes. Here in Henderson County, North Carolina, for example, some elderly people only pay a property tax on 50% of the value of their home. Also, the poor usually don't end up paying any state income taxes. And the sales rates probably vary somewhat from state to state.
I also would not be surprised if Romney had had to pay a hefty tax on his inheritance when his father died, something most Americans never have to worry about. I know he did not accept what his father left for him, but I don't know if that would exempt him from having to pay the inheritance tax.
Wait ... What? The libtards won't be voting for R/R? Then why do they care what the tax records show?
Can't talk about unemployment or fiscal calamity or high gas prices or unfunded mandates which affect millions but the libtards can focus like a laser on the nearly meaningless tax records of R/R.
Excellent comment. The Leftists can pound sand.
And of course it is not about convincing his opponents to vote for him. Polls show each candidate has the support of around 45% of voter. The election is about convincing enough of the remaining 10% to support your own choice so that they can win.
This undecided voters have the right to as much pertinent information as they want in order to make up their minds. The long established practice of previous candidates is to release many years of tax returns to show the candidate is in good standing and a contributing member of society. Romney's insistence on breaking that practice may lead some of those voters to distrust him.
So, of course his opponents will continue to insist on the release of those returns to keep the question in the minds of the undecided. Only Romney can decide if the information contained in those returns is more damaging to his campaign than the suspicions raised by not releasing them.
So far his decision seems obvious.
Show the Oxford & Columbia files now!
Show the Fast and Furious documents now!
Etc. etc.
This is why I don't take you seriously, Rory, you are a partisan hack like the rest of the libtards.
When will we see any transparency from the current, temporary resident of the WH?
The left cant run on Obamas record of the last three years. And the dog on the car roof story aint working. So, the hope that they can find something in MRs tax returns is theirthat only hope.
The dems are losing out in the marketplace of ideas. Europe is failing and every day more and more Americans realize we must stop trying to be like europe
#
In politics, perception is everything.
Rory M. Aug 18, 2012, 9:03pm EDT
In politics, perception is everything.
I perceive that Oblama is hiding his true nation of birth and his limited intelligence by not divulging his college records.
If that is the card conservatives want to keep playing through the whole election then you're going to lose. So have at it.