Given the fact that President Elect Obama wants to eliminate the Social Security tax cap, shouldn't Secretary Elect Geithner have paid these when he should have? We all hate paying taxes, but do we want a tax cheat heading Treasury? What Department is the IRS in?

Geithner's Tax History Muddles Confirmation Article
By JONATHAN WEISMAN
WASHINGTON -- Timothy Geithner didn't pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for several years while he worked for the International Monetary Fund, and he employed an immigrant housekeeper who briefly lacked proper work papers.

President-elect Barack Obama's pick for Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, employed an immigrant housekeeper with expired work papers. Those issues, and a series of other tax matters, caused the postponement Tuesday of Mr. Geithner's confirmation hearing as Treasury secretary. They were instead the subject of a closed-door meeting between the nominee, currently president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and members of the Senate Finance Committee, in whose hands his confirmation lies.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123187503629378119.html

all smoke...no substance...the man will be approved and supported by both political parties...lets move on!

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> all smoke...no substance...the man will be
> approved and supported by both political
> parties...lets move on!

Why don't you stop paying your taxes and tell the IRS it is all smoke? I am sure there are some IRS agents and judges who just might disagree with the know-it-all Vince(1).

World Bank, IMF and the Inter-American Development Bank do not pay taxes. Their employees do not pay any form of income tax in the countries where they operate.

World Bank and IMF employees are also provided housekeeping and child care staff at WB and IMF expense.

This is from a whiner group called "50years.org":

IMF and World Bank: 100% Tax
Exempt! By executive order, the IMF and
World Bank are covered by the International
Organizations Immunities Act.

Bob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> World Bank, IMF and the Inter-American Development
> Bank do not pay taxes. Their employees do not pay
> any form of income tax in the countries where they
> operate.
>
> World Bank and IMF employees are also provided
> housekeeping and child care staff at WB and IMF
> expense.
>
> This is from a whiner group called "50years.org":
>
> IMF and World Bank: 100% Tax
> Exempt! By executive order, the IMF and
> World Bank are covered by the International
> Organizations Immunities Act.

The IMF and World Bank reimburse employees, including U.S. citizens, for their U.S. income taxes. They don't, however, make contributions toward Social Security and Medicare taxes, which individuals are expected to pay on their own.

s



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/02/2010 12:42AM by inkahootz.

Another example of the goal of the demokrats... make THEM pay the taxes while we, both the elite and unemployed, will skate on by. Watch your wallets! Here it comes!

conVince is a Nazi book burner that likes to take it in the ass with a kielbasa sausage.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> all smoke...no substance...

smoke is a substance.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

Try getting ANY GS job in the Treasury Department with a delinquent tax record. It is impossible. Apparently, Mr. Geithner thinks he is too good to contribute to Social Security or Medicare. Pretty ironic for a Democratic administration.

as jerimiah would say... the democrat's chickens are coming home to roost

It isn't ironic, it is expected. Raise taxes on the people who produce jobs and the people who work. Exempt payment of taxes for the demokratic elite and people who do not work in order to fool them into voting demokrat. It only makes sense that those at the top are not held responsible for crimes.

It looks like the rise of the demokrats is going smoothly, as planned, and outrages such as the appointing a leader of tax collection that himself broke tax law is only unexpected for those who listen to the apologists like Vince. "Smoke, no substance" is the talking point, the excuse that is designed to deflect what is really going on.

Call me a nazi all you want, but I'm not sure what questioning why the cabinet position in charge of the IRS should go to an individual with tax problems has to do with nazis.

you all love to waste your time talking about the small stuff...

I don't like the fact that the guy didn't pay his taxes for the IMF work. However, the guy is a multi-millionaire who did some side work as an IMF consultant. I would be more concerned if he hadn't paid his taxes on the investment banking income he made. All said, the IRS caught it in the audit and he also voluntarily paid taxes and penalties for years of income that didn't fall under the IRS audit. Not an ideal situation. But I would rather Obama have someone in there he felt comfortable doing the job than some guy who could pass muster but who isn't very capable.

WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't like the fact that the guy didn't pay his
> taxes for the IMF work. However, the guy is a
> multi-millionaire who did some side work as an IMF
> consultant. I would be more concerned if he hadn't
> paid his taxes on the investment banking income he
> made. All said, the IRS caught it in the audit and
> he also voluntarily paid taxes and penalties for
> years of income that didn't fall under the IRS
> audit. Not an ideal situation. But I would rather
> Obama have someone in there he felt comfortable
> doing the job than some guy who could pass muster
> but who isn't very capable.


WTL,

After my father retired from the World Bank, he still did contractual consulting from time to time. He was paid a flat fee for services rendered. He still paid taxes on the consulting work, because it was performed in the United States. Now if this guy did the consulting work while abroad, he would not be taxed by the IRS.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2009 03:05PM by inkahootz.

I don't think Mr. Geithner is a tax cheat. He made an error in his taxes and corrected it when he learned of it and paid the approprate penalties. I would like more information about how he made the error though.

I'd like public officials that write laws or head agencies that oversee the tax code to have a much better than average understanding of it. This is my problem with Charlie Rangel. How can you write tax law if you make so many mistakes in your own taxes?

It's doubtful Geithner does his own taxes so I'd like to hear why his tax professional didn't spot that error right off the bat. Hell, Turbo Tax wouldn't let that by. I've had friends who claim they didn't realize taxes weren't being withheld from their paychecks and then were shocked at a big tax bill in April. I just don't understand how you can pay so little attention to your paycheck.

Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think Mr. Geithner is a tax cheat. He
> made an error in his taxes and corrected it when
> he learned of it and paid the approprate
> penalties. I would like more information about
> how he made the error though.

If it were only that simple. According to the AP, "[h]e paid some of the taxes in 2006, after an IRS audit discovered the discrepancy for taxes paid in 2003 and 2004. But it wasn't until much later - days before Obama tapped him to head Treasury late last year - that Geithner paid back most of the taxes, incurred in 2001 and 2002. He did so after Obama's transition team found that Geithner had made the same tax mistake his first two years at the IMF as the one the IRS found he made during his last two years there."

Either he is so INCREDIBLY stupid that he made the same mistake multiple years after being audited and penalized, or he simply thinks he is above paying taxes.

inkahootz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I don't like the fact that the guy didn't pay
> his
> > taxes for the IMF work. However, the guy is a
> > multi-millionaire who did some side work as an
> IMF
> > consultant. I would be more concerned if he
> hadn't
> > paid his taxes on the investment banking income
> he
> > made. All said, the IRS caught it in the audit
> and
> > he also voluntarily paid taxes and penalties
> for
> > years of income that didn't fall under the IRS
> > audit. Not an ideal situation. But I would
> rather
> > Obama have someone in there he felt comfortable
> > doing the job than some guy who could pass
> muster
> > but who isn't very capable.
>
>
> WTL,
>
> After my father retired from the World Bank, he
> still did contractual consulting from time to
> time. He was payed a flat fee for services
> rendered. He still paid taxes on the consulting
> work, because it was performed in the United
> States. Now if this guy did the consulting work
> while abroad, he would not be taxed by the IRS.

I'm not saying he is exempt. I'm saying that the guy makes millions of dollars and didn't properly account for this consulting work he did for IMF. I'm not excusing what he did. However, since he had acted to properly address this issue when it was brought to his attention, I think he should be given some credit.

Tax Hater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I don't think Mr. Geithner is a tax cheat. He
> > made an error in his taxes and corrected it
> when
> > he learned of it and paid the approprate
> > penalties. I would like more information about
> > how he made the error though.
>
> If it were only that simple. According to the AP,
> "e paid some of the taxes in 2006, after an IRS
> audit discovered the discrepancy for taxes paid in
> 2003 and 2004. But it wasn't until much later -
> days before Obama tapped him to head Treasury late
> last year - that Geithner paid back most of the
> taxes, incurred in 2001 and 2002. He did so after
> Obama's transition team found that Geithner had
> made the same tax mistake his first two years at
> the IMF as the one the IRS found he made during
> his last two years there."
>
> Either he is so INCREDIBLY stupid that he made the
> same mistake multiple years after being audited
> and penalized, or he simply thinks he is above
> paying taxes.

The way the IRS regulations read, unless they have evidence of fraud or malicious intent, the IRS can't audit your books going back more than three years. Geithner voluntarily paid those taxes and fees after the fact. Technically speaking, he wasn't obligated to audit his own books...which he did.

The guy probably received millions of dollars from his investments, board of director memberships, etc. The IMF consulting fee to him is probably like you or me winning $20 from a scratch lottery ticket. It's not like it was top-of-mind.

> The guy probably received millions of dollars from
> his investments, board of director memberships,
> etc. The IMF consulting fee to him is probably
> like you or me winning $20 from a scratch lottery
> ticket. It's not like it was top-of-mind.


Mos def. The Bank pays their consultants very well, but compared to what he had stacked...shit's peanuts!

WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tax Hater Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Voter Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I don't think Mr. Geithner is a tax cheat.
> He
> > > made an error in his taxes and corrected it
> > when
> > > he learned of it and paid the approprate
> > > penalties. I would like more information
> about
> > > how he made the error though.
> >
> > If it were only that simple. According to the
> AP,
> > "e paid some of the taxes in 2006, after an IRS
> > audit discovered the discrepancy for taxes paid
> in
> > 2003 and 2004. But it wasn't until much later -
> > days before Obama tapped him to head Treasury
> late
> > last year - that Geithner paid back most of the
> > taxes, incurred in 2001 and 2002. He did so
> after
> > Obama's transition team found that Geithner had
> > made the same tax mistake his first two years
> at
> > the IMF as the one the IRS found he made during
> > his last two years there."
> >
> > Either he is so INCREDIBLY stupid that he made
> the
> > same mistake multiple years after being audited
> > and penalized, or he simply thinks he is above
> > paying taxes.
>
> The way the IRS regulations read, unless they have
> evidence of fraud or malicious intent, the IRS
> can't audit your books going back more than three
> years. Geithner voluntarily paid those taxes and
> fees after the fact. Technically speaking, he
> wasn't obligated to audit his own books...which he
> did.
>
> The guy probably received millions of dollars from
> his investments, board of director memberships,
> etc. The IMF consulting fee to him is probably
> like you or me winning $20 from a scratch lottery
> ticket. It's not like it was top-of-mind.

IMF issues several clear guidelines each year for its employees detailing their responsibility to pay all their self-employment taxes, and that Geithner had signed annual statements saying that he would do so. He also had experience dealing with such taxes. In fact, the guy actually kept money given to him by the IMF that was intended to be used to pay taxes. Finally, he NEVER paid any penalties, so stop indicating he paid "fees."

Tax Hater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> IMF issues several clear guidelines each year for
> its employees detailing their responsibility to
> pay all their self-employment taxes, and that
> Geithner had signed annual statements saying that
> he would do so.

Unless you have personal knowledge of Geithner's working relationship with IMF, you are pulling that out of your ass. If he was a sub to a prime, he probably didn't sign anything.

> He also had experience dealing
> with such taxes.

This is true. He should have done it. No argument there.

> In fact, the guy actually kept
> money given to him by the IMF that was intended to
> be used to pay taxes.

No. They paid a fixed fee. What the guy does with the money is his own business...and responsibility. Otherwise, IMF would have made him an employee.

> Finally, he NEVER paid any
> penalties, so stop indicating he paid "fees."

First, do you know that for sure? Second, at the very least he paid interest to the IRS on the money he owed, so he paid more than taxes owed. Third, it is up to the IRS to levy penalties. Typically they tie penalties to malicious intent. If Geithner was able to demonstrate there was no such intent, it is not unusual for the IRS to waive such penalties.

s



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/02/2010 01:09AM by inkahootz.

WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tax Hater Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > IMF issues several clear guidelines each year
> for
> > its employees detailing their responsibility to
> > pay all their self-employment taxes, and that
> > Geithner had signed annual statements saying
> that
> > he would do so.
>
> Unless you have personal knowledge of Geithner's
> working relationship with IMF, you are pulling
> that out of your ass. If he was a sub to a prime,
> he probably didn't sign anything.
>
> > He also had experience dealing
> > with such taxes.
>
> This is true. He should have done it. No argument
> there.
>
> > In fact, the guy actually kept
> > money given to him by the IMF that was intended
> to
> > be used to pay taxes.
>
> No. They paid a fixed fee. What the guy does with
> the money is his own business...and
> responsibility. Otherwise, IMF would have made him
> an employee.
>
> > Finally, he NEVER paid any
> > penalties, so stop indicating he paid "fees."
>
> First, do you know that for sure? Second, at the
> very least he paid interest to the IRS on the
> money he owed, so he paid more than taxes owed.
> Third, it is up to the IRS to levy penalties.
> Typically they tie penalties to malicious intent.
> If Geithner was able to demonstrate there was no
> such intent, it is not unusual for the IRS to
> waive such penalties.


I think WTL has you on this one. When my dad was a Bank employee he was taxed because he was based in the U.S. ( even though he went on missions for months at a time). When he retired and did consulting, he was expected to pay his own taxes on the consulting fees he earned. Additionally, when he was employed full time by the Bank he paid IRS, SS, and Medicare taxes. If he had been stationed abroad permanently he would not have had to pay them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2009 03:13PM by inkahootz.

WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tax Hater Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > IMF issues several clear guidelines each year
> for
> > its employees detailing their responsibility to
> > pay all their self-employment taxes, and that
> > Geithner had signed annual statements saying
> that
> > he would do so.
>
> Unless you have personal knowledge of Geithner's
> working relationship with IMF, you are pulling
> that out of your ass. If he was a sub to a prime,
> he probably didn't sign anything.

Not out of my ass, it was reported in the WSJ. Not to mention all of the assertions I have made can be verified by the Senate Finance Committee's documents relating to Geithner's nomination and failure to pay taxes. They can be found here - http://finance.senate.gov/press/Bpress/2009press/prb011309d.pdf see page 2 specifically that indicates he signed such documents.

> > He also had experience dealing
> > with such taxes.
>
> This is true. He should have done it. No argument
> there.
>
> > In fact, the guy actually kept
> > money given to him by the IMF that was intended
> to
> > be used to pay taxes.
>
> No. They paid a fixed fee. What the guy does with
> the money is his own business...and
> responsibility. Otherwise, IMF would have made him
> an employee.

Again, see the Finance Committee report!

> > Finally, he NEVER paid any
> > penalties, so stop indicating he paid "fees."
>
> First, do you know that for sure? Second, at the
> very least he paid interest to the IRS on the
> money he owed, so he paid more than taxes owed.
> Third, it is up to the IRS to levy penalties.
> Typically they tie penalties to malicious intent.
> If Geithner was able to demonstrate there was no
> such intent, it is not unusual for the IRS to
> waive such penalties.

All articles indicate he had penalties waived. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123194884833281695.html?mod=googlenews_wsj see the fifth paragraph from the bottom.

A little research would have saved yourself from looking like a moronic ass.

Any other bright ramblings you have for the peanut gallery?

Tax Hater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Not out of my ass, it was reported in the WSJ.
> Not to mention all of the assertions I have made
> can be verified by the Senate Finance Committee's
> documents relating to Geithner's nomination and
> failure to pay taxes. They can be found here -
> http://finance.senate.gov/press/Bpress/2009press/p
> rb011309d.pdf see page 2 specifically that
> indicates he signed such documents.
>

Did you actually read the report? It sounds like the IMF has a very convoluted way of dealing with taxes and that Geithner tried to pay his taxes in full but didn't because of the IMF's screwed up compensation system. As for signing the documents, he signed a paper when he started there that he received the personnel manuals. That's not the same as signing an annual document specifically about taxes.


>
> Again, see the Finance Committee report!
>

I did. He made a good faith effort to pay the taxes.


>
> All articles indicate he had penalties waived.
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123194884833281695
> .html?mod=googlenews_wsj see the fifth paragraph
> from the bottom.
>

The penalties were "waived" because it fell under an across-the-board amnesty. He still paid interest on the taxes.

> A little research would have saved yourself from
> looking like a moronic ass.
>

It appears that you wasted several hours of your time researching this. I would have to say that YOU are the moronic ass.

> Any other bright ramblings you have for the peanut
> gallery?

Yeah. If you read the report, it sounds like the guy screwed up on very convoluted tax item. To me, it speaks volumes about the need to simplify our tax code so this kind of bullshit doesn't happen.

WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did you actually read the report?

Yes I did, and from your comments below, it is obvious that you did not, or if you did, you failed to understand it. Is English your first language?

It sounds like
> the IMF has a very convoluted way of dealing with
> taxes and that Geithner tried to pay his taxes in
> full but didn't because of the IMF's screwed up
> compensation system. As for signing the documents,
> he signed a paper when he started there that he
> received the personnel manuals. That's not the
> same as signing an annual document specifically
> about taxes.

Read page three again, it specifically states "He filled out, SIGNED, and submitted an ANNUAL tax allowance request worksheet...." Do you know what annual means? It means EVERY year.


> > A little research would have saved yourself
> from
> > looking like a moronic ass.
> >
>
> It appears that you wasted several hours of your
> time researching this. I would have to say that
> YOU are the moronic ass.

several hours? how long does it take you to read 30 pages? Given your reading comp skills, you might want to spend a bit more time on it.

> > Any other bright ramblings you have for the
> peanut
> > gallery?
>
> Yeah. If you read the report, it sounds like the
> guy screwed up on very convoluted tax item. To me,
> it speaks volumes about the need to simplify our
> tax code so this kind of bullshit doesn't happen.

So, after proven wrong, you go from "you are pulling it from your ass" to "need for tax reform." Are you a shill or just plain stupid?

Tax Hater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Did you actually read the report?
>
> Yes I did, and from your comments below, it is
> obvious that you did not, or if you did, you
> failed to understand it. Is English your first
> language?
>

I read it. You are wrong.

> It sounds like
> > the IMF has a very convoluted way of dealing
> with
> > taxes and that Geithner tried to pay his taxes
> in
> > full but didn't because of the IMF's screwed up
> > compensation system. As for signing the
> documents,
> > he signed a paper when he started there that he
> > received the personnel manuals. That's not the
> > same as signing an annual document specifically
> > about taxes.
>
> Read page three again, it specifically states "He
> filled out, SIGNED, and submitted an ANNUAL tax
> allowance request worksheet...." Do you know what
> annual means? It means EVERY year.
>
>

Yes. And he believed he paid it, as I said previously. If your reading comprehension wasn't so low, you would understand that.

> > > A little research would have saved yourself
> > from
> > > looking like a moronic ass.
> > >
> >
> > It appears that you wasted several hours of
> your
> > time researching this. I would have to say that
> > YOU are the moronic ass.
>
> several hours? how long does it take you to read
> 30 pages? Given your reading comp skills, you
> might want to spend a bit more time on it.
>

I was talking about the time it took you to get the info, etc.

> > > Any other bright ramblings you have for the
> > peanut
> > > gallery?
> >
> > Yeah. If you read the report, it sounds like
> the
> > guy screwed up on very convoluted tax item. To
> me,
> > it speaks volumes about the need to simplify
> our
> > tax code so this kind of bullshit doesn't
> happen.
>
> So, after proven wrong, you go from "you are
> pulling it from your ass" to "need for tax
> reform." Are you a shill or just plain stupid?

You would have to actualy prove me wrong for me to be "proven wrong." You didn't do that.

WashingToneLocian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tax Hater Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WashingTone Locian Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Did you actually read the report?
> >
> > Yes I did, and from your comments below, it is
> > obvious that you did not, or if you did, you
> > failed to understand it. Is English your first
> > language?
> >
>
> I read it. You are wrong.

Oh, OK, I am supposed to believe some guy who posts on this website instead of a Finance Committee document or all new reports related to this ordeal.

> > It sounds like
> > > the IMF has a very convoluted way of dealing
> > with
> > > taxes and that Geithner tried to pay his
> taxes
> > in
> > > full but didn't because of the IMF's screwed
> up
> > > compensation system. As for signing the
> > documents,
> > > he signed a paper when he started there that
> he
> > > received the personnel manuals. That's not
> the
> > > same as signing an annual document
> specifically
> > > about taxes.
> >
> > Read page three again, it specifically states
> "He
> > filled out, SIGNED, and submitted an ANNUAL tax
> > allowance request worksheet...." Do you know
> what
> > annual means? It means EVERY year.
> >
> >
>
> Yes. And he believed he paid it, as I said
> previously. If your reading comprehension wasn't
> so low, you would understand that.

He never thought he paid them. Not even Geithner, the transition team, or anyone with half a brain ever claimed this. He thought he wasn't required to pay them. There is a difference, even if your simple mind cannot understand this. That is the fact. The Finance Committee report verifies this as does all press accounts. If a man who is about to lead the Treasury Department (which oversees the IRS) doesn't know which taxes to pay, he is unqualified. Further, he was given explicit instructions by the IMF. He blatently ignored them for his own gain. Anyone who has ever been self employed knows how to pay these taxes. They aren't difficult and they are not convoluted. Contrary to your claims, his work at the IMF was not simply one of many sources of income for him - it was his primary source of income.

> > > > A little research would have saved yourself
> > > from
> > > > looking like a moronic ass.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It appears that you wasted several hours of
> > your
> > > time researching this. I would have to say
> that
> > > YOU are the moronic ass.
> >
> > several hours? how long does it take you to
> read
> > 30 pages? Given your reading comp skills, you
> > might want to spend a bit more time on it.
> >
>
> I was talking about the time it took you to get
> the info, etc.

It takes less than 5 seconds. The Finance Committee has a website and it posts the documents. You might want to learn how to use a search engine. I suggest Google.

> > > > Any other bright ramblings you have for the
> > > peanut
> > > > gallery?
> > >
> > > Yeah. If you read the report, it sounds like
> > the
> > > guy screwed up on very convoluted tax item.
> To
> > me,
> > > it speaks volumes about the need to simplify
> > our
> > > tax code so this kind of bullshit doesn't
> > happen.
> >
> > So, after proven wrong, you go from "you are
> > pulling it from your ass" to "need for tax
> > reform." Are you a shill or just plain stupid?
>
> You would have to actualy prove me wrong for me to
> be "proven wrong." You didn't do that.

Wow, stupid and stubborn. What a fine combination of dimwittedness you possess.

I suppose you have some equally brilliant answers for his dependent care fraud and his own nanny-gate fiasco. Sleep-away camp doesn’t count as a deduction. It’s a luxury for affluent kids, not a necessity the taxpayers subsidize. Like John Edwards’s expensive haircut and Sarah Palin’s campaign-financed wardrobe, this one reeks of something worse than sloppiness. It’s that sense of entitlement we’ve seen all too often.

Tax Hater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Read page three again, it specifically states "He
> filled out, SIGNED, and submitted an ANNUAL tax
> allowance request worksheet...." Do you know what
> annual means? It means EVERY year.
>
>

Was that an annual tax allowance request? Or a tax allowance request he submitted annually?

I read that as a single worksheet pertaining to an annual tax allowance.

Bob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tax Hater Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Read page three again, it specifically states
> "He
> > filled out, SIGNED, and submitted an ANNUAL tax
> > allowance request worksheet...." Do you know
> what
> > annual means? It means EVERY year.
> >
> >
>
> Was that an annual tax allowance request? Or a
> tax allowance request he submitted annually?
>
> I read that as a single worksheet pertaining to an
> annual tax allowance.

Once again, if you bothered to read the report, you would have read the following: "IMF employees are required to file annually a form requesting the federal, state, and self-employment gross ups to wages."

Therefore, Bob, your reading is wrong.

WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't like the fact that the guy didn't pay his
> taxes for the IMF work. However, the guy is a
> multi-millionaire who did some side work as an IMF
> consultant.

Actually, he was director of the Policy Development and Review Department (2001-2003). It was his primary employment at the time. Any other facts you care to muddle?

Here's the thing...no one but you really cares Mr Tax Hater...within 2 weeks noone will be talking about this anymore...ever again.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's the thing...no one but you really cares Mr
> Tax Hater...within 2 weeks noone will be talking
> about this anymore...ever again.

You sound like another elitist who could care a less about the rule of law. As long as your elite class is protected and kept in power, you are fine with committing fraud against the American people. Do you not believe in funding Social Security and Medicare? If not, see to it that the programs are eliminated. I don't need you and your kind pimping these programs to the poor and elderly to win their votes, while at the same time not paying your fair share and hoisting the burden on less connected hard working Americans.

Of course I beleive in those programs...and so does Geithner! It was just an honest mistake..that's all get over it. Do you even think this man looks at his monthly pay stub to see what it is he is paying for? Move on America...egt a grip!

TY for the elitist designation...

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course I beleive in those programs...and so
> does Geithner! It was just an honest
> mistake..that's all get over it. Do you even
> think this man looks at his monthly pay stub to
> see what it is he is paying for? Move on
> America...egt a grip!
>
> TY for the elitist designation...

If it was such an honest mistake, why did he wait to rectify it AFTER he was approached to be Secretary of the Treasury. Why did he continue to take child care deductions AFTER his own accountant told him he couldn't?

There is nothing honest about this man or your defense of him.

get over it..you loose...what republikan dreg site are you getting all this crap?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2009 10:13PM by Vince(1).

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> get over it..you loose...what republikan dreg site
> are you getting all this crap?

It is called the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and every other major news outlet in this country. I probably voted the same way you did in November, but are you so in love with Obama and his so called dream team that you will regurgitate all defenses mindlessly? I support Americans fulfilling their obligations regardless of affiliation. I support an America where the elite doesn't scate by. Do you?

So..lets get this straight..you beleive the man intentionally avoided paying SSN taxes? A man who has been the head of the NY Fed Reserve..if he idnt have plans to be Sect of the Treasury, certainly had other plans that would involve investigations of his past...he intentionally avoided paying the tax for his own personal gain? That he only paid the tax because he was caught?

Do you have a similar opinion of his problems with the house keeper whose immigration status changed while emplyed by him?

Do you have a news article which lays out the facts as you see them...and comes to the conclusion that he is guilty of intentionally avoiding paying taxes?

vince would probably support appointing former felons to the bench and as police chiefs. talk about the fox guarding the henhouse this is too funny

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you have a news article which lays out the
> facts as you see them...and comes to the
> conclusion that he is guilty of intentionally
> avoiding paying taxes?

I do, and if I produce the link are you going to recant your nonsense? Seriously, there are articles that indicate his accountant warned him about the camp deductions, yet Geithner continued to do it. If I produce it, are you going to stop your blind support of this tax cheat?

He'll just say the source is bad or it's "just smoke" and whatever other dismissive points he wants to make. 'lol' had it right, this is a blatant fox ruling henhouse move. And look at the stimulus package... the infrastructure projects are heavily slanted toward transportation projects. So who does Obama pick for Sec of Transportation? A particularly pork-loving republican that will probably divert the money into bullshit. That way the administration can say it is "bi-partisan" when it really includes like-minded republicans who love pork as much as their demokrat colleagues.

Dude, get over it--everybody else has. It's a minor problem, he'll explain it in the confirmation hearing, and then we'll get on with solving the serious problems the current group of incompetents is leaving behind. In four years, if you feel like they didn't do a good job then, by all means, do everything you can to support a different candidate.


Tax hater Wrote:
> I do, and if I produce the link are you going to
> recant your nonsense? Seriously, there are
> articles that indicate his accountant warned him
> about the camp deductions, yet Geithner continued
> to do it. If I produce it, are you going to stop
> your blind support of this tax cheat?

Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dude, get over it--everybody else has. It's a
> minor problem, he'll explain it in the
> confirmation hearing, and then we'll get on with
> solving the serious problems the current group of
> incompetents is leaving behind. In four years, if
> you feel like they didn't do a good job then, by
> all means, do everything you can to support a
> different candidate.

"If in four years...?" We don't have four years to wait while an incompetent or a cheat tries to fix the economy.

You don't have a choice.

Tax hater Wrote:
> "If in four years...?" We don't have four years
> to wait while an incompetent or a cheat tries to
> fix the economy.

Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You don't have a choice.

But I still have a voice. Do you have many choices when it comes to the operations of the government? Were you able to exercise choices during the Bush administration? Did that stop you from being critical?

Tax hater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Do you have a news article which lays out the
> > facts as you see them...and comes to the
> > conclusion that he is guilty of intentionally
> > avoiding paying taxes?
>
> I do, and if I produce the link are you going to
> recant your nonsense? Seriously, there are
> articles that indicate his accountant warned him
> about the camp deductions, yet Geithner continued
> to do it. If I produce it, are you going to stop
> your blind support of this tax cheat?

Produce the link(s) from a credible source...MSM...and we will go from there.

conVince Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He'll just say the source is bad or it's "just
> smoke" and whatever other dismissive points he
> wants to make. 'lol' had it right, this is a
> blatant fox ruling henhouse move. And look at the
> stimulus package... the infrastructure projects
> are heavily slanted toward transportation
> projects. So who does Obama pick for Sec of
> Transportation? A particularly pork-loving
> republican that will probably divert the money
> into bullshit. That way the administration can
> say it is "bi-partisan" when it really includes
> like-minded republicans who love pork as much as
> their demokrat colleagues.


Boy oh boy...I hope Tax Hater has better friends then you...you make him and you sound even more cynical I am....and no one...no one should be more cynical then I am. And of course I will voice an opinion on his source...he said all the MSM is carrying these "facts". If he comes back with the likes of O'Reilly...Limbaugh...Colter..I will definatley criticise. Guess what..if I dont think the article says what he says it says...I will critise. All my options remain open....notice however,..it's been 10 hours...and still no article.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2009 06:52PM by Vince(1).

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> conVince Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > He'll just say the source is bad or it's "just
> > smoke" and whatever other dismissive points he
> > wants to make. 'lol' had it right, this is a
> > blatant fox ruling henhouse move. And look at
> the
> > stimulus package... the infrastructure projects
> > are heavily slanted toward transportation
> > projects. So who does Obama pick for Sec of
> > Transportation? A particularly pork-loving
> > republican that will probably divert the money
> > into bullshit. That way the administration can
> > say it is "bi-partisan" when it really includes
> > like-minded republicans who love pork as much
> as
> > their demokrat colleagues.
>
>
> Boy oh boy...I hope Tax Hater has better friends
> then you...you make him and you sound even more
> cynical I am....and no one...no one should be more
> cynical then I am. And of course I will voice an
> opinion on his source...he said all the MSM is
> carrying these "facts". If he comes back with the
> likes of O'Reilly...Limbaugh...Colter..I will
> definatley criticise. Guess what..if I dont think
> the article says what he says it says...I will
> critise. All my options remain open....notice
> however,..it's been 10 hours...and still no
> article.

Notice how you didn't accept the challenge for over 10 hours. I asked you questions 10 hours ago, now you decide to attempt to answer them. So, will you recant your nonsense with a link?

BTW, it is thAn, not thEn when you are comparing two things. You do it too often for it to be a typo.

OK, Vince(1), here you go. It isn't an article it is the same original source document I linked to before. http://finance.senate.gov/press/Bpress/2009press/prb011309d.pdf

Read the top of page 4 where it says "Mr. Geithner included payments to overnight camps in his dependent care computations for years 2001, 2004, and 2005. The accountant who prepared his 2006 tax return apprised him that payments to overnight camps were not allowable expenses for the purposes of the credit but he did not file amended returns at the time to correct the prior years."

He eventually paid these taxes even though he knew he owed them. He waited until he was nominated to be Treasury Secretary to pay them. Do you think he would have paid them had he not been nominated? If you believe that, why did he not pay them when his accountant told them the deductions were improper? Not to mention, thinking you can count overnight camp costs as deductions is either intentionally deceptive or moronic on the scale of belonging in Melwood. Nobody with half a brain who is trying to fill out tax forms honestly would make this "mistake."

This document was prepared by the staff of Democratic Chairman Max Bachus.

Ok...I read it....no one has ever denied the fact that Mr Geitner failed to pay taxes. I have no doubts that at a different time his nomination would be dead on arrival...but these are differnt times..and Mr Geltner is in the unusual position of having the confidence of the president, both parties in Congress and the the banking community. And confidence is in very short supply.

The reference you provided is a very good summary of the facts. However it is not designed to address the issue of motivation. You certainly have the strong opinion that his actions are yet just another example of an arrogant politician who beleives he is above the law. I am sure Mr Geithner would give a kinder and gentler explanation. And to date the MSM is willing to give him the same benefit of doubt. I have never known the IRS to cut anyone slack..they are fair but firm. If they are succumbing to political pressure from Obama, that is very serious....and may constitute abuse of power. No one outside the fringe of radical Obama bashers see the seeds of such abuse of power in the president elect...I don't..you do..time will tell! If you are right, this wont be the last instance and a pattern of abuse of power will surface in time for you and me to vote against him in 4 years..a yet another failed amerikan president...let's hope not.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ok...I read it....no one has ever denied the fact
> that Mr Geitner failed to pay taxes. I have no
> doubts that at a different time his nomination
> would be dead on arrival...but these are differnt
> times..and Mr Geltner is in the unusual position
> of having the confidence of the president, both
> parties in Congress and the the banking community.
> And confidence is in very short supply.
>
> The reference you provided is a very good summary
> of the facts. However it is not designed to
> address the issue of motivation. You certainly
> have the strong opinion that his actions are yet
> just another example of an arrogant politician who
> beleives he is above the law. I am sure Mr
> Geithner would give a kinder and gentler
> explanation. And to date the MSM is willing to
> give him the same benefit of doubt. I have never
> known the IRS to cut anyone slack..they are fair
> but firm. If they are succumbing to political
> pressure from Obama, that is very serious....and
> may constitute abuse of power. No one outside the
> fringe of radical Obama bashers see the seeds of
> such abuse of power in the president elect...I
> don't..you do..time will tell! If you are right,
> this wont be the last instance and a pattern of
> abuse of power will surface in time for you and me
> to vote against him in 4 years..a yet another
> failed amerikan president...let's hope not.

I understand that you are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I also understand that confidence is lacking in DC. However, do you agree that his actions are either grossly stupid or grossly arrogant? You have read the report and you have seen the articles. Is this the absolute best man that could be nominated for the job? During the Bush administration, the right time, right person argument was thrown about constantly. We are at the beginning of something new with President-Elect Obama. This is a nation of great minds, is Tim Geithner the ONLY person to lead us out of our situation? If you honestly believe so, I think you are selling this nation short.

Tax hater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We are at the beginning of something new with
> President-Elect Obama. This is a nation of great
> minds, is Tim Geithner the ONLY person to lead us
> out of our situation? If you honestly believe so,
> I think you are selling this nation short.


I'd support Joseph Stiglitz as the nominee. He's the one who predicted this current financial meltdown, after all.

> I understand that you are willing to give him the
> benefit of the doubt. I also understand that
> confidence is lacking in DC. However, do you
> agree that his actions are either grossly stupid
> or grossly arrogant? You have read the report and
> you have seen the articles. Is this the absolute
> best man that could be nominated for the job?
> During the Bush administration, the right time,
> right person argument was thrown about constantly.
> We are at the beginning of something new with
> President-Elect Obama. This is a nation of great
> minds, is Tim Geithner the ONLY person to lead us
> out of our situation? If you honestly believe so,
> I think you are selling this nation short.


Yes..I agree..there is a every reason to think the man should not be doing his own taxes...that he should listen to the advise of tax advisors..that if he is going to do his own taxes he needs to take more time to do them right. If he disagrees with the tax policy he needs to seperate his protest from the act of paying what is due. The gentlemen deserves close monitoring.