SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Donald Trump... Leaker-in-Chief?
Donald Trump and his associates have spent much of the past year deflecting questions about Trump's stubborn refusal to release his taxes. What is Trump hiding? Embarrassing business relationships in Russia or elsewhere? Debts that might indicate conflicts of interest? Or maybe this billionaire's tax payments have been embarrassingly meager. Or maybe Trump's fortune - like his inaugural crowd and his stubby hands - isn't nearly as big as he'd like us to believe.
Mar 15, 2017
Donald Trump and his associates have spent much of the past year deflecting questions about Trump's stubborn refusal to release his taxes. What is Trump hiding? Embarrassing business relationships in Russia or elsewhere? Debts that might indicate conflicts of interest? Or maybe this billionaire's tax payments have been embarrassingly meager. Or maybe Trump's fortune - like his inaugural crowd and his stubby hands - isn't nearly as big as he'd like us to believe.
So, when MSNBC's Rachel Maddow announced on Tuesday that "we've got Donald Trump's tax returns," and that she would share them on Tuesday's edition of The Rachel Maddow Show, the buzz among eager left-wingers was deafening. Finally, the truth about Trump would be revealed.
After an excruciatingly long set up, Ms. Maddow (and her guest, the journalist David Cay Johnston) shared two pages of Donald Trump's 2005 federal tax return. These two pages, it turns out, are not very revealing. The return includes nothing especially incriminating and it indicates that, in 2005, Trump paid $35.5 million in taxes on $152.7 million in income -- roughly a 24% tax rate. (You'll recall that Mitt Romney took a political hit when his long-awaited tax returns revealed that he paid just 14% of his income in federal taxes in 2011.) One could almost hear the sighs of disappointment across social media.
These two pages were sent anonymously to Mr. Johnston, a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter who has written extensively on the ways in which rich people avoid taxes (most notably in his terrific book, Perfectly Legal.)
So, what's going on? I strongly suspect that these two pages were sent to Mr. Johnston by someone in the Trump camp. Why? I am dead sure that, most years, Trump pays virtually no tax, and I strongly suspect that his unabridged tax returns would reveal all sorts of things Trump doesn't want us to know. In 2005--for whatever reason--he paid taxes at a rate that, while appallingly low, is way higher than anyone expected. So, this cherry-picked morsel of tax info seems to suggest that, maybe, regarding Trump's taxes there has been much ado about little. (This is like someone anonymously sending to a journalist one of George W. Bush's college papers, a paper on which W happened to earn a B+; or someone sharing a short video of Rick Perry in which he does not say something idiotic. In each of these cases, the implication is deceptive.)
The next step: Trump's people will complain that the revelation of Trump's tax return is an appalling invasion by the spiteful anti-Trump media--aided and abetted, once again, by criminal leakers. Even still, they will assert, these two (improperly obtained) pages "show" that Trump (a) is, indeed, a very rich guy ($150 million in income!) and (b) pays his taxes. All of the speculation to the contrary? Fake news!! And Team Trump will act dismayed and morally outraged whenever they're asked about Trump's taxes.
Indeed, they've already started. The White House has declared that the revelation of these two pages by the "dishonest media" is "illegal." Donald Trump Jr. tweeted: "Thank you Rachel Maddow for proving to your #Trump hating followers how successful @realDonaldTrump is & that he paid $40mm in taxes!"
Leakers? Pay no attention to that orange man behind the curtain!
When and if we actually see Donald Trump's tax history, it will inevitably show that he has been dodging taxes brilliantly and scandalously for his entire life--except, for some reason, in 2005. And I suspect that we will learn that he is not as rich as his $150 million income in 2005 suggests.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Tim Koechlin
Tim Koechlin holds a PhD in economics. He is the Director of the International Studies Program at Vassar College, where he has an appointment in International Studies and Urban Studies. Professor Koechlin has taught and written about a variety of subjects including economic, political and racial inequality; globalization; macroeconomic policy, and urban political economy.
Donald Trump and his associates have spent much of the past year deflecting questions about Trump's stubborn refusal to release his taxes. What is Trump hiding? Embarrassing business relationships in Russia or elsewhere? Debts that might indicate conflicts of interest? Or maybe this billionaire's tax payments have been embarrassingly meager. Or maybe Trump's fortune - like his inaugural crowd and his stubby hands - isn't nearly as big as he'd like us to believe.
So, when MSNBC's Rachel Maddow announced on Tuesday that "we've got Donald Trump's tax returns," and that she would share them on Tuesday's edition of The Rachel Maddow Show, the buzz among eager left-wingers was deafening. Finally, the truth about Trump would be revealed.
After an excruciatingly long set up, Ms. Maddow (and her guest, the journalist David Cay Johnston) shared two pages of Donald Trump's 2005 federal tax return. These two pages, it turns out, are not very revealing. The return includes nothing especially incriminating and it indicates that, in 2005, Trump paid $35.5 million in taxes on $152.7 million in income -- roughly a 24% tax rate. (You'll recall that Mitt Romney took a political hit when his long-awaited tax returns revealed that he paid just 14% of his income in federal taxes in 2011.) One could almost hear the sighs of disappointment across social media.
These two pages were sent anonymously to Mr. Johnston, a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter who has written extensively on the ways in which rich people avoid taxes (most notably in his terrific book, Perfectly Legal.)
So, what's going on? I strongly suspect that these two pages were sent to Mr. Johnston by someone in the Trump camp. Why? I am dead sure that, most years, Trump pays virtually no tax, and I strongly suspect that his unabridged tax returns would reveal all sorts of things Trump doesn't want us to know. In 2005--for whatever reason--he paid taxes at a rate that, while appallingly low, is way higher than anyone expected. So, this cherry-picked morsel of tax info seems to suggest that, maybe, regarding Trump's taxes there has been much ado about little. (This is like someone anonymously sending to a journalist one of George W. Bush's college papers, a paper on which W happened to earn a B+; or someone sharing a short video of Rick Perry in which he does not say something idiotic. In each of these cases, the implication is deceptive.)
The next step: Trump's people will complain that the revelation of Trump's tax return is an appalling invasion by the spiteful anti-Trump media--aided and abetted, once again, by criminal leakers. Even still, they will assert, these two (improperly obtained) pages "show" that Trump (a) is, indeed, a very rich guy ($150 million in income!) and (b) pays his taxes. All of the speculation to the contrary? Fake news!! And Team Trump will act dismayed and morally outraged whenever they're asked about Trump's taxes.
Indeed, they've already started. The White House has declared that the revelation of these two pages by the "dishonest media" is "illegal." Donald Trump Jr. tweeted: "Thank you Rachel Maddow for proving to your #Trump hating followers how successful @realDonaldTrump is & that he paid $40mm in taxes!"
Leakers? Pay no attention to that orange man behind the curtain!
When and if we actually see Donald Trump's tax history, it will inevitably show that he has been dodging taxes brilliantly and scandalously for his entire life--except, for some reason, in 2005. And I suspect that we will learn that he is not as rich as his $150 million income in 2005 suggests.
Tim Koechlin
Tim Koechlin holds a PhD in economics. He is the Director of the International Studies Program at Vassar College, where he has an appointment in International Studies and Urban Studies. Professor Koechlin has taught and written about a variety of subjects including economic, political and racial inequality; globalization; macroeconomic policy, and urban political economy.
Donald Trump and his associates have spent much of the past year deflecting questions about Trump's stubborn refusal to release his taxes. What is Trump hiding? Embarrassing business relationships in Russia or elsewhere? Debts that might indicate conflicts of interest? Or maybe this billionaire's tax payments have been embarrassingly meager. Or maybe Trump's fortune - like his inaugural crowd and his stubby hands - isn't nearly as big as he'd like us to believe.
So, when MSNBC's Rachel Maddow announced on Tuesday that "we've got Donald Trump's tax returns," and that she would share them on Tuesday's edition of The Rachel Maddow Show, the buzz among eager left-wingers was deafening. Finally, the truth about Trump would be revealed.
After an excruciatingly long set up, Ms. Maddow (and her guest, the journalist David Cay Johnston) shared two pages of Donald Trump's 2005 federal tax return. These two pages, it turns out, are not very revealing. The return includes nothing especially incriminating and it indicates that, in 2005, Trump paid $35.5 million in taxes on $152.7 million in income -- roughly a 24% tax rate. (You'll recall that Mitt Romney took a political hit when his long-awaited tax returns revealed that he paid just 14% of his income in federal taxes in 2011.) One could almost hear the sighs of disappointment across social media.
These two pages were sent anonymously to Mr. Johnston, a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter who has written extensively on the ways in which rich people avoid taxes (most notably in his terrific book, Perfectly Legal.)
So, what's going on? I strongly suspect that these two pages were sent to Mr. Johnston by someone in the Trump camp. Why? I am dead sure that, most years, Trump pays virtually no tax, and I strongly suspect that his unabridged tax returns would reveal all sorts of things Trump doesn't want us to know. In 2005--for whatever reason--he paid taxes at a rate that, while appallingly low, is way higher than anyone expected. So, this cherry-picked morsel of tax info seems to suggest that, maybe, regarding Trump's taxes there has been much ado about little. (This is like someone anonymously sending to a journalist one of George W. Bush's college papers, a paper on which W happened to earn a B+; or someone sharing a short video of Rick Perry in which he does not say something idiotic. In each of these cases, the implication is deceptive.)
The next step: Trump's people will complain that the revelation of Trump's tax return is an appalling invasion by the spiteful anti-Trump media--aided and abetted, once again, by criminal leakers. Even still, they will assert, these two (improperly obtained) pages "show" that Trump (a) is, indeed, a very rich guy ($150 million in income!) and (b) pays his taxes. All of the speculation to the contrary? Fake news!! And Team Trump will act dismayed and morally outraged whenever they're asked about Trump's taxes.
Indeed, they've already started. The White House has declared that the revelation of these two pages by the "dishonest media" is "illegal." Donald Trump Jr. tweeted: "Thank you Rachel Maddow for proving to your #Trump hating followers how successful @realDonaldTrump is & that he paid $40mm in taxes!"
Leakers? Pay no attention to that orange man behind the curtain!
When and if we actually see Donald Trump's tax history, it will inevitably show that he has been dodging taxes brilliantly and scandalously for his entire life--except, for some reason, in 2005. And I suspect that we will learn that he is not as rich as his $150 million income in 2005 suggests.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.