Are Trump businesses (and Trump) profiting from the presidency?

[siamese3]

I just thought I would start a separate thread for ethics stuff. Entanglement stuff. Non transparency stuff. I hate getting all serious in katharath's tweets from a lunatic. The new articles about the state department's promotion of Mar-a-lago are top of mind at the moment. Oh yes, also Ivanka & China trademarks.

 

[Dee*Jay]

The short and obvious answer here is YES.

 

[AGBF]

I just thought I would start a separate thread for ethics stuff. Entanglement stuff. Non transparency stuff. I hate getting all serious in katharath's tweets from a lunatic. The new articles about the state department's promotion of Mar-a-lago are top of mind at the moment. Oh yes, also Ivanka & China trademarks.

This topic is too serious for me. I shall boycott this thread. Oh, wait! Too late! I just posted. I shall just have to write ignorant things instead. Luckily you are all used to that.

Deb

 

[AGBF]

The short and obvious answer here is YES.

I like that posting, Dee*Jay. It didn't get too complicated for me to understand. Thank you.

Deb

 

[siamese3]

This topic is too serious for me. I shall boycott this thread. Oh, wait! Too late! I just posted. I shall just have to write ignorant things instead. Luckily you are all used to that.

Deb

Deb, I love your posts! They are always so thoughtful, informative, sometimes funny and so diplomatic. I especially love your sense of humor. Post away!

 

[Calliecake]

Trump wants the corporate tax rate to be decreased to 15%. It currently is 35%. Trump is all about profiting from his presidency.

 

[lovedogs]

YES YES YES YES YES.
OH.
AND.
YYYYEEEEESSSSSSSSSSS

 

[redwood66]

Probably. Though all presidents benefit from their time in office.

 

[arkieb1]

I wrote about the vanity Fair article in the other thread. There was a point to that - the official line is that Barron and Melania will move into the White House once the school year is done, however reports claim they have made no application to any of the schools in the area and that they are costing the US taxpayers approx. $1 million per week for security to protect them while she refuses to move into the White House. I find it fascinating personally that Ivanka the daughter is taking up many of the duties Melania is not doing.

Is Trump profiting? Yes I dare say he is, and he is also helping his rich business buddies wherever he can, changing tax legislation to seemingly create more jobs but at the same time to greatly benefit big business, and clearly rewriting the general rules of the position to suit his own family.

So much for the president representing the common ordinary American. When so many poor and forgotten Americans were cheering after he won the election and he was throwing gala dinners celebrating his win that costed thousands per head, I was sitting back thinking alas they know not what they do, or that so many of them do know but they prefer instead to have tunnel vision and overlook who he is and how he conducts himself.

 

[Dancing Fire]

The short and obvious answer here is YES.

But can he break HRC's record profit as SOTUS?

 

[Kbell]

I find it fascinating personally that Ivanka the daughter is taking up many of the duties Melania is not doing.

Is Trump profiting? Yes I dare say he is, and he is also helping his rich business buddies wherever he can, changing tax legislation to seemingly create more jobs but at the same time to greatly benefit big business, and clearly rewriting the general rules of the position to suit his own family.

So much for the president representing the common ordinary American. When so many poor and forgotten Americans were cheering after he won the election and he was throwing gala dinners celebrating his win that costed thousands per head, I was sitting back thinking alas they know not what they do, or that so many of them do know but they prefer instead to have tunnel vision and overlook who he is and how he conducts himself.

Actually I think Melania IS doing her duty as a mother - which I will say is her 1st and primary duty whether anyone agrees or not.

Tax legislation unfortunately does & has sent companies running overseas & outsourcing. It's like an epidemic. I HATE calling any large company now and avoid it if at all possible because I will get lost in automation and when I do get someone 99% of the time they are not located in this country - I ask. I'm not saying Trump doesn't benefit from his presidency. Every president has but I don't think he's trying to rewrite tax law simply to suit himself either.

 

[t-c]

Probably. Though all presidents benefit from their time in office.

But usually not until they leave the office. Trump is benefiting while he is in office because he has NOT divested his assets nor put them in a blind trust unlike all the other presidents before him, some of whom were also very rich.

 

[t-c]

Actually I think Melania IS doing her duty as a mother - which I will say is her 1st and primary duty whether anyone agrees or not.

Tax legislation unfortunately does & has sent companies running overseas & outsourcing. It's like an epidemic. I HATE calling any large company now and avoid it if at all possible because I will get lost in automation and when I do get someone 99% of the time they are not located in this country - I ask. I'm not saying Trump doesn't benefit from his presidency. Every president has but I don't think he's trying to rewrite tax law simply to suit himself either.

How would we know? We have no idea which part of the tax code he's taken advantage of because he hasn't released his taxes.

But can he break HRC's record profit as SOTUS?

What record profit and what is your source?

 

[Kbell]

How would we know? We have no idea which part of the tax code he's taken advantage of because he hasn't released his taxes.

Well we don't know for sure... that's why I said "I don't think". Taking advantage of tax breaks is not illegal and something each & every one of us does including myself. If a corporation, any corporation, doesn't take advantage of those incentives they would be doing themselves & their shareholders a disservice.

 

[arkieb1]

I doubt the full extent of his incompetence and level of self interest whilst in office will be revealed until he leaves.

 

[Tekate]

I just thought I would start a separate thread for ethics stuff. Entanglement stuff. Non transparency stuff. I hate getting all serious in katharath's tweets from a lunatic. The new articles about the state department's promotion of Mar-a-lago are top of mind at the moment. Oh yes, also Ivanka & China trademarks.

Yes Yes Yes

 

[Tekate]

But can he break HRC's record profit as SOTUS?

Proof dahling..

 

[t-c]

Well we don't know for sure... that's why I said "I don't think". Taking advantage of tax breaks is not illegal and something each & every one of us does including myself. If a corporation, any corporation, doesn't take advantage of those incentives they would be doing themselves & their shareholders a disservice.

I'm not faulting Trump for taking advantage of the tax code before he was elected president. The issue is the very real possibility of the current tax code being changed in such a way as to benefit him/his company -- and the only way to know for sure is to see his previous tax returns.

In this situation, "we don't know for sure" is not a defense against that charge that he is ethically compromised. The simple fact that "we don't know for sure" suggests that Trump is ethically compromised, because ethics rules requires transparency.

 

[Kbell]

I'm not faulting Trump for taking advantage of the tax code before he was elected president. The issue is the very real possibility of the current tax code being changed in such a way as to benefit him/his company -- and the only way to know for sure is to see his previous tax returns.

In this situation, "we don't know for sure" is not a defense against that charge that he is ethically compromised. The simple fact that "we don't know for sure" suggests that Trump is ethically compromised, because ethics rules requires transparency.

While I agree seeing his actual tax return, for transparency & for those competent enough to read them, will show what tax breaks his company benefitted from; I don't agree that changing any tax laws in favor of keeping business here is solely for his own benefit. It may very well benefit his or his families companies somehow but if the greater outcome is keeping more companies & more jobs here are we supposed to reject those changes, ignoring all the other good it does because of this? Take the stance that if Trump benefits in any way shape or form it should be voted down regardless of all else? That's the part I do not agree with. If a tax incentive was proposed that gave a greater break to those who do not outsource, or is limiting how much they can outsource to qualify, I would be all for it whether Trump's companies benefit or not.

 

[AGBF]

Fees for joining Mar-a-Lago doubled. That is a Trump business that benefits from the Trump presidency.

Link...http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/25/mar-a-lago-membership-fee-doubles-to-200000.html

 

[Calliecake]

Actually I think Melania IS doing her duty as a mother - which I will say is her 1st and primary duty whether anyone agrees or not.

Tax legislation unfortunately does & has sent companies running overseas & outsourcing. It's like an epidemic. I HATE calling any large company now and avoid it if at all possible because I will get lost in automation and when I do get someone 99% of the time they are not located in this country - I ask. I'm not saying Trump doesn't benefit from his presidency. Every president has but I don't think he's trying to rewrite tax law simply to suit himself either.

He would like to change the Corporate Tax law to 15% vs the 35% it currently is. You are delusional if you don't think he would not benefit from this. Keep burying your head in the sand. SMDH

There are many conflicts of interest. It amazes me the amount of people who are just getting by that think Trump is looking out for their best interests. Keep telling yourself that Trump and his cabinet of billionaires know all about your day to day life.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I don't care about his tax returns if he can bring jobs back to U.S. Showing his tax returns does not solve our problems here in the U.S. nor abroad.

 

[Kbell]

He would like to change the Corporate Tax law to 15% vs the 35% it currently is. You are delusional if you don't think he would not benefit from this. Keep burying your head in the sand. SMDH

There are many conflicts of interest. It amazes me the amount of people who are just getting by that think Trump is looking out for their best interests. Keep telling yourself that Trump and his cabinet of billionaires know all about your day to day life.

LOL - I love how judgmental people get when you say one thing. I NEVER said he won't benefit, did I? I also never said I thought he or anyone else in his cabinet has a clue about my daily life and quite frankly neither do you, you know nothing about my life. I also think I made mature comments that didn't make assumptions about other posters or insult them in any way unlike yourself. So keep shaking your damn head... certainly doesn't impact my life. Although politics can be a touchy subject, it amazes me how quickly people try to make things personal & insult you instead of just having a healthy debate. What a boring world this would be if everyone agreed with my every idea.

 

[Dancing Fire]

He would like to change the Corporate Tax law to 15% vs the 35% it currently is. You are delusional if you don't think he would not benefit from this. Keep burying your head in the sand. SMDH

The record high stock market is in agreement with him.

 

[t-c]

While I agree seeing his actual tax return, for transparency & for those competent enough to read them, will show what tax breaks his company benefitted from; I don't agree that changing any tax laws in favor of keeping business here is solely for his own benefit. It may very well benefit his or his families companies somehow but if the greater outcome is keeping more companies & more jobs here are we supposed to reject those changes, ignoring all the other good it does because of this? Take the stance that if Trump benefits in any way shape or form it should be voted down regardless of all else? That's the part I do not agree with. If a tax incentive was proposed that gave a greater break to those who do not outsource, or is limiting how much they can outsource to qualify, I would be all for it whether Trump's companies benefit or not.

That is not my stance. My point is that we are basically blind to his conflicts of interests when it comes to the tax code because he still has not released his tax returns. And to give him a pass right away is abdicating our responsibility as citizens to guard against possible corruption.

I don't care if one or more changes of the tax code benefits Trump. But I do care if the changes systematically benefit him. Trump campaigned as someone who would represent the forgotten man -- those are not millionaire real estate developers.

Frankly, I think the fact that we are even arguing this is ridiculous. Trump should have divested all his business holdings and put his money in a blind trust -- as all other presidents had done before him -- so that there is no question of impropriety. Instead we are arguing semantics.

 

[Kbell]

That is not my stance. My point is that we are basically blind to his conflicts of interests when it comes to the tax code because he still has not released his tax returns. And to give him a pass right away is abdicating our responsibility as citizens to guard against possible corruption.

I don't care if one or more changes of the tax code benefits Trump. But I do care if the changes systematically benefit him. Trump campaigned as someone who would represent the forgotten man -- those are not millionaire real estate developers.

Frankly, I think the fact that we are even arguing this is ridiculous. Trump should have divested all his business holdings and put his money in a blind trust -- as all other presidents had done before him -- so that there is no question of impropriety. Instead we are arguing semantics.

I agree with the last part about the blind trust... But I also think helping corporate America stay in America actually does help the forgotten man, so I wish someone would come up with benefits/incentives for keeping business & jobs right here.

 

[t-c]

I agree with the last part about the blind trust... But I also think helping corporate America stay in America actually does help the forgotten man, so I wish someone would come up with benefits/incentives for keeping business & jobs right here.

It is arguable that cutting taxes from 35% to 15% would make corporations stay or come back to the US. First of all, with all the loopholes, many corporations pay way less than 35% and the biggest ones do not pay any at all (I have a few friends whose job is to figure out how to move assets and inventory to reduce all taxes to nil). If that is the case, the US would be competing against a 0% tax rate.

Second of all, it is not a given that reducing taxes on corporations result in more jobs and higher pay (with the exception of higher top executive pay) because companies will only hire more people if they need to produce more. And they will not pay more to their employees unless competition for people force them to.

Do you know what actually drives the economy forward resulting in more jobs? Tax cuts to the middle class and poor. Because when the large middle class and poor have money, they spend it. This increases demand that companies want to meet, so they will want to produce more which results in hiring, which will result in competition for talent which results in higher wages and it spirals up from there until inflation (among other things) slows or stops it.

So it's actually the other way around: helping the forgotten man helps corporate America.

BTW, the whole trickle-down economics philosophy has been proven to be unsound -- just look at the Kansas experiment.

 

[partgypsy]

Probably. Though all presidents benefit from their time in office.

Lincoln didn't do so great.

 

[Kbell]

It is arguable that cutting taxes from 35% to 15% would make corporations stay or come back to the US. First of all, with all the loopholes, many corporations pay way less than 35% and the biggest ones do not pay any at all (I have a few friends whose job is to figure out how to move assets and inventory to reduce all taxes to nil). If that is the case, the US would be competing against a 0% tax rate.

Second of all, it is not a given that reducing taxes on corporations result in more jobs and higher pay (with the exception of higher top executive pay) because companies will only hire more people if they need to produce more. And they will not pay more to their employees unless competition for people force them to.

Do you know what actually drives the economy forward resulting in more jobs? Tax cuts to the middle class and poor. Because when the large middle class and poor have money, they spend it. This increases demand that companies want to meet, so they will want to produce more which results in hiring, which will result in competition for talent which results in higher wages and it spirals up from there until inflation (among other things) slows or stops it.

So it's actually the other way around: helping the forgotten man helps corporate America.

BTW, the whole trickle-down economics philosophy has been proven to be unsound -- just look at the Kansas experiment.

I agree there are a lot of variables and unknowns. I'm not saying give corp America a tax break and not everyone else too. I don't know the exact answer but I'd love to see jobs come back. There are plenty of jobs being done overseas by American companies that could be done right here - it's not hiring more bodies to do produce more, it's moving the current workload back. If there is no incentive to move the work back, they won't, why would they? Customer service jobs sourced overseas don't produce a product or more product, they support one. Those support jobs can easily be done here if there were financial incentive to do so.

 

[redwood66]

Lincoln didn't do so great.

Well you got me there. Correction - modern presidents. Though Kennedy did not benefit in the end either.