If you're on the fence and still not sure whether to vote for Obama or Romney, perhaps this latest piece of information might help you make up your mind. Remember when Harry Reid claimed that he had solid proof that the GOP hopeful hadn't paid taxes for many years? Remember how some folks were skeptical about that, believing Reid was just grandstanding for show? Turns out he was right.

Bloomberg broke the story late Sunday night, with a story published around 11pm Central Time which gives an in-depth explanation of Romney's legal tax evasion since 1996. His tax avoidance was completely legal, although most hardworking Americans might question its ethical qualities. As President Obama said in the second debate, the GOP candidate paid less money in taxes than people earning less than $30,000 per year. How can that happen? Well, up until 1997, if you were rich, you could "rent" non-profit status from your favorite charity.

Huh? How can an individual rent tax-exempt status from a charity? It's pretty intricate, but the way it worked was, in Mitt's case, he used the Mormon church as a tax shelter by setting up a Charitable Remainder Unitrust (CRUT), that paid him a specific amount of money per year from dividends while also donating the smallest amount possible to the church.

http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981730200

The Bloomberg article is the best reference. Yes, It is very sleazy.
The title of this thread is BS though. Romney seems to have paid
taxes. He just used this outrageous slimy loophole and does not
want to talk about it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-29/romney-avoids-taxes-via-loophole-cutting-mormon-donations.html

Romney Avoids Taxes via Loophole Cutting Mormon Donations
By Jesse Drucker - Oct 29, 2012 12:01 AM ET

In 1997, Congress cracked down on a popular tax shelter that allowed rich people to take advantage of the exempt status of charities without actually giving away much money.

Individuals who had already set up these vehicles were allowed to keep them. That included Mitt Romney, then the chief executive officer of Bain Capital, who had just established such an arrangement in June 1996.

The charitable remainder unitrust, as it is known, is one of several strategies Romney has adopted over his career to reduce his tax bill. While Romney’s tax avoidance is legal and common among high-net-worth individuals, it has become an issue in the campaign. President Barack Obama attacked him in their second debate for paying “lower tax rates than somebody who makes a lot less.”

In this instance, Romney used the tax-exempt status of a charity -- the Mormon Church, according to a 2007 filing -- to defer taxes for more than 15 years. At the same time he is benefiting, the trust will probably leave the church with less than what current law requires, according to tax returns obtained by Bloomberg this month through a Freedom of Information Act request.

In general, charities don’t owe capital gains taxes when they sell assets for a profit. Trusts like Romney’s permit funders to benefit from that tax-free treatment, said Jonathan Blattmachr, a trusts and estates lawyer who set up hundreds of such vehicles in the 1990s.

Near Zero

“The main benefit from a charitable remainder trust is the renting from your favorite charity of its exemption from taxation,” Blattmachr said. Despite the name, giving a gift or getting a charitable deduction “is just a throwaway,” he said. “I used to structure them so the value dedicated to charity was as close to zero as possible without being zero.”

When individuals fund a charitable remainder unitrust, or “CRUT,” they defer capital gains taxes on any profit from the sale of the assets, and receive a small upfront charitable deduction and a stream of yearly cash payments. Like an individual retirement account, the trust allows money to grow tax deferred, while like an annuity it also pays Romney a steady income. After the funder’s death, the trust’s remaining assets go to a designated charity.

Romney’s CRUT, which is only a small part of the $250 million that Romney’s campaign cites as his net worth, has been paying him 8 percent of its assets each year. As the Romneys have received these payments, the money that will potentially be left for charity has declined from at least $750,000 in 2001 to $421,203 at the end of 2011.

Tax Returns

The Romney campaign declined to answer written questions about the trust.

“The trust has operated in accordance with the law,” Michele Davis, a campaign spokeswoman, said in an e-mail.

If it were not so pathetic I would laugh when I see his political ads wailing against the deficit.

Romney is not the cure he is the illness.

Charlie is the tax cheat.
He still got voted back in.
How stupid is dat?

Get real, lol, all of Washington is corrupt. Romney is not the only one, they all do it. Washington needs to be vacated and new members be brought in. I'm not talking presidents, I mean everyone.

Funny I didn't see where it said he paid no taxes.
Guess he must be one of the "47%ers"
Wonder if he will vote for Obama then?

Good for Mitt! How many poor people pay nothing but get hand outs?

Gov. Romney released copies of his tax returns, and the claim that he didn't pay taxes is an outright lie.

Copies of tax returns are not indicative at all.

What the people need to see are copies of the assessment based on his returns and other sources, and which the tax department sends out as a sort of receipt, with a stamp of approval, or with adjustments in the amounts payable, or with issuances of notices of audits, or with supboneas, or arrest orders.

These are indicative.

I am not saying which Mr. Romani got, because, frankly, I don't know.

What I say instead is that if someone sincerely wants to disclose his income and taxes paid, he needs to publicise his record (or notice) of assessment by the tax department.

I don't think the issue is entirely in the income taxes paid.

The issue is this:

Mr. Romney saved on taxes in ways that were legal, but not ethical.

Whether they were ethical or not, is an undecidable question.

One way of deciding is that he wants Americans to eradicate the deficit, and end the wreckless spending by the house and the government.

He neglects to do CHIP IN WITH HIS OWN FUNDS, HOWERVER. He decidedly paid much less tax than other tax payers in his position.

He is saying, "I want you all to give more, take less, but I give less and take more." If this was not his aim, then he would not have resorted to save huge amounts of taxes to be paid by him.

THIS is not unethical, but it is. It is up to each person to decide, whether he or she wants to hear a voter tell him or her to give more, take less, while the leader has a proven track record of taking more and giving less.

This is what is behind the reports, the taxes paid or not paid. Not the actual amount, but the spirit behind the act, behind the tax payment behaviour of mr. Romney.

"We are all equal before the law, except some of us are more equal than others." This is what he is saying, and this is the exact idea that unveiled the covert hypocracy of communists, and other dictatorial systems.

One more step, and the US is a dictatorship, that's what the tax behaviour of Mr. Romney tells me. Not whether he paid much less taxes than he should have, if he pulled his own weight, or else he did not pay taxes at all.

and you want to tell me now,that ALL of his Earnings went into that one Trust,and that is all the Trust is worth?