W
T
F

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012...enses.html

Quote:The Romney campaign hasn't spelled out what kind of tax deductions it wants to close in order to pay for lower headline income tax rates, but perhaps something related to horses could do the trick:


As millions tune into the Olympics in prime time this summer, just before Mr. Romney will be reintroducing himself to the nation at the Republican convention, viewers are likely to see “up close and personal” segments on NBC about the Romneys and dressage, a sport of six-figure horses and $1,000 saddles. The Romneys declared a loss of $77,000 on their 2010 tax returns for the share in the care and feeding of Rafalca, which Mrs. Romney owns with Mr. Ebeling’s wife, Amy, and a family friend, Beth Meyers.

It's of course true that curbing the deductibility of expenses related to the care and feeding of dressage horses might inhibit investment in the critical dressage sector of the economy. But I'm skeptical that incentivizing capital formation in this particular area is all that vital to the long-term prosperity of the country.

Jealous much?

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

Romney's not getting the same deal GE did. How fair is that?

If it's legal, it's fine.

Considering the Kennedy clan got their start as bootlegging gangsters...................if you don't like the tax code call Congress.

(06-19-2012 11:06 AM)Max Power Wrote:  W
T
F

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012...enses.html

Quote:The Romney campaign hasn't spelled out what kind of tax deductions it wants to close in order to pay for lower headline income tax rates, but perhaps something related to horses could do the trick:


As millions tune into the Olympics in prime time this summer, just before Mr. Romney will be reintroducing himself to the nation at the Republican convention, viewers are likely to see “up close and personal” segments on NBC about the Romneys and dressage, a sport of six-figure horses and $1,000 saddles. The Romneys declared a loss of $77,000 on their 2010 tax returns for the share in the care and feeding of Rafalca, which Mrs. Romney owns with Mr. Ebeling’s wife, Amy, and a family friend, Beth Meyers.

It's of course true that curbing the deductibility of expenses related to the care and feeding of dressage horses might inhibit investment in the critical dressage sector of the economy. But I'm skeptical that incentivizing capital formation in this particular area is all that vital to the long-term prosperity of the country.

So I guess you're saying that business should not be able to write off losses? Or should the government be in the business of deciding which businesses can lose money and deduct and which can not *cough* fascism *cough*

And I say this as someone who will not be voting for mittens this November..

If its legal who the **** cares?

Biden bills the ******* secret service rent at one of his homes, I guess you clowns don't care to comment on that?

(06-19-2012 11:50 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 11:06 AM)Max Power Wrote:  W
T
F

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012...enses.html

Quote:The Romney campaign hasn't spelled out what kind of tax deductions it wants to close in order to pay for lower headline income tax rates, but perhaps something related to horses could do the trick:


As millions tune into the Olympics in prime time this summer, just before Mr. Romney will be reintroducing himself to the nation at the Republican convention, viewers are likely to see “up close and personal” segments on NBC about the Romneys and dressage, a sport of six-figure horses and $1,000 saddles. The Romneys declared a loss of $77,000 on their 2010 tax returns for the share in the care and feeding of Rafalca, which Mrs. Romney owns with Mr. Ebeling’s wife, Amy, and a family friend, Beth Meyers.

It's of course true that curbing the deductibility of expenses related to the care and feeding of dressage horses might inhibit investment in the critical dressage sector of the economy. But I'm skeptical that incentivizing capital formation in this particular area is all that vital to the long-term prosperity of the country.

So I guess you're saying that business should not be able to write off losses? Or should the government be in the business of deciding which businesses can lose money and deduct and which can not *cough* fascism *cough*

And I say this as someone who will not be voting for mittens this November..

Why should a business be able write off their losses? I thought you guys were for capitalism and accountability?

(06-19-2012 11:06 AM)Max Power Wrote:  W
T
F

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012...enses.html

Quote:The Romney campaign hasn't spelled out what kind of tax deductions it wants to close in order to pay for lower headline income tax rates, but perhaps something related to horses could do the trick:


As millions tune into the Olympics in prime time this summer, just before Mr. Romney will be reintroducing himself to the nation at the Republican convention, viewers are likely to see “up close and personal” segments on NBC about the Romneys and dressage, a sport of six-figure horses and $1,000 saddles. The Romneys declared a loss of $77,000 on their 2010 tax returns for the share in the care and feeding of Rafalca, which Mrs. Romney owns with Mr. Ebeling’s wife, Amy, and a family friend, Beth Meyers.

It's of course true that curbing the deductibility of expenses related to the care and feeding of dressage horses might inhibit investment in the critical dressage sector of the economy. But I'm skeptical that incentivizing capital formation in this particular area is all that vital to the long-term prosperity of the country.

Instead of wasting time being critical of someone taking a legal tax deduction, why don't you instead try to find out who got such a deduction inserted into the tax code? Let's put the blame where it belongs.

It's call dressage. You must have gone to state school.

(06-19-2012 11:58 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Why should a business be able write off their losses? I thought you guys were for capitalism and accountability?

What the hell does that have to do with anything? Why do they get to write off losses? Because they get taxed on profit, idiot.

I have a problem with calling this a business (and more broadly, the tax code that allows him to get away with this). If this is a business, then I should be able to enter my dog in a talent show and write off the kibble and vet bills.

The problem is this is in a legal gray area. The question for the IRS as I understand it is whether Mitt Romney honestly is doing this to make a profit (otherwise it's a hobby). I suspect that this is a sham (and he basically admitted as much by saying it's therapeutic for his wife with MS), but the IRS probably decided that it's not worth the effort to take Romney to court and fight his army of tax lawyers over a $70,000 deduction to probe into his intentions. Damn lawyers.

(06-19-2012 12:04 PM)Max Power Wrote:  I have a problem with calling this a business (and more broadly, the tax code that allows him to get away with this). If this is a business, then I should be able to enter my dog in a talent show and write off the kibble and vet bills.

The tax code is blind to the type of investment. And, if your dog were a show dog and you formed a DBA or other business entity *YOU COULD* write it off.

The Olympics is not exactly 'a talent show'. Athletes write off training expenses all the time, so do sponsors. You don't think when a race car wrecks that gets written off?

Quote:The problem is this is in a legal gray area.

No, the problem is you *want* it to be a gray area. Is this horse for Romney's personal use? does he ride it in shows? Does he spend money on it and share in prize money / breeding fees... Sure sounds like a business to me..

This is not a pet horse that his kids ride, nice try.

Quote:The question for the IRS as I understand it is whether Mitt Romney honestly is doing this to make a profit (otherwise it's a hobby).

I would be more than willing to be if he is writing off 77K in losses, and employing a rider, that there is little question this is a financial investment. You can start business and invest in assets that personally interest you.

Quote:I suspect that this is a sham (and he basically admitted as much by saying it's therapeutic for his wife with MS)

What does it helping his wife deal with MS have anything to do with it being a sham? would you be happier if it was written off as a medical expense?

Quote:but the IRS probably decided that it's not worth the effort to take Romney to court and fight his army of tax lawyers over a $70,000 deduction to probe into his intentions.

Because they have no case.

Quote:IRS CODE:

The determination whether an activity is engaged in for profit is to be made by reference to objective standards, taking into account all of the facts and circumstances of each case. Although a reasonable expectation of profit is not required, the facts and circumstances must indicate that the taxpayer entered into the activity, or continued the activity, with the objective of making a profit. In determining whether such an objective exists, it may be sufficient that there is a small chance of making a large profit. Thus it may be found that an investor in a wildcat oil well who incurs very substantial expenditures is in the venture for profit even though the expectation of a profit might be considered unreasonable. In determining whether an activity is engaged in for profit, greater weight is given to objective facts than to the taxpayer's mere statement of his intent.

26 CFR § 1.183-2(a).

If my wife finds baking therapeutic... ohh how I wish... and we decide to start up a small catering business to both engage in something she likes, and bring in some extra money should I be able to deduct expenses related to it?

Romney's horse in in the Olympics and I have to assume that breeding fees are good for that caliber of horse. Clearly there is a Small Chance of making a large profit here.

This is about you hating on Romney, nothing about the act itself.

Do any of you cons find this to be elitist and out of touch with main street America?

(06-19-2012 12:26 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  Do any of you cons find this to be elitist and out of touch with main street America?

With all the f'n moonbat millionaire and billionaire Democrats out there, do you realize how f'n stupid that makes your post sound?

If there's a profit potential, it's usually a business and not a hobby. So you report the income and deduct the losses. For the most part, you only get to offset the losses against your income...so it's not like he's getting to deduct anything special here that no one else would be entitled to.

When I think of elitist, I don't need to look any further than 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. ...when he's there.

(06-19-2012 12:31 PM)Rebel Wrote:  

(06-19-2012 12:26 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  Do any of you cons find this to be elitist and out of touch with main street America?

With all the f'n moonbat millionaire and billionaire Democrats out there, do you realize how f'n stupid that makes your post sound?

I don't know... I mean just the other day me and a buddy were poping open a one thousand dollar bottle of whine at Clooney's house and we got to talking about how out of touch Romney is...

No it's absolutely a gray area of the law. It's difficult for the IRS to prosecute in areas like this and they are dissuaded from doing so when they're dealing with the uber wealthy.

This is a "sport" that he's admitted is a passion of his wife's and which has helped her deal with her MS, which is driving his participation. Dressage is NOT a sport people get into to make a profit. It's a hobby for the very wealthy. NASCAR is different. Get back to me when dressage gets a network TV contract and plasters sponsor logos all over the horses. They'll need some non-billionaire fans first.

http://www.dressagearena.org/is-training...profitable

(06-19-2012 11:57 AM)maximus Wrote:  If its legal who the **** cares?

Biden bills the ******* secret service rent at one of his homes, I guess you clowns don't care to comment on that?

Probably because it provides better protection for the second highest office in the land and likely saves the government money.

There are also IRS rules related to charging a fair market value for the rental of rental property.