The great Donald Trump tax evasion story

The Telegraph has an exclusive. They worked on this for three months.

Exclusive: US presidential hopeful Donald Trump signed off on a controversial business deal that was designed to deprive the American government of tens of millions of dollars in tax, the Telegraph can disclose.

The billionaire approved a $50 million investment in a company – only for the deal to be rewritten several weeks later as a ‘loan’.

Experts say that the effect of this move was to skirt vast tax liabilities, and court papers seen by the Telegraph allege that the deal amounted to fraud.

Independent tax accountants and lawyers said that the documents Mr Trump signed – copies of which were obtained by this newspaper as part of a three-month investigation – contained “red flags” indicating the deal was irregular.

But the Republican presumptive presidential nominee signed nonetheless.

A real estate deal that used Trump’s name but was actually between other companies. If it is structured this way then the tax position is this. If it’s structured that way then the tax position is this other.

The documents were signed, they thought about that tax position and decided to run it again using the other structure.

Big Scandal, eh? And of course, you’ll not be surprised to know that this story was brought to you with the assistance of the Tax Justice Network, would you?

23 thoughts on “The great Donald Trump tax evasion story”

  1. Donald Trump should be more careful! If he’s going to structure all his deals in a tax efficient way he should only do deals with Oxfam.

  2. Good for Trump.

    Why pay the Federal Tyranny one penny more than they can use their thugs to get. And put the thugs etc in “accounts receivable” for the future.

  3. Is that all they can come up with?

    Good job they’re paying as much attention to the affairs of Hillary and Sanders…

  4. Careful what you accuse The Donald of doing, DBC, he will soon have the power to get you extradited to the US , manacled in a yellow jumpsuit, on whatever charge he thinks fit. That whole evasion/avoidance thing, the difference is whether you end up in a cell with Big Bubba or not. Which is exactly where you might end up if you continue to call the next PoTUS a criminal……….

  5. DBC

    I think you’re a little confused (I could just leave it there couldn’t I). Tim has on many occasions -try today at the ASI – distinguished between evasion and avoidance. Try to understand.

  6. What an absolute crock of shit from beginning to end.

    I don’t believe for a moment that the dying Telegraph carried out a 3 month investigation. It looks like they had the whole lot spoon-fed to them by Jody Kriss, as part of his ongoing attempt to squeeze cash out of Bayrock via litigation. No doubt the yank tax moaning monkeys were happy to sign up to Kriss’s campaign as it suits their agenda, but any hack prepared to take those allegations at face value should resign.

    Regardless of the tax position of the Bayrock deal – and we only have an anonymous employee of a failed Icelandic company and a ‘business is evil’ campaign group suggesting it had anything to do with tax – it had fuck all to do with Trump.

    DBC Retard; so you don’t understand the differences between evasion and avoidance or between equity and debt?

  7. Trump should be embarrassed but only because he, like the rest of us, probably shares some DNA with the low-lifes who think this is newsworthy.

    This sort of blurred line between equity and debt is normal in structured investments and ultimately whether it is treated as one or another would be a matter of US tax law, the attitude of the IRS and ultimately the US courts, not what is written on some letter. Moreover this isn’t Trump’s tax affairs but the affairs of an unconnected investor in an LP that owns one of his buildings, and quite frankly Trump probably doesn’t give two hoots how their investment is taxed.

  8. However, if elected Trump will soon have the U.S. fiscal position on his desk. It will be interesting to see if he has the courage.of his convictions ( no, serouously) to tell U.S. private and corporate citizens that tax avoidance is perfectly acceptable.

  9. If there really is fraud, it’s likely to be because they have artificially re-characterised an equity investment as a loan.

    If you really make a loan, that’s legal, even if done that way for tax reasons. But if it was actually equity at the time the investment was made and they subsequently pretended it was a loan, that’s illegal.

    It would be as if a charity shop accepted a donation of goods and then asked you to sign a form saying that they’re still your goods and they’re selling them on your behalf. Wouldn’t happen. No, no-one ethical could do that sort of thing to get a tax advantage.

  10. “It would be as if a charity shop accepted a donation of goods and then asked you to sign a form saying that they’re still your goods and they’re selling them on your behalf. Wouldn’t happen. No, no-one ethical could do that sort of thing to get a tax advantage.”

    But there is no tax advantage in such a case, no-one can therefore be acting unethically, and given Oxfam’s aims, anything it does cannot by definition be to gain a tax advantage or be tax avoidance. All of this has been confirmed in cogent, consistent and uncontradictory argument by Professor Murphy.

  11. “But there is no tax advantage in such a case, no-one can therefore be acting unethically, and given Oxfam’s aims, anything it does cannot by definition be to gain a tax advantage or be tax avoidance. All of this has been confirmed in cogent, consistent and uncontradictory argument by Professor Murphy.”

    Lets take a hypothetical situation. Billionaire sets up highly specialised charity (Society for the Preservation of Boll Weevils), and gives it hundreds of millions and installs family members as CEO etc on nice fat salaries. They ‘invest’ the money in buying existing profitable trading businesses (unrelated to boll weevils), making decent profits, which they return to the charity free of corporation tax, giving it a substantial yearly income, which they spend on sending the ‘staff’ on trips to inspect endangered boll weevils in Barbados, Cancun, the Gold Coast etc etc. First class naturally.

    One assumes the One Fifth Professor would approve?

  12. Jim said:
    “One assumes the One Fifth Professor would approve?”

    Only if it paid for a Fair Tax Mark.

  13. “Only if it paid for a Fair Tax Mark”

    Or paid for a lavish report on the dangers posed by tax havens to boll weevils.

  14. I see the Tinygraph is moist around the gusset over the fact the Clinton campaign is wanking off on their story. There’s something Pravdaesque about these puny tossers going after the pathetic transgressions of a blowhard whilst ignoring the glaring corruption of a career cunt.

    The sooner the twats pluck up the courage to fuck off behind their paywall, the better.

  15. Hold on.

    DBC implied that this blog thinks that it should be acceptable that it’s good to “stick it to the man” by finding any method that re-directs any “hard earned cash” from getting “wasted” by the democratically elected state.

    Is he wrong?

  16. bicr

    “Yep.”

    So this blog [the folk that comment on here regularly] doesn’t think “it should be acceptable that it’s good to “stick it to the man” by finding any method that re-directs any “hard earned cash” from getting “wasted” by the democratically elected state.”?

    The answer you wanted to say is “nope, DBC isn’t wrong.”

    The vast majority of you will support the idea that the less tax you pay the more you can spend on sweets.

    As long as those fucking horses aren’t scared.

    They’re scared of Ecks – he wants to eat them raw.

  17. “So this blog [the folk that comment on here regularly]…”

    No, shit head, the folk that comment here regularly are not “this blog”. We are all guests on Tim Worstall’s blog. You comment here regularly, and you are definitely not this blog.

    “They’re scared of Ecks – he wants to eat them raw.”

    Only the ones you haven’t shagged and mutilated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *