Trump's Tax Returns
The law is clear. The tax returns of any individual or business are private. That is made clear in 26 U.S. Code § 6103. Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information. That is the section of the Internal Revenue Code that protects the privacy of the returns of individuals and businesses.
There are notable exceptions. One is that state tax agencies can be given access to federal income tax returns when needed in the administration of state laws. Another is that tax returns can be subpoenaed as part of a criminal investigation. We will come back to that a bit later.
Buried in that portion of the Internal Revenue Code is Section 6103(f)(1) which was added to the code after the Teapot Dome Scandal. The history of this change to the IRC is described quite well in an article by George K. Yin, Edwin S. Cohen Distinguished Professor of Law and Taxation at the University of Virginia.
But when House Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal asked for six years of Trump's tax returns under the authority granted in the aforementioned section of the IRC, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin denied the request. He said that it lacked a "...legitimate legislative purpose."
There is also an attempt to obtain eight years of Trump's tax returns going on in New York, where New York County District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr., has subpoenaed them from the accounting firm that Trump has used for many years. That firm has said it will comply with the subpoena, but Trump's attorneys are challenging the subpoena.
Two different attempts going on to get those tax returns, but not for the purpose of releasing them to the public. Odds are good the public will never see Trump's tax returns, other than the few pages that were leaked in the past.
That's the legal stuff. The question is, does a president or a presidential candidate have a moral responsibility to release their tax returns to the public? I think they do.
* * *
Trump says we don't need his tax returns because of the financial disclosure forms he is required to file. His 2018 filing is here.
On page 15, as part of the list of assets is item 030. Trump National Golf Course in Jupiter, FL. The value on this financial disclosure is listed as being more than $50,000,000. He plays here on occasion when he is staying at his Mar a Lago home.
In January of 2018, he sued Palm Beach County, saying that their assessed value of $19.7 million is too high.
Wait a moment. His financial disclosure form says it is worth over $50 million, but he claims in a lawsuit that it is worth less than half that amount? Why is that not an impeachable offense? The Ethics in Government Act allows for imposition of civil penalties for a false claim on a financial disclosure form. It also allows for criminal penalties (including imprisonment) for "...anyone who knowingly and willfully falsifies or conceals any material fact..."
Perhaps Congress should amend the Ethics in Government Act to require the signature on financial disclosure forms to state that they are being signed under penalty of perjury. After all, we have to sign our tax returns under penalty of perjury.
There are notable exceptions. One is that state tax agencies can be given access to federal income tax returns when needed in the administration of state laws. Another is that tax returns can be subpoenaed as part of a criminal investigation. We will come back to that a bit later.
Buried in that portion of the Internal Revenue Code is Section 6103(f)(1) which was added to the code after the Teapot Dome Scandal. The history of this change to the IRC is described quite well in an article by George K. Yin, Edwin S. Cohen Distinguished Professor of Law and Taxation at the University of Virginia.
But when House Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal asked for six years of Trump's tax returns under the authority granted in the aforementioned section of the IRC, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin denied the request. He said that it lacked a "...legitimate legislative purpose."
There is also an attempt to obtain eight years of Trump's tax returns going on in New York, where New York County District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr., has subpoenaed them from the accounting firm that Trump has used for many years. That firm has said it will comply with the subpoena, but Trump's attorneys are challenging the subpoena.
Two different attempts going on to get those tax returns, but not for the purpose of releasing them to the public. Odds are good the public will never see Trump's tax returns, other than the few pages that were leaked in the past.
That's the legal stuff. The question is, does a president or a presidential candidate have a moral responsibility to release their tax returns to the public? I think they do.
* * *
Trump says we don't need his tax returns because of the financial disclosure forms he is required to file. His 2018 filing is here.
On page 15, as part of the list of assets is item 030. Trump National Golf Course in Jupiter, FL. The value on this financial disclosure is listed as being more than $50,000,000. He plays here on occasion when he is staying at his Mar a Lago home.
In January of 2018, he sued Palm Beach County, saying that their assessed value of $19.7 million is too high.
Wait a moment. His financial disclosure form says it is worth over $50 million, but he claims in a lawsuit that it is worth less than half that amount? Why is that not an impeachable offense? The Ethics in Government Act allows for imposition of civil penalties for a false claim on a financial disclosure form. It also allows for criminal penalties (including imprisonment) for "...anyone who knowingly and willfully falsifies or conceals any material fact..."
Perhaps Congress should amend the Ethics in Government Act to require the signature on financial disclosure forms to state that they are being signed under penalty of perjury. After all, we have to sign our tax returns under penalty of perjury.
posted by me at 6:45 AM
<< Home