|
Post by Fredo on Oct 18, 2012 12:01:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by duke on Oct 18, 2012 12:13:07 GMT -5
From the link Fredo supplied above: "The Obama campaign has connected Romney’s overseas investments in the Caymans to methods for avoiding U.S. taxes. But there’s no evidence Obama receives any tax advantage from his overseas pension investments.
David S. Miller, a tax attorney with Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP in New York, reviewed public filings by Advent and said it was highly unlikely Obama got any tax advantage from the pension fund’s investment in the Advent partnership.
Atwood went further, saying: "There is no tax advantage to any (pension) plan participant" from that investment.
Miller offered this analysis: "There is no evidence that the fund helped the Illinois pension fund avoid any taxes â€' in this respect, the Illinois pension fund would have been treated identically had the fund been organized as a domestic (U.S.) partnership. However, the fact that it was organized as a Cayman partnership might have allowed some taxable investors to defer some tax on foreign (non-U.S.) portfolio companies purchased by the Fund."
Atwood emphasized that neither Obama nor any other participant in the retirement system has anything to do with selecting investments for the fund.
Miller concurred with that, and added that Romney legitimately can claim that he has similar distance from foreign investments made through his individual retirement accounts.
It’s "entirely accurate" for Romney to say that Obama’s pension plan has investments in foreign companies and through a Caymans trust, Miller said. Technically, it’s a Cayman-based partnership, but that’s a trivial difference, he added.
Our rating
Romney told Obama: "You also have investments in Chinese companies. You also have investments outside the United States. You also have investments through a Caymans trust."
It’s an accurate set of statements when you consider investments made by managers of the Illinois pension fund in which Obama has an account.
As we noted in reviewing previous claims about Romney’s investments in China, the investments involved are indirect and -- as far as anybody has said -- made without the knowledge of the account holder.
With that clarification, we rate Romney’s statement Mostly True.
|
|
|
Post by Motherjones on Oct 18, 2012 12:23:03 GMT -5
Your desperation and ignorance with regard to issues of economics and finance is becoming increasingly obvious. There is simply no viable equivalency between the investment of the Illinois pension fund (which will pay out to Obama at a fixed rate regardless of the performance of the fund's few investments in Chinese companies), and Romney's personal and ongoing investment in Chinese companies that have spied on US companies, worked with Iran, etc. And when Romney ran Bain, he directed massive investments in Chinese companies and outsourced American jobs to Chinese companies. Just look at Asimco for one stark example. Romney gets rich from the implosion of American businesses. Anyone can see that this is no model for a promising tomorrow unless your name is Romney or you are in the 1% of plutocrats that are sucking this country dry. Your blind attempt to justify Mr. Romney's rapacious and predatory business practices breaks down relies on sheer illogic, blatant false equivalency and dishonesty. That you would want to further empower someone with such an obvious disdain for American companies and workers is simply astonishing.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Oct 18, 2012 14:52:32 GMT -5
I do so e njoy when the Langleybots show up. It usually means that we've hit a nerve somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Sgt K USMC on Oct 18, 2012 23:36:56 GMT -5
I'm fairly surprised with this ones near lifelike persona…
Almost as if it is a real person as opposed to a rhetoric machine…
|
|
|
Post by dino on Oct 19, 2012 10:55:11 GMT -5
Almost.
|
|