The hoople's a money man,for rice cake.
IMF? Nobody in such a position to accumulate wealth or manage it forgets taxes,just another smartass with ethics that rise and fall with the prevailing tides.

It's racism! The honkie gets away with it while muh man, Wesley Snipes is incarcerated for it.

Boys and girls, the word for today is "incarceration". Can you say "incarceration"?....
From a long-ago SNL skit.

I see; when Bush was in office it's fine to attack Republicans, but now that Obama is in it's a new age of enlightenment? It's going to be a long four years if I'm not entitled to do what was done for the past eight.

The statute had run on those two years when he was audited by the IRS. He was under no legal obligation then (when audited) or now to pay those taxes.

This kind of thing happens all the time. Assume you are one of those FNIAs who prepares their own return and innocently (or not) mishandles reporting something on your return year in and year out. IRS audits you and adjusts your returns. If there is no indication of fraud, the statute of limitations is three years. So, who here would go back, oh, say six more years and pony up all those taxes when not legally required to ?? I wouldn't advise someone to.

From what I gather, he did include these IMF payments in income, but did not report them as payments subject to S/E tax. So, the Government lost out on the medicare tax portion (2.9%) of his IMF payments. (I assume his salary with the Fed Reserve is subject to FICA and his earnings were over the FICA limits, which in those years was 80,400 and 84,900. )

That said, I doubt he's the ONLY guy in America who can fill the position of Treas. Sec. If he is, we is in trouble.:rolleyes:

Not get away with it, got promoted!


People say, 'didn't pay his taxes' because that sounds obviously terrible. People don't say, 'didn't pay 2.9% of his taxes'.

Honestly though, there's not a very limited number of people who can fill the job. But, only a very limited number of people's opinions matter when determining who's good for the job. And those people don't pay their taxes either. The business elite are really the ones who do the confirmation, and they did it already.
IOW, he's not the fox guarding the henhouse, he's the fox guarding the other foxes.

That is about as kind of a spin as can be put on the situation. He KNEW==His employer met with everyone to insure they were aware, and according to one report, even paid extra income to cover the expected taxes.
If he gets the nomination it is an indication of business as usual.

How long until we pine for the good ole days of the W administration?

Not really spin, just an explanation of how the law is written.
But, yes, he was informed of the proper tax treatment and still mishandled it. I don't know if it ever came out if he prepared his own returns or had an accountant prepare it. At least he could claim the "Oops" defense. The " I didn't look it over before I filed it" excuse! Blame my accountant. :rolleyes:

But if he did,as you relate, pay extra income (taxes) to cover the expected taxes", it seems like he was acting in good faith originally and later, when he prepared it, he goofed up.

As a CPA, I don't think it's a big deal. I don't have a problem giving him a pass on this. And I'm not exactly what you would call a Democratic Supporter.;)

I think you miss the point. The divissive "the Republicans/Democrats" or "right winger/ left winger" generalizations is what I object to. The recent election was a victory for the moderates, not the fringe wings of either side.

By that I assume that you mean giving the President approval ratings above 90%, as were enjoyed by George Bush in 2001. I also assume that you mean that Congress will do whatever the President wants, the press will report every claim made by the President without checking the facts, and that people will be accused of being anti-American if they criticize the President. Like it or not, that's the situation that was presented to George Bush.

He did not pay; his employer paid him extra to compensate for the extra taxes.
If my employer decides to give me a $5000 bonus, they check I get is somewhat less, say about $3300. This is because they with held the taxes. If they gave me a $5000 check for the bonus, and then another $2000 check for the taxes, it would approximate what Geithner rec'd.

The IMF doesn't do that exactly. They have a formula they use to pay US employees their taxes. They don't do their employees' taxes for them, they just tell them you are getting X dollars to cover your taxes. It's up to the employee to do his/her own taxes.

Thanks for your informed and unbias assessment.

My dog ate my tax return........ :rolleyes:

If we have a repeat of the last 8 years, there will be nothing left of the American middle class.