Comments about ‘Romneys paid $1.94 million federal taxes for 2011’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Sept. 21 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Centerville, UT

It would not matter how much information the left had access to concerning Romney's taxes, it would never be enough. It's abundantly clear that, despite Harry Reid's accusations, Mitt Romney pays his taxes. Is it against the law to use tax reduction strategies? NO! If you have a 401k, you are using a tax reduction strategy. If you have a Roth IRA, you are using a tax reduction strategy. And looking at the numbers here, not only are the Romney's honest, they are extremely generous. What more do the Democrats need?

Florissant, MO

So much for Harry Reid being honest. Everyone wants to go after the "1%", it is a good thing I am not one of the one percent people, I would close my income doors and sit back and let the government take care of me also. There are many wealthy people that are leaving this country, guess what goes with them? Jobs!!!

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT

The liberal philosophy is that elected officials and candidates have absolutely NO right to privacy in their financial disclosures, in fact no rights at all because 'public' means 'we own them'. If anyone can't see what's not only morally wrong, but completely insane about such a doctrine, they don't deserve to claim the same rights they seek to take away from others. The fact is that we don't own others, but their office.

The state of this union is most certainly threatened by those who feel that personal responsibility is less favorable than dependence on others. The evidence is overwhelming that the moral quality of our society and therefore the peace we enjoy is weakening. There has never been a greater need than now for parents to teach their children true principles- as we are ever more surrounded by such contempt. Contempt, resentment, and jealousy are inherent to feeling entitled to the fruit of another persons's labor. No wonder everyone wants to know how much Romney makes- those who would abandon responsibility to live off others just want to know how much they can be jealous of. Meanwhile other candidates wealth remains un-scrutinized.

Ogden, UT

To MoJules 5:16 p.m. Sept. 21, 2012

So much for Harry Reid being honest.


One problem with your argument -- this isn't one of the years about which Senator Reid was speaking.

Murray, UT

"Price Waterhouse released a letter from his accountants saying that in the 20 years prior to 2010 the Romneys paid an average annual effective rate of 20.2 percent, never lower than 13.66 percent."

Romney never paid no taxes in any of the last 22 years. That makes Reid look wrong.

Salt Lake City, UT

I am sure its all a lie......just ask Harry Reid the Mormon?

Joan Watson

The question that one should ask - is Mitt Romney an honest man - has he paid his fair share of federal and state taxes - is he a rich man that has contributed money and time to the betterment of others - is he a proven and effective leader who sholders and owns his responsibilities - can he solve problems???? If the answer is yes - then he is head and shoulders above most of today's polliticians. It would be refreshing to have such a man president of the United States.

Saint George, UT

The envy of Romney's wealth is shameful, as if taxing him more is going to solve our nation's ills. The hypocrisy of the left, including in my estimation a hypocritical Harry Reid, is truly astonishing. Obama can make millions, pay little in charity, and golf over a hundred times since being elected, all on the taxpayer's dime, but somehow is viewed as being more charitible or worthy of his office, as if stealing one citizen's money to give to another is somehow honorable. What a sorry state of affairs for the voting citizens of this country! Wake up!

Mcallen, TX

Obama spent more on just one vacation than what Romney made in a year.

How much tax did he pay on that?

ute alumni
Tengoku, UT

no it makes reid a liar

Fresno, CA

The "Taxers" are the Democratic Party's equivalent of the "Birthers."

Why don't we focus on the important issues: the fact that gas prices are raising the cost of everything else from food to vacations, that our wealth as Americans has declined drastically in the past 3 years, that unemployment is still very high, that the Middle East is in an anti-American uproar and are murdering American citizens and our embassador?

Instead, we get "show us your back taxes from forever until today...." and a President who acts like a CHILD. Whenever confronted with his numerous failures and empty promises, he always responds with "it's not MY fault" or "he started it" (Pointed to George W.) It's like having a toddler in the White House.

It's no wonder he is not a good leader. He absolutely refuses to take responsibility for anything. I for one will be thrilled to have an adult as our leader. Oh, and since Obama paid less in taxes than his secretary, you would think they would be smart enough to stop talking about how much candidates paid in taxes.

Mike Johnson
Stafford, VA

>>>On average, middle-income families — those making from $50,000 to $75,000 a year — pay 12.8 percent of their income in federal taxes, according to Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation.

If so, they overpaid significantly.

In 2011, a married couple filing jointly and taking the standard deduction ($11,600) and two personal exemptions ($3700 for each of them), it would take an income of $114,679 to pay 14.1% ($16,170) in income tax. At $75,000 the tax would be $7,550 or 10.1%. At $50,000, the tax would be $3,800 or 7.6%. And those are based on simply taking the standard deduction. Itemizing likely would reduce the rates.

12.8% average for $50K to $75K would have to include singles, which have higher tax liabilities by design.

Idaho Falls, ID

Interesting how few Obama supporters have anything to say on this article. It seems their motto is "If you can't say anything snarky, don't say anything at all."

Sandy, UT

There is a real problem in this country when real hard work is taxed differently than investment income.

Why should someone who works sixty hours a week, earning a hourly or salary, pay a higher effective rate than someone who makes their money from investments?

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT


Your concern is valid, but the doctrine you advocated is dangerous.

The construction worker says to the pianist: I've earned my living, you aren't any more entitled to making more money than me.

The problem:
We all have a right to reap what we sew. If this right did not exist, then no right would exist (simple math). If no right exists, then others are justified and moral even if they take what is yours from you. A guy can study math and economics his entire life and another guy can work out in a gym his entire life. They both put hard work and time (which cost them money, property, investment, etc.) into their careers and have every right to work.

Even if you say "fine, then just raise taxes on Paris Hilton type people who inherit millions without working", then how you quality this and preserve justice? If a parent leaves all their money and house to their blind and deaf child with a learning disability, would you take the money from them based solely on their not earning it themselves?

It's not the government's job, NOR RIGHT, to redistribute property.

Salt Lake City, UT


That is because the money that is used for the initial investment has normally already been taxed as income. In Romney's case income earned working the 60+ hours a week at Bain Capital. This income that has already been taxed can now be invested and then any income derived from the investment is then taxed a 2nd time at a lower rate. Understanding this point, don't you think it is fair to have a lower tax rate when your income dollar is being taxed for the second time?? Also worth noting is the fact that every investment has risk....if you invest wisely you get a return, but if the investment goes bad then that dollar is lost. An argument could be made that if my investment dollar has already been taxed when I earned it and then I am willing to risk losing it by investing it....then why should gov't have any right to tax the income I may or may not earn?

Kearns, UT

Our tax laws are meant to encourage investing in the future. Those people who work 60+ hours a week have opportunities to invest in 401K, IRA, stocks, and other investment accounts. If they choose to invest, it will also lower their amount of taxable income for the year.

Why do the tax laws allow that? Well, I am guessing it's because the people who create those laws understand that Americans will need more than social security as part of a retirement plan. I have an employee retirement plan, but I also invest a little extra on my own. It means I don't take home as much money as I would like right now, but that money is being set aside for my future.

Hamilton, IL

Mitt Romney is wealthy, SO WHAT. So are hundreds of other people in this country like those in Hollywood, professional sports players, other politicians. Miitt pays taxes, he gives to charity what more should he do than any of these other wealthy people do?

liberal larry
salt lake City, utah

Maybe the Dnews can do an article explaining all of the exotic tax tricks that Mitt uses to lower his taxes, I really don't understand how he uses the Cayman Islands and other off shore accounts to minimize this taxes. What ever happened to the $77,000, he tried to deduct for his Olympic horse Trafalca? If he can deduct expenses for his horse, can I legally claim a deduction for my over over weight cat Wally?

Hayden, ID

The larger question is, will Harry Reid, Obama and Nancy Pelosi apologize to Romney for lying about him? And the second valid question is why do Democrats contribute next to nothing to charities? Says something about the difference between Mitt Romney and his critics doesn’t it?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments