Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Newt Gingrich avoided tens of thousands of dollars in Medicare payroll taxes in 2010 by paying himself a relatively small salary in comparison to the distributions received from his S-corporation, a technique the IRS has consistently and successfully challenged, Forbes reports. S-Corporation shareholders who also provide services for the entity are supposed to pay themselves a reasonable compensation, which is subject to the Medicare tax. Gingrich and his wife, Callista, treated only $444,327 of what they got as compensation to them, reporting a whopping $2.4 million of their earnings from these corporations as profits or dividends.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

taxman

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

The statute of limitations is still open for the 2010 tax period, would be interesting to see if the IRS audits him while he is on the campaign trail.

Used same wedding vows too.

"I promise to love, Cherish, and...oh you're sick? Nevermind."

would be interesting to see if the IRS audits him while he is on the campaign trail.

Won't happen IMHO as Obama would be accused of playing games with the GOP nomination process.

A real outsider, that Noot.

Forgot about the whole cheating on the dying wife shared fact.

Don't overlook the Wife Nummah Two Diagnosed With MS: Hey, How About An Open Marriage (Which I'm Already Involved In, By The Way).

Noot: someone you can depend on. LOL.

www.freerepublic.com

fellowshipofminds.wordpress.co
m

What do #7 and #8 have to do with Newt using a the same tax scheme as John Edwards?

Well you libs seem to be all over Newt for an alleged affair, what about obummers alleged affairs?

"what about obummers alleged affairs?"

Wake us up when you're not backing a guy who failed a lie detector test, twice.

Even World Nut Daily washed its hands of Larry Sinclair.

what about obummers alleged affairs?

#10 | Posted by glasshouse at 2012-01-23 10:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

Ah, so "alleged" now has as much cachet as "confirmed". You make us tired.

GLASSHOUSE----Do you not understand that that same very strange collections of minds who honestly believe (all at once) that Obama is a Marxist, a Wall Street; a Muslim, a radical Christian, an atheist; a Kenyan, an Indonesian; could do anything else but state he is also an adulterer?

#12 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2012-01-23 11:04 AM

And your kind tire me all over.

it is alleged so you lemming believe it to be true.

#11 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2012-01-23 10:51 AM

And just who am I backing?

And just who am I backing?

#15 | Posted by glasshouse at 2012-01-23

Please feel free to tell us.

"And just who am I backing?"

You linked to an article about Larry Sinclair.

Is the rumor true you don't read your own links?

it is alleged so you lemming believe it to be true.

#14 | Posted by glasshouse

If that is an insult I didn't understand it.

"it is alleged so you lemming believe it to be true"

What a riot. You don't know the difference between "alleged" and "admitted".

You don't know the difference between "alleged" and "admitted".

Posted by Danforth at 2012-01-23 11:14 AM

In typical Newt fashion, he has not only confirmed AND denied the affair, but has also excused it, rationalized it if it had happened, and placed blame on others for it happening, should it have in fact, happened.

In typical Newt fashion, he has not only confirmed AND denied the affair, but has also excused it, rationalized it if it had happened, and placed blame on others for it happening, should it have in fact, happened.

#20 | Posted by kanrei at 2012

Yeah. If the man is elected his press conferences are going to be fun.

In typical Newt fashion, he has not only confirmed AND denied the affair, but has also excused it, rationalized it if it had happened, and placed blame on others for it happening, should it have in fact, happened.

He's also said anyone who quotes him verbatim will be lying.

1. Newt cheated on wife number one with wife number two. BTW, wife number one had cancer and Newt took advantage by bringing divorce papers along when he came to visit. Nice.

2. Newt cheated on wife number two with wife number three. While he was cheating with wife number three he did take the time to visit the 6:00 evening news every night to chastise President Clinton for his dalliances with Monica Lewinsky. He then left wife number two (who had been diagnosed with MS) and married wife number three. Wonder when serial cheating became a family value?

3. Newt was drummed out of Congress on ethics charges and was fined $300,000.00. It was a small price to pay. After he left Congress Freddie Mac paid him around 1.6 million dollars to lobby Congress for them. Excuse me? Did I say lobby? My bad. Newt says he was employed as a “historian” and not a lobbyist â€" and he said it without laughing.

Newt said on a Sunday morning show that (paraphrasing) “Right-wing social engineering is no better than left-wing social engineering.” The next day he said that anyone who quoted him would be “lying.” Just so I get this straight? If I quoted what Newt said verbatim â€" I’d be lying? Only low information voters would buy that

-MODEL MAYHEM

Just so I get this straight? If I quoted what Newt said verbatim I'd be lying?

Well, yes sort of. See, when you say exactly what a liar said, you are lying if you repeat what they said. If you say they said it, then you are not.

And anyone who quotes Kanrei as saying that is lying.

I think....


And anyone who quotes Kanrei as saying that is lying.

I think....

#25 | Posted by Danforth at 2012-01-23 11:27 AM |

Read it again.

Danforth says "the sky is green."

That is a lie.

If I say "the sky is green, Danforth said so" then I am lying as well.

If I say "Danforth said the sky is green," then I am not lying.

Not that hard.

"Read it again."

Sorry, I was making a joke.

And a lousy one, by the reaction. My apologies.

Sorry, I was making a joke.

And a lousy one, by the reaction. My apologies.

#27 | Posted by Danforth at 2012-01-23 11:32 AM

I didn't think I was being rude there. Wasn't my intent that time. I was really meaning to read it again because I realized I wrote it with circular logic.

He's also said anyone who quotes him verbatim will be lying.
#22 | Posted by Danforth

That's undoubtedly true.

Both ways.

The statute of limitations is still open for the 2010 tax period, would be interesting to see if the IRS audits him while he is on the campaign trail.

#1 | POSTED BY TAXMAN AT 2012-01-23 09:44 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

I have seen cases where shareholders take all there money as distributions and zero as salary challenged and won by the IRS.

It gets murkier when you have to argue "reasonable compensation" issues if he took a salary.

With the medicare tax being less than $70,000 on the money in question I doubt the IRS will invest the time and money in what surely will got to court.

I was thinking more on the lines of...

And if anyone quotes Danforth quoting Kanrei quoting Newt and his lies...well, that person will be lying!

He's also said anyone who quotes him verbatim will be lying.

#22 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2012-01-23 11:17 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Especially if they use the video clip of him saying what he says will be lying.

I think that is what Newt thought he meant. What he said however was actually pretty true: anyone who quotes him is lying (because Newt knows he lies everytime he speaks so any and all quotes are lies as well.)

"It gets murkier when you have to argue "reasonable compensation" issues if he took a salary."

There should still be comps and ranges for that job, rare as it is. Edwards at least had the argument he never knew if he would win. Newt had to know the money would be coming in regularly, good results or bad. (I'm speaking of his role as historian, of course, since he did no lobbying.) But this is a classic tax-avoidance scheme, and the IRS announced several years ago S-corps would be one of their targets going forward.

"With the medicare tax being less than $70,000 on the money in question I doubt the IRS will invest the time and money in what surely will got to court."

I'll think of that the next time I'm in an audit over 800 bucks.

I'll think of that the next time I'm in an audit over 800 bucks.

I have never had a client audited over a $3000 income or expense item, and to be clear I am talking about a person to person audit, not correspondance audit. Not at the federal level. NYS is a whole other ball of crazy.

As an S corp he did what the law allows.

Geez the guy pays 30% plus in taxes and people bitch about it.

Shop smart, shop S Mart!

As an S corp he did what the law allows.

No he didn't, that's the point.

"Ah, so "alleged" now has as much cachet as "confirmed". You make us tired."
#12 | Posted by Zed

The Cain treatment proves it is.

Newt is a historian the way Paula Deen is a nutritionist.

Newt is a historian the way Paula Deen is a nutritionist.
#41 | Posted by CaptainNemo

Are Newt, Paula, and the Aga Khan the only people who get their weight's-worth in precious gems and metals on their birthdays?

I'm not surprised that Newt Gingrich cuts corners on his taxes. The guy has never felt like rules applied to him. He'd be as corrupt a president as Nixon.

Well you libs seem to be all over Newt for an alleged affair,

Like FDR and the "alleged" attack on Pearl Harbor, Asshouse. It's the Dem MO-take a proven truth and let you guys claim it was "alleged". Then make you look like fools.

Porky Pig and Magic underwearer Man.. same song and dance!
More Wars....we can just end food stamps...
Why more Wars...good......Food stamps...Bad...

We need to end "affordable health care act... It isn't right that insurance companies will have to pay out 80% of the money they take in..How would they ever have enough money left to give to the GOP???

They talk freedom ...who's
1.Stop gay people from getting married.
2. End a women righ to choose.

How about ending the religious control freak crap!

I'm not surprised that Newt Gingrich cuts corners on his taxes.
#43 | Posted by rcade

Are you surpised Obama didn't put Newt in his Cabinet?

What's interesting about this article is that it once again points out that the rich pay the largest amount of taxes in a considerable number of areas. Until this came out I'll bet the lefties didn't know that the wealthy with high incomes once again pay higher levels (based on income) for their medicare. And it's a sliding scale.

How about ending the religious control freak crap!

#45 | Posted by truthteller101

How about taking an ESL class or two?

"What's interesting about this article is that it once again points out that the rich pay the largest amount of taxes in a considerable number of areas."

Only if you want to pretend income and taxes have no correlation.

"I'll bet the lefties didn't know that the wealthy with high incomes once again pay higher levels (based on income) for their medicare."

Is Matsop the only person on the DR who didn't know Medicare tax has no cap?

"And it's a sliding scale."

Abso-fucking-clueless.

Thanks Truthy. That was quite a contribution.

BFD.

who would take more in earned income than they have to if it can be distributed?

to be honest, I'm surprised his earned income and his wife's is even that high.

I'll bet the lefties didn't know that the wealthy with high incomes once again pay higher levels (based on income) for their medicare. And it's a sliding scale.

#47 | POSTED BY MATSOP AT 2012-01-24 10:39 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Compare and contrast the % of income that a retiree pays for Medicare with income of $30,000 vs $3,000,000 and get back to us.

-President Barack Obama reported all of his $1.4 million in 2010 book profits as subject to Medicare taxes.

well, I won't speculate as to the difference between that and the type of income being generated from Newt's business interests. I'll let the IRS do that.

but the IRS has to establish that $444K is not reasonable.

I'm pretty sure there are a ton of high income folks like Newt who's income is spread out this way.

I'm pretty sure there are a ton of high income folks like Newt who's income is spread out this way

There are, the IRS is going after them, and the taxpayers are losing on a consistent clip (i.e., the IRS has been succesfull in showing the compensation was not reasonable). Someone above nailed it though, the IRS won't go after Newt because it will look like our President is targeting him. Same is the case with John Edwards - President Bush didn't send the IRS for political purposes.

treated only $444,327 of what they got as compensation

Certainly an unreasonable salary. Idiots.

Class envy and the categorizing of people are the rallying cries of the Democratic party. It is all they have.

All the while their current leader increases his net worth from $400K to $10.5 million after 5-6 years in DC. Certainly a man of the people.

Certainly an unreasonable salary. Idiots.
Class envy and the categorizing of people are the rallying cries of the Democratic party. It is all they have.
All the while their current leader increases his net worth from $400K to $10.5 million after 5-6 years in DC. Certainly a man of the people.

#55 | POSTED BY YOUHATEME

Translation:
GOP getting rich good!
GOP breaking tax laws good!
Democrat getting rich bad!

don't know if he dodged. question is whether he took a reasonable salary or not. this is a question most taxpayers with an S corp face. choose too low, get audited. choose too high, get audited. we don't know enough about what he did to say he dodged shit.

54 | Posted by taxman

So if the salary was reasonable and he paid his taxes--medicare taxes on that-then he paid his correct taxes--right?

I am a S-corp and I don't have this problem with Newt's kind of revenue. But I get whatever the CPA points to as salary and I still have to pay some taxes to the feds and the state.

They also have me pay estimated taxes at the quarters to the feds and state.

Can you blame Gingrick for dodging taxes on something he was paid to pimp? C'mon, taxes are for the little people. In Newt's case both figuratively and literally.

-President Barack Obama reported all of his $1.4 million in 2010 book profits as subject to Medicare taxes.
well, I won't speculate as to the difference between that and the type of income being generated from Newt's business interests.

Because no one ever speculates or expresses an opinion on anything a politician does or says on this blog ever.

The IRS says on its web site that distributions to an S corp. owner should be treated as compensation to the extent they are associated with his personal services or services to the firm. Earnings that come from an investment of capital and equipment, or from the work of others, can be treated as profit. On his July 2011 financial disclosure form, Gingrich valued his holdings in Gingrich Productions at between $500,000 and $1 million, suggesting he has far too little capital invested in the firm to justify booking $2.4 million as profit. On Gingrich Productions’ web site, there is no suggestion it profits from the work of anyone other than the Gingriches. The site says: “Together, Newt and Callista host and produce historical and public policy documentaries, write books and newsletters, give speeches, record audio books, produce photographic essays, and make television and radio appearances.”

It will be interesting to see if the IRS picks up on this. My guess is they won't since it would appear to be politically motivated.

Plan Gingrich.

A project of the GOP establishment.

Statement of Intent.

Our chosen "safe" candidate resembles a plastic Ken doll and has a past history of dubious business and taxation behavior. It is imperative that we find somebody else to "oppose" him who has even worse problems of a similar nature. That person is also required to be physically and spiritually ugly in order to offset the vacuous appearance of the chosen one and to downplay his unfortunate religious background.

Newt Gingrich satisfies these criteria perfectly.

Arrange contacts with the media, friendly and unfriendly, to push this narrative. Find some wealthy extremist nutjobs to fund Gingrich so that the project runs long enough to fix the narrative in the public's mind.

The Candidates' Effective Tax Rate: Obama 26%, (John Kerry 12%) Gingrich 31.6%, Romney 13.9%
inagist.com

"The Candidates' Effective Tax Rate: Obama 26%, (John Kerry 12%) Gingrich 31.6%, Romney 13.9%"

Obviously Obama and Gingrich needed danforth's help.

Class envy and the categorizing of people are the rallying cries of the Democratic party. It is all they have.

All the while their current leader increases his net worth from $400K to $10.5 million after 5-6 years in DC. Certainly a man of the people.

#55 | Posted by YouHateMe

yeah the concept of "fairness" is all the Democrats have.

poor things

from $400K to $10.5 million after 5-6 years in DC.

Being President and writing a best seller didn't hurt I bet.

He made 2.5 million in 2005 alone.

oops He made 2.5 million in 2008 alone...

oops He made 2.5 million in 2008 alone...

#66 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2012-01-24 04:07 PM | REPLY | FLAG

So the other $8 million after taxes just appeared in his account.

You are a naive little man.

eBecause no one ever speculates or expresses an opinion on anything a politician does or says on this blog ever.

well, there probably isn't a single person on this site (except maybe Taxman....I don't know) who can intelligently discuss this issue.

anybody, especially you, can google anything and post it as though they are the authority on corporate tax law.

So the other $8 million after taxes just appeared in his account.

You are a naive little man.

#67 | Posted by YouHateMe

sure right. that's exactly how it happens. I bet you could access his tax returns since then and find out if you really wanted too.

hmmm so why is it you begrudge this President his earnings? You want him to live in a apt and drive an old blue dodge to prove he is one of the people? He is not same as you and me any more. He is the President of the United States. The most powerful position in the world.

If I made 2.5 million dollars in 2008 and I was smart (I am obviously not as I obviously didn't) by 2012 10 million dollars would be chump change.

Top that off with the fact that he is POTUS.

I don't see where the problem is. Seems to me it is you that is being a little naive.

can google anything and post it as though they are the authority on corporate tax law.

#68 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2012-01-24 04:41 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Well if you had bothered to read the article, you would know that it came directly from it.

And it is correct too.

anybody, especially you, can google anything and post it as though they are the authority on corporate tax law.

#68 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2012-01-24 04:41 PM | REPLY | FLAG

Well don't take my word for it then. The IRS will be the final arbiter, here is what they have to say....

www.irs.gov

www.irs.gov

In yet another similar case, the Tax Court held that an accountant was taking dividends and performing duties for the company. The Tax Court ruled the dividends were actually wages, subject to employment taxes. Joseph M. Grey Public Accountant, P.C. vs. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 121 (2002)

If cash or property, or the right to receive either, did go to the shareholder, a salary amount must be determined and the level of salary must be reasonable and appropriate. See the S Corporation Compensation and Medical Insurance Issues page for more details on what is considered to be reasonable compensation

"Obviously Obama and Gingrich needed danforth's help."

Damn straight. Based on the taxes he paid, Newt wasn't even smart enough to fully fund he and Calista's 401(k) plans.

"anybody, especially you, can google anything and post it as though they are the authority on corporate tax law."

Then maybe you should use teh googles to learn this is in regards to personal tax law.

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable