Teresa Heinz Kerry releases income taxes

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

Part of a conspiracy, to avoid attention from her non-taxpaying ways!

 

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=38258

 

To: National Desk, Political Reporter

 

Contact: Michael Meehan of Kerry-Edwards 2004, 202-464-2800

 

WASHINGTON, Oct. 15 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Mrs. Teresa Heinz Kerry announced today that she has filed her final 2003 federal tax forms and as she said promised last spring, has released the top two pages of her 1040 tax filings.

 

Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $798,820 in state and federal income taxes in 2003, approximately 35 percent of her gross taxable income, according to figures and federal tax forms she released today.

 

Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $627,150 in federal income taxes on gross taxable income of $2,291,137, primarily from dividends and interest she receives from Heinz family trusts. In addition, she paid an additional $171,670 in state income taxes and had $2,781,791 of tax exempt interest income from state, municipal and public entity bonds. These taxes are separate from and in addition to the income taxes paid directly by the Heinz family trusts and by other beneficiaries who receive income from those trusts.

 

In 2003, Mrs. Heinz Kerry was responsible for more than $4.6 million distributed as charitable contributions, primarily through charitable grants by the Heinz Family Foundation, a 501©(3) corporation Mrs. Heinz Kerry established with her late husband, Senator John Heinz and later significantly expanded after his death in 1991 through her creation of the Teresa and H. John Heinz III Fund within that Foundation. The Heinz Family Foundation is principally funded by a charitable lead trust, the Teresa & H. John Heinz III Charitable Trust, established as a result of estate planning decisions made by Senator Heinz and Mrs. Heinz Kerry before his death.

 

The Heinz Family Foundation is separate from the Howard Heinz Endowment, of which Mrs. Heinz Kerry is Chairman, and the Vira I. Heinz Endowment, of which she is a board member, both of which were established by earlier generations of the Heinz family and make significant annual charitable grants. Both the Heinz Family Foundation and the Endowments file publicly available Forms 990 PF on an annual basis, forms which set forth the charitable grants as well as investments made by each entity.

 

In 2000, then-candidate George Bush filed an extension for his 1999 taxes, released some information in the Spring and then released his 1040 Form after he filed his taxes in October 2000. Mrs. Heinz Kerry files a separate tax return from her husband, Senator John Kerry, and received an extension for filing her 2003 returns until October 15, 2004.

 

While she is not a candidate for any public office and the release of this tax information is not required by law, it fulfills the commitment Mrs. Heinz Kerry made last May. The release of this information is in addition to the financial information Sen. Kerry and Mrs. Heinz Kerry already had disclosed through the forms required by the Senate Financial Disclosure Report and the Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report, both of which are publicly available on Senator Kerry's campaign website, johnkerry.com.

 

"This tax information goes beyond any legal requirement, but John and I believe it strikes a proper balance between my family's privacy and the media's requests for additional information," Mrs. Heinz Kerry said.

 

Paid for by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.

 

I'm sure there'll be something else to release soon.

 

"Mrs. Kerry.. what is your shoe size?"

"Why do you want to hide this info?"

"Teresa, are you really 66?"

"Release your birth certificate!"

[Guest MikeSC]

ACTUALLY, $628,401 of her reported $5M in income is only 12.47%.

 

$2.8M was shielded from taxes due to being interest-free investments.

 

She has full right to shield her money all she wants. More power to her in exploiting tax shelters.

 

But to bitch that the rich don't pay their fair share takes a particular kind of courage, since she is very guilty of the same.

 

Oh, and to show what the other side is doing, the Bushes made $822,126 and paid $227,490 in taxes --- or 27.7%. They had no tax-exempt income.

-=Mike

[Guest Cerebus]

the Bushes made $822,126

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

ACTUALLY, $628,401 of her reported $5M in income is only 12.47%.

 

$2.8M was shielded from taxes due to being interest-free investments.

 

She has full right to shield her money all she wants. More power to her in exploiting tax shelters.

hmm..

 

you did ignore something.. I'd say

 

Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $627,150 in federal income taxes on gross taxable income of $2,291,137, primarily from dividends and interest she receives from Heinz family trusts. In addition, she paid an additional $171,670 in state income taxes and had $2,781,791 of tax exempt interest income from state, municipal and public entity bonds. These taxes are separate from and in addition to the income taxes paid directly by the Heinz family trusts and by other beneficiaries who receive income from those trusts.

 

in other news.. you don't have to pay taxes on tax exempt bonds.

 

I guess government bonds operate out of tax shelters now. I guess our state bonds now work out of the Cayman Islands.

 

But to bitch that the rich don't pay their fair share takes a particular kind of courage, since she is very guilty of the same.

 

So to prove her point. She should overpay her taxes.

 

And if she did that, they would give her a refund.

 

Wow.. that would really be meaningful

 

Oh, and to show what the other side is doing, the Bushes made $822,126 and paid $227,490 in taxes --- or 27.7%. They had no tax-exempt income.

 

*golf clap*

 

I think it's STUNNING that Grover Norquist was wrong on this.

[Guest MikeSC]

ACTUALLY, $628,401 of her reported $5M in income is only 12.47%.

 

$2.8M was shielded from taxes due to being interest-free investments.

 

She has full right to shield her money all she wants. More power to her in exploiting tax shelters.

hmm..

 

you did ignore something.. I'd say

 

Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $627,150 in federal income taxes on gross taxable income of $2,291,137, primarily from dividends and interest she receives from Heinz family trusts. In addition, she paid an additional $171,670 in state income taxes and had $2,781,791 of tax exempt interest income from state, municipal and public entity bonds. These taxes are separate from and in addition to the income taxes paid directly by the Heinz family trusts and by other beneficiaries who receive income from those trusts.

 

in other news.. you don't have to pay taxes on tax exempt bonds.

 

I guess government bonds operate out of tax shelters now. I guess our state bonds now work out of the Cayman Islands.

 

 

 

And you ignore my point: She has every right in the world to shield her money from taxes.

 

It just makes her and John insufferable hypocrites for decrying the rich not paying "their fair share" when they, in fact, don't pay their fair share.

 

If you want the rich to pay "their fair share", then don't protect your income.

But to bitch that the rich don't pay their fair share takes a particular kind of courage, since she is very guilty of the same.

 

So to prove her point. She should overpay her taxes.

 

And if she did that, they would give her a refund.

 

Wow.. that would really be meaningful

Nope --- pay the "fair share" on the $5M she made.

 

She and John bitch that the rich have all of these tax loopholes to protect their money --- but they do the exact same thing.

 

Again, more power to her --- but it makes her one major-league hypocrite.

Oh, and to show what the other side is doing, the Bushes made $822,126 and paid $227,490 in taxes --- or 27.7%. They had no tax-exempt income.

 

*golf clap*

 

I think it's STUNNING that Grover Norquist was wrong on this.

That wasn't from Grover --- and you could, ya know, provide evidence that it's wrong.

-=Mike

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

i think she should pay more money. Tax the rich. Tax them blind. Gawd it feels so good to say that.

[Guest MikeSC]

i think she should pay more money. Tax the rich. Tax them blind. Gawd it feels so good to say that.

I don't. I applaud her attempts to "shield" her money by investing in gov't bonds and the like.

 

I think she, also, should not utter one word about the rich not paying their fair share as she does the precise same thing. Hell, their state offers you a CHOICE of paying a higher tax rate than is needed and the Kerrys have NEVER opted to do that, either.

-=Mike

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

ACTUALLY, $628,401 of her reported $5M in income is only 12.47%.

 

$2.8M was shielded from taxes due to being interest-free investments.

 

She has full right to shield her money all she wants. More power to her in exploiting tax shelters.

hmm..

 

you did ignore something.. I'd say

 

Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $627,150 in federal income taxes on gross taxable income of $2,291,137, primarily from dividends and interest she receives from Heinz family trusts. In addition, she paid an additional $171,670 in state income taxes and had $2,781,791 of tax exempt interest income from state, municipal and public entity bonds. These taxes are separate from and in addition to the income taxes paid directly by the Heinz family trusts and by other beneficiaries who receive income from those trusts.

 

in other news.. you don't have to pay taxes on tax exempt bonds.

 

I guess government bonds operate out of tax shelters now. I guess our state bonds now work out of the Cayman Islands.

 

 

 

And you ignore my point: She has every right in the world to shield her money from taxes.

 

It just makes her and John insufferable hypocrites for decrying the rich not paying "their fair share" when they, in fact, don't pay their fair share.

 

If you want the rich to pay "their fair share", then don't protect your income.

How much income would Teresa Heinz Kerry have without those Government Bonds?

 

2.2 million dollars.

 

What rate did she pay on that $2.2 million dollars?

 

34.9%

 

You seem to think that there's a magic power that Teresa holds in which she just says money is tax exempt due to bonds.

 

That $2.7M came from bonds, in which she did not have to pay taxes.

 

Here's some more info on tax-exempt bonds:

 

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:fiSYk...empt+bond&hl=en

 

http://www.investorwords.com/4897/tax_exempt_bond.html

 

But I guess THK should pay taxes on tax-exempt bonds too.

 

It's not like they wouldn't refund her the money.

 

But to bitch that the rich don't pay their fair share takes a particular kind of courage, since she is very guilty of the same.

 

So to prove her point. She should overpay her taxes.

 

And if she did that, they would give her a refund.

 

Wow.. that would really be meaningful

Nope --- pay the "fair share" on the $5M she made.

 

It's pretty freaking pointless to pay taxes on tax-exempt bonds. The Government will still give her a refund if she paid 940K (a 34.9% rate) on a tax-exempt bond.

 

She and John bitch that the rich have all of these tax loopholes to protect their money --- but they do the exact same thing.

 

If you can find something where either THK or John Kerry claimed tax-exempt bonds are a loophole. Go find it.

 

http://www.law.upenn.edu/fac/dshakow/fedtax/class38.htm

 

CHAPTER XIII. Tax Exempt Interest and Tax Expenditures

 

SECTION 103 (443ff.)

 

What is its effect? Think of marketplace where interest rates are 10%. Suddenly, some bonds get a tax exemption. Result--DEMAND rises and local governments can start paying a lower interest rate (charge more for the bonds).

 

What would happen to exempt bonds' prices and interest rates? Well, who is the most likely buyer? The taxpayer who gets the biggest benefit from the exemption--the one in the highest tax bracket (50% now).

 

Before we had exempt bonds, could buy two $500 taxable bonds paying $50/year interest. After tax, had $25/year from each, or $50 total.

 

Now, how much will a person pay for a tax-exempt bond yielding $50/year? If all else is equal, would pay the same amount as paid for the two bonds above--$1,000. So, tax-exempt bond is yielding 5%.

 

If that were the end of the story, would it be fair to call 103 a "loophole"? (Not really--the taxpayer isn't netting anything more from its investment. There is an IMPLICIT tax which is, in effect, going from the buyer of the bond to the U.S., and from the U.S. to the state.)

 

Unfortunately, the rise in the price of tax-exempt bonds (and the reduction in their yield) is not the end of the story. Because exempt bonds don't yield half the taxable bonds' yield.

 

Reasons are far from clear. Let us assume that what happens is that the 50% taxpayers buy their fill of exempt bonds, and there are still bonds for sale. What happens? The rates go up to attract some 45% and 40% taxpayers.

 

Going back to our simple example of a 10% taxable rate, now need a 6% rate to sell bonds to the 40% taxpayer. But, the 50% taxpayers get that 6% rate too. Now it's starting to look more like a loophole.

 

When rate was 5%, the 50% bracket taxpayer did not get any additional return. When compared situation to buying a 10% taxable bond, the taxpayer came out even, the Federal Government lost, and the state governments won.

 

With a 6% rate, the bonds bought by the 50% taxpayers still produce a loss of Federal revenues of half the taxable interest rate. However, now only 4% of that 5% is going to the municipalities, while the other 1% goes to the taxpayer.

 

NOTE: In Tax Notes of 7/1/85, page 97, there is an article about the dividends paid deduction that quotes Miller, "Debt and Taxes", The Journal of Finance, Vol. XXXII, No. 2 (May 1977), 261-275. It indicates that the demand curve for bonds stays level for a while because of the presence of tax-exempt investors. It then moves upward to entice taxable investors into the market.

 

Now comes SECTION 265. What is it trying to prevent? Suppose the taxpayer in the 50% bracket has no money around to invest in more tax-exempt bonds. What to do? Well, suppose you borrow $10,000 from a bank at 10% interest, and invest it in some 6% tax-exempt bonds.

 

Each year you pay $1,000 in interest and collect $600--yet that is a good deal. The interest paid is deductible, so its after-tax cost is only $500. But the $600 of interest collected on the exempt bonds is $600 after-tax too. So, have netted $100 without putting in a cent of your own.

 

Is that good? Well, is it bad? If you represented state governments, would you be happy with 265, or unhappy, or wouldn't you care?

 

If 265 were not in the Code, wouldn't have to raise rates to attract the 40% taxpayers--the 50% taxpayers who had finished investing their own loose funds in tax-exempt bonds would simply borrow some more so that they could buy some more bonds. Result, back down to a 5% rate.

 

Then again.. I'd imagine you already know a lot about tax-exempt bonds.

 

Again, more power to her --- but it makes her one major-league hypocrite.

 

Yep.. with the hidden tax-exempt bond loophole that millions know about.

 

Oh, and to show what the other side is doing, the Bushes made $822,126 and paid $227,490 in taxes --- or 27.7%. They had no tax-exempt income.

 

*golf clap*

 

I think it's STUNNING that Grover Norquist was wrong on this.

That wasn't from Grover

 

http://www.atr.org/pressreleases/2004/pr-k...axes-9-7-04.htm

 

Kerrys Paid Just 12% in Federal Income Taxes in 2003

Massachusetts Senator paid skimpy tax bill despite calls for rich to "pay their share"

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. - John Kerry has repeatedly called for increasing taxes on the "wealthy" so the affluent "pay their fair share" for the "common good." Ironically, John and Theresa Heinz Kerry, who comprise one the richest families in the world, pay relatively little income tax.

 

Last year, John Kerry and his wife paid just 12% of their combined income in income taxes, despite their assertion that the rich should contribute increased amounts to government coffers. In contrast, President and Mrs. Bush, who had a substantially lower income than the Kerry's, paid over 28% in taxes.

 

"John Kerry wants other Americans to pay higher taxes while he and his wife manage to pay a rate lower than most of the middle class," said ATR President Grover Norquist. "Apparently, the Kerrys think everyone else should pay higher taxes but them."

 

In addition to finding loopholes and write-offs to decrease his taxes, John Kerry has declined to pay a small, voluntary tax in his home state. The Massachusetts state income tax code contains a provision allowing payers to contribute an extra .6% of their income to benefit the commonwealth. Kerry has consistently failed to pay the extra money, which would have amounted to $687 dollars last year.

 

"John Kerry thinks other hardworking Americans should pay more taxes while he and his billionaire wife pay as little as possible," continued Norquist. "The hypocrisy John Kerry shows on his own tax return is not indicative of the character and judgment America needs in our President."

 

No.. it wasn't from Grover at all.

 

Just from his group.

 

Which issued a press release.

 

Which quoted him.

 

It's different.

 

and you could, ya know, provide evidence that it's wrong.

 

#1 - John and Teresa file seperate returns.

 

#2 - If you combine their taxable incomes, they paid at a rate of 33.7%

 

#2b - But if you combine their total income and divide it by their taxes, ignoring the amount of tax-exempt stuff, they paid at a 16.3% rate. Higher than Norquist claims.

 

#2c - Kerry paid 90,575 on an income of 346,664, a rate of 26.7%

[Guest MikeSC]

ACTUALLY, $628,401 of her reported $5M in income is only 12.47%.

 

$2.8M was shielded from taxes due to being interest-free investments.

 

She has full right to shield her money all she wants. More power to her in exploiting tax shelters.

hmm..

 

you did ignore something.. I'd say

 

Mrs. Heinz Kerry paid $627,150 in federal income taxes on gross taxable income of $2,291,137, primarily from dividends and interest she receives from Heinz family trusts. In addition, she paid an additional $171,670 in state income taxes and had $2,781,791 of tax exempt interest income from state, municipal and public entity bonds. These taxes are separate from and in addition to the income taxes paid directly by the Heinz family trusts and by other beneficiaries who receive income from those trusts.

 

in other news.. you don't have to pay taxes on tax exempt bonds.

 

I guess government bonds operate out of tax shelters now. I guess our state bonds now work out of the Cayman Islands.

 

 

Oh, and to show what the other side is doing, the Bushes made $822,126 and paid $227,490 in taxes --- or 27.7%. They had no tax-exempt income.

 

*golf clap*

 

I think it's STUNNING that Grover Norquist was wrong on this.

That wasn't from Grover

And you're ignoring that she intentionally used tax shelters, SUCH AS TAX-EXEMPT bonds, to protect her income.

 

More power to her.

 

She just has no business chastising one damned soul for not paying their "fair share", since they all do THE EXACT SAME THINGS.

 

They use the exact same techniques she uses to protect their incomes. If she and Kerry feel it's wrong for "the rich" to pay less than their "fair share", then they should not be guilty of the self-same problems.

 

If you, for one moment, think that she has not worked to shield a great deal of her income, you're just painfully naive. Odds are, Dick Cheney has done the exact same thing.

 

The only difference is that he isn't claiming that the rich don't pay their fair share.

But to bitch that the rich don't pay their fair share takes a particular kind of courage, since she is very guilty of the same.

 

So to prove her point. She should overpay her taxes.

 

And if she did that, they would give her a refund.

 

Wow.. that would really be meaningful

Nope --- pay the "fair share" on the $5M she made.

 

It's pretty freaking pointless to pay taxes on tax-exempt bonds. The Government will still give her a refund if she paid 940K (a 34.9% rate) on a tax-exempt bond.

And why does she even HAVE those bonds?

 

To shield her income --- that's right.

 

Which means she isn't paying her "fair share" --- and, again, more power to her.

 

She just should shut up that the practice is wrong if she participates in it as well.

She and John bitch that the rich have all of these tax loopholes to protect their money --- but they do the exact same thing.

 

If you can find something where either THK or John Kerry claimed tax-exempt bonds are a loophole. Go find it.

Since they haven't exactly been clear what a loophole IS in their eyes --- this is an absurd challenge.

 

What the hell do you THINK they meant? There are MANY ways to shield your income from taxation in completely and totally legal ways. Teresa uses them to her benefit.

 

You just don't see the rest of the rich regularly bemoaning people who do the same thing they do.

Again, more power to her --- but it makes her one major-league hypocrite.

 

Yep.. with the hidden tax-exempt bond loophole that millions know about.

Hate to break it to you --- but EVERY SINGLE "LOOPHOLE" IS THE SAME THING. Every single loophole is perfectly legal and is widely known by people with money.

 

That is why they're used.

http://www.atr.org/pressreleases/2004/pr-k...axes-9-7-04.htm

 

Kerrys Paid Just 12% in Federal Income Taxes in 2003

Massachusetts Senator paid skimpy tax bill despite calls for rich to "pay their share"

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. - John Kerry has repeatedly called for increasing taxes on the "wealthy" so the affluent "pay their fair share" for the "common good." Ironically, John and Theresa Heinz Kerry, who comprise one the richest families in the world, pay relatively little income tax.

 

Last year, John Kerry and his wife paid just 12% of their combined income in income taxes, despite their assertion that the rich should contribute increased amounts to government coffers. In contrast, President and Mrs. Bush, who had a substantially lower income than the Kerry's, paid over 28% in taxes.

 

"John Kerry wants other Americans to pay higher taxes while he and his wife manage to pay a rate lower than most of the middle class," said ATR President Grover Norquist. "Apparently, the Kerrys think everyone else should pay higher taxes but them."

 

In addition to finding loopholes and write-offs to decrease his taxes, John Kerry has declined to pay a small, voluntary tax in his home state. The Massachusetts state income tax code contains a provision allowing payers to contribute an extra .6% of their income to benefit the commonwealth. Kerry has consistently failed to pay the extra money, which would have amounted to $687 dollars last year.

 

"John Kerry thinks other hardworking Americans should pay more taxes while he and his billionaire wife pay as little as possible," continued Norquist. "The hypocrisy John Kerry shows on his own tax return is not indicative of the character and judgment America needs in our President."

 

No.. it wasn't from Grover at all.

 

Just from his group.

 

Which issued a press release.

 

Which quoted him.

 

It's different.

This was actually from the Club for Growth.

 

And it's 100% accurate.

 

Teresa made roughly $5M. She paid roughly 12% in taxes.

 

Nothing illegal. Nothing even unethical. If she didn't, she'd have been an idiot.

 

Just exceptionally hypocritical for them to bitch about others doing it.

and you could, ya know, provide evidence that it's wrong.

 

#1 - John and Teresa file seperate returns.

 

#2 - If you combine their taxable incomes, they paid at a rate of 33.7%

Except that tax loopholes' JOB is to lower one's taxable income. If you are going to bitch about loopholes, don't use them yourself.

 

Nice attempt at a defense. I'm not saying she's wrong to use loopholes.

 

Just hypocritical to bitch that others do the same.

-=Mike