TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein ... -daughter/

An aspect of the truth anyway....the article doesn't go into what a scam the whole thing is.

Mark Zuckerberg used 2,234 words to describe the things he values most in the world. None of those words was “freedom.”

This pretense is psychologically convenient. It makes the billionaire feel good about himself and often enables him to win back some of the approval he lost by making so much money. Importantly, a billionaire doling out a lot of money requires no independent thought or courage whatsoever–whereas fighting for freedom requires a lot of it, because fighting for freedom is always connected to controversial issues.

And thus what we have is a world in which the world’s most brilliant business minds, minds that have reached their potential only because of freedom, do absolutely nothing to promote freedom. When was the last time that you saw a prominent billionaire businessman take a courageous stand for freedom, a stand that would invite disapproval but was nevertheless the right thing to do?

The main item of interest is that he is structuring it as a 'for profit' LLC, not a 'non-profit'

Allows unlimited spending on politicians and lobbying - tax deductible to the corporation.

Smarter people than me also claim it overall saves him billions on taxes over his lifetime while he retains complete control of the money.

Of course, with that much money, it's hard to believe he cares much about even a ton of taxes.

SA_Steve wrote:The main item of interest is that he is structuring it as a 'for profit' LLC, not a 'non-profit'

Allows unlimited spending on politicians and lobbying - tax deductible to the corporation.

Smarter people than me also claim it overall saves him billions on taxes over his lifetime while he retains complete control of the money.

Of course, with that much money, it's hard to believe he cares much about even a ton of taxes.

The more they have, the more they care, and the greater their efforts to avoid them. None of these guys ever really "give away" their money....there is ALWAYS a quid pro quo, either in tax avoidance, profit, or political influence.

"It's a big club, and we ain't in it." - George Carlin

VMI77 wrote:

SA_Steve wrote:The main item of interest is that he is structuring it as a 'for profit' LLC, not a 'non-profit'

Allows unlimited spending on politicians and lobbying - tax deductible to the corporation.

Smarter people than me also claim it overall saves him billions on taxes over his lifetime while he retains complete control of the money.

Of course, with that much money, it's hard to believe he cares much about even a ton of taxes.

The more they have, the more they care, and the greater their efforts to avoid them. None of these guys ever really "give away" their money....there is ALWAYS a quid pro quo, either in tax avoidance, profit, or political influence.

I don't begrudge the uber-wealthy from doing whatever is legal to minimize or avoid taxes. I do what I can, at my level, and the options are not as plentiful. But I'll still find any legal loophole that I can to minimize what I pay to Uncle Sam.

It does irritate me, however, when someone makes some big deal about it like he did, and tell the world that hes giving away all his $$, when in reality he's doing nothing of the sort. Hubris is a sad thing to behold.

Vol Texan wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

SA_Steve wrote:The main item of interest is that he is structuring it as a 'for profit' LLC, not a 'non-profit'

Allows unlimited spending on politicians and lobbying - tax deductible to the corporation.

Smarter people than me also claim it overall saves him billions on taxes over his lifetime while he retains complete control of the money.

Of course, with that much money, it's hard to believe he cares much about even a ton of taxes.

The more they have, the more they care, and the greater their efforts to avoid them. None of these guys ever really "give away" their money....there is ALWAYS a quid pro quo, either in tax avoidance, profit, or political influence.

I don't begrudge the uber-wealthy from doing whatever is legal to minimize or avoid taxes. I do what I can, at my level, and the options are not as plentiful. But I'll still find any legal loophole that I can to minimize what I pay to Uncle Sam.

It does irritate me, however, when someone makes some big deal about it like he did, and tell the world that hes giving away all his $$, when in reality he's doing nothing of the sort. Hubris is a sad thing to behold.

I agree for the most part...my problem with it is that due to their money and influence they get methods of tax avoidance that aren't granted to us peasants.

VMI77 wrote:

Vol Texan wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

SA_Steve wrote:The main item of interest is that he is structuring it as a 'for profit' LLC, not a 'non-profit'

Allows unlimited spending on politicians and lobbying - tax deductible to the corporation.

Smarter people than me also claim it overall saves him billions on taxes over his lifetime while he retains complete control of the money.

Of course, with that much money, it's hard to believe he cares much about even a ton of taxes.

The more they have, the more they care, and the greater their efforts to avoid them. None of these guys ever really "give away" their money....there is ALWAYS a quid pro quo, either in tax avoidance, profit, or political influence.

I don't begrudge the uber-wealthy from doing whatever is legal to minimize or avoid taxes. I do what I can, at my level, and the options are not as plentiful. But I'll still find any legal loophole that I can to minimize what I pay to Uncle Sam.

It does irritate me, however, when someone makes some big deal about it like he did, and tell the world that hes giving away all his $$, when in reality he's doing nothing of the sort. Hubris is a sad thing to behold.

I agree for the most part...my problem with it is that due to their money and influence they get methods of tax avoidance that aren't granted to us peasants.

And the death tax is a great example. If all of the wealthy families had to follow the same taxation rate as us low lifes, most of that wealth would be wiped out in a generation.

chasfm11 wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

Vol Texan wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

SA_Steve wrote:The main item of interest is that he is structuring it as a 'for profit' LLC, not a 'non-profit'

Allows unlimited spending on politicians and lobbying - tax deductible to the corporation.

Smarter people than me also claim it overall saves him billions on taxes over his lifetime while he retains complete control of the money.

Of course, with that much money, it's hard to believe he cares much about even a ton of taxes.

The more they have, the more they care, and the greater their efforts to avoid them. None of these guys ever really "give away" their money....there is ALWAYS a quid pro quo, either in tax avoidance, profit, or political influence.

I don't begrudge the uber-wealthy from doing whatever is legal to minimize or avoid taxes. I do what I can, at my level, and the options are not as plentiful. But I'll still find any legal loophole that I can to minimize what I pay to Uncle Sam.

It does irritate me, however, when someone makes some big deal about it like he did, and tell the world that hes giving away all his $$, when in reality he's doing nothing of the sort. Hubris is a sad thing to behold.

I agree for the most part...my problem with it is that due to their money and influence they get methods of tax avoidance that aren't granted to us peasants.

And the death tax is a great example. If all of the wealthy families had to follow the same taxation rate as us low lifes, most of that wealth would be wiped out in a generation.

My father looked into "charitable foundations" years ago. I don't know what the rules are now, but the gist of it was that you could endow such a "charity" with a ton of money and appoint or "hire" your heirs to run it. The law only required that something like 5% to 10% be distributed as charity....the rest could be used in administration....IOW, paid out as "salaries" to the heirs "hired" to run it.

So, say some rich guy sets up sets up such a charity and it has an income (interest, dividends, etc) of $10 million per year. It pays out $9 million a year in administration (salaries, expense accounts, company vehicles, company housing, etc) and distributes $1 million in charity. If the capital generating that $10 million in income is say, $100 million, that is effectively an inheritance tax rate of 1% or even less, depending on how "expenses" are accounted for. Of course all or part of the salaries may be subject to income tax but the estate itself remains untouched.

And of course there is the uncalculated "externality" of the benefit accruing as a result of the influence and political favors purchased with the $1 million that is likely to produce far far more return in profit. How much of an ROI do you think a $1 million donation to the Clinton "charity" would yield? I doubt the yield is less than 10 to 1.

This reminds me of how accountants get hired:

Interviewer to accounting candidate: How much is 2 + 2?
Candidate, winking: How much do you need it to be?
Interviewer: Welcome aboard! :-)

SIA

Sounds a lot like the Clinton Foundation...